agonal

(redirected from agonally)
Also found in: Medical.
Related to agonally: agonal gasp, Agonal Respirations

ag·o·nal

 (ăg′ə-nəl)
adj.
Associated with or relating to great pain, especially the agony of death.
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

agonal

(ˈæɡənəl)
adj
relating to agony, esp before death
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014

ag•o•nal

(ˈæg ə nl)

adj.
of, pertaining to, or symptomatic of agony, esp. paroxysmal distress, as the death throes.
[1600–10]
Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.
ThesaurusAntonymsRelated WordsSynonymsLegend:
Adj.1.agonal - pertaining to or associated with agony (especially death agonies)agonal - pertaining to or associated with agony (especially death agonies)
Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.
Translations

agonal

adj agónico
English-Spanish/Spanish-English Medical Dictionary Copyright © 2006 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
To appropriate Richard Bernstein's words from another context, in many ways, each is "each other's other"; their debate can be seen as an "allegory of the 'modern/postmodern' condition" and is a "juxtaposed rather than an integrated cluster of changing elements that resist reduction to a common denominator, essential core, or generative first principle." (3) This being the case, I do not attempt to reconcile the differences between the two theorists or integrate their democratic visions; rather, believing that (and showing) the tensions between them to be irresolvable but fruitful and educative, I treat both theorists agonally to highlight some of the limits, strains, a nd possibilities of contemporary Third World democratic politics.
On the other hand, heeding Mouffe, I treat the areas of disagreement between the two agonally. The idea here is not to champion one theorist over the other but to preserve and analyze their relative differences so as to bring out the strengths and limits of each.
That is why engaging with both theorists agonally, rather than championing one or the other, is more fruitful, for it helps tease out the tensions in Third World democratic politics between such issues as consensus and difference, pluralism and justice, universalism and particularity.