Question: What type of shop does the widow have?
About the article "Ramen", section ""Tampopo"".

Candidate passages:
In some cases, a non-BCNF table cannot be decomposed into tables that satisfy BCNF and preserve the dependencies that held in the original table.
Beeri and Bernstein showed in 1979 that, for example, a set of functional dependencies {AB → C, C → B} cannot be represented by a BCNF schema.
Thus, unlike the first three normal forms, BCNF is not always achievable.
Consider the following non-BCNF table whose functional dependencies follow the {AB → C, C → B} pattern:For each Person / Shop Type combination, the table tells us which shop of this type is geographically nearest to the person's home.
We assume for simplicity that a single shop cannot be of more than one type.
The candidate keys of the table are:  {Person, Shop Type}  {Person, Nearest Shop} Because all three attributes are prime attributes (i.e.
belong to candidate keys), the table is in 3NF.
The table is not in BCNF, however, as the Shop Type attribute is functionally dependent on a non-superkey: Nearest Shop.
The violation of BCNF means that the table is subject to anomalies.
For example, Eagle Eye might have its Shop Type changed to "Optometrist" on its "Fuller" record while retaining the Shop Type "Optician" on its "Davidson" record.
This would imply contradictory answers to the question: "What is Eagle Eye's Shop Type?"
Holding each shop's Shop Type only once would seem preferable, as doing so would prevent such anomalies from occurring:In this revised design, the "Shop Near Person" table has a candidate key of {Person, Shop}, and the "Shop" table has a candidate key of {Shop}.
Unfortunately, although this design adheres to BCNF, it is unacceptable on different grounds: it allows us to record multiple shops of the same type against the same person.
In other words, its candidate keys do not guarantee that the functional dependency {Person, Shop Type} → {Shop} will be respected.
A design that eliminates all of these anomalies (but does not conform to BCNF) is possible.
This design introduces a new normal form, known as Elementary Key Normal Form.
This design consists of the original "Nearest Shops" table supplemented by the "Shop" table described above.
The table structure generated by Bernstein's schema generation algorithm is actually EKNF, although that enhancement to 3NF had not been recognized at the time the algorithm was designedIf a referential integrity constraint is defined to the effect that {Shop Type, Nearest Shop} from the first table must refer to a {Shop Type, Shop} from the second table, then the data anomalies described previously are prevented. 
Article 7, Section 1 of the Trade Union Act of 1949 of Japan specifically permits the negotiation of union shop provisions, provided that the union represents a majority of workers at the worksite.
However, Article 28 of the Constitution of Japan protects freedom of association.
Japanese courts have wrestled with the two conflicting legal values, and found that the right to organize is superior to the right to freedom of association.
However, court have crafted five conditions for a union shop agreement to be accepted: Workers must remain free to join a union that does not represent a majority of workers in the plant.
If a worker withdraws from the majority union to join the minority union, the union shop agreement may no longer cover the withdrawing worker.
New workers retain the right to join a union that does not represent a majority of workers in the plant, and cannot be forced to join the majority union.
The union shop agreement is nullified if a union no longer represents a majority of workers at the worksite.
If a worker withdraws from the majority union to form a new union, the union shop agreement may no longer cover the withdrawing worker.
Article 17 of the Trade Union Act requires that the collective bargaining agreement be extended to all workers of the same type if 75 percent of that class of the employer's workers are already covered by the agreement.
Although this may appear to impose the union shop, in practice defining what constitutes a "similar type of worker" has proven too difficult and Section 17 is rarely enforced.
In 1996, 62.1 percent of all Japanese collective bargaining agreements contained a union shop provision.
As of 1999, 60 percent did so.
Other forms of union security agreements, such as the closed shop and agency shop, are extremely rare.
Japanese labor law treats large employers differently from small employers, and union shop provisions are much less likely to be negotiated in small workplaces.
For example, Chalmers cites 1979 data showing that 50 percent of all workplaces in Japan had a union shop provision.
But while 73 percent of employers with more than 1,000 workers had such agreements, just 59 percent of employers with 500 to 999 workers did so.
Some agreements are ambiguously worded, making their enforcement problematic.
Other union shop provisions are tied to various requirements that the union promote "industrial peace", such as mandatory arbitration for all disputes and a relinquishment of the right to strike. 
Watching a military parade (stock footage from World War I), the gang decides to enlist in order to "kill a million Japs".
Rejected by the Army, Marines, and Navy for being too young, the punks help the war effort by throwing fruit at a shop they believe is owned by a Japanese American.
Confronted by him wielding a short sword, the gang decides to come back at night but find him dead.
Their father figure Police Lieutenant "Pops" Stevens tell them they should be ashamed of themselves as Keno, the owner of the shop, was Chinese, an ally of America and that Danny should be especially ashamed as his brother is in the service.
The boys buy some flowers and go to the shop to apologize to the widow and notice a Japanese man take a pen from a locker the widow opened for him.
Glimpy steals the pen and find that it contains a message written in Japanese.
They visit a Japanese shop run by Mr. Matsui to have it translated.
He tries to steal the message but the gang threatens him, whereupon Mr. Matsui commits hari kari in their presence.
The boys run to the police.
Matusui's son (Philip Ahn) successfully disguises himself as his late father to impersonate him and discredit the boys to the police.
The boys take the law in their own hands to discover that Matsui is in league with German residents of the neighborhood (such as Gabriel Dell, who would play a different role in each film of the series) who are in a sabotage group called the Black Dragon Society.
In a subplot, Danny's brother Phil (Tom Brown) has supposedly been dishonourably discharged from the US Navy but is working undercover to infiltrate the Black Dragons.
Danny's brother's girlfriend Nora (Florence Rice), (who is in the WAVES) has a Japanese friend she went to high school with whom she seeks help from to translate the message.
However he turns out to be Matsui's son, the leader of the spy ring and has her locked up in a cell in the basement of the shop.
The gang breaks into Matsui's shop that is filled with haunted house type secret passageways and trapdoors where they discover the Black Dragon Society dressed in hooded costumes that Glimpy refers to as "Japanese Halloween".
The gang frees Nora and revenges the attack on Pearl Harbor by beating up the saboteurs.
The film ends with Nora and Phil getting married but as they walk down the church steps with a sabre arch of East Side Kids holding their captured Japanese swords (that are quickly confiscated by the police at the end of the ceremony!).
Phil is told he has orders to report back to his base as soon as possible.
Phil and Nora briefly lament their not going on a honeymoon, but Muggs and the gang pile in the car and gallantly offer to accompany Nora on her honeymoon unaware of what a honeymoon entails... 
Widow inheritance, also known as bride inheritance, is a type of marriage in which a widow marries a kinsman of her late husband, often his brother.
Widow Inheritance started centuries ago and it was meant for the widow to find someone to help her and her kids financially, and to keep her late husband's wealth within the family bloodline.
At the time it was initiated, women were a stay home moms, who were only responsible for the house choirs and men were the provider, therefore if the women and her kids were to end up alone she would have no one to provide for her and her kids.
Plus because her in-laws doesn’t want someone outside of the family's blood line to inherit her late husband's wealth or whatever he has been working for all his life, they remarry her with someone within the family’.
It can have various forms and functions in different cultures, serving in relative proportions as a social protection for, and control over, the widow and her children.
She may have the "right" to require her late husband's extended family to provide her with a new man, or conversely she might have the "obligation" to accept the man put forward by the family, with no real prospect of turning him down, if her birth family will not accept her back into their home.
The custom is sometimes justified on the basis that it ensures that the wealth does not leave the patrilineal family.
It is also sometimes justified as a protection for the widow and her children.
A form of widow inheritance existed in ancient Judaism, where it is known as levirate marriage (see "yibbum").
It is known in India.
It is common in certain African groups, for example the Luo in Kenya and Uganda around Lake Victoria. 
The Duluth Pack outlet store is located in the Canal Park area.
A Duluth pack is a traditional portage pack used in canoe travel.
A specialized type of backpack, Duluth packs are nearly square in order to fit easily in the bottom of a canoe.
The Duluth pack has its roots in a French-Canadian named Camille Poirier.
Arriving in Duluth in 1870 with a small stock of leather and tools, he began a shoe store and quickly made a go of it in what was then a booming frontier town on the shores of Lake Superior.
Out of his small shoe shop on the waterfront, Poirier began building a new style canoe pack with a tumpline, sternum strap, and umbrella holder.
Patented by Poirer in 1882, the original #3 Duluth Packs have changed little since they were first introduced.
He sold the backpack business to the company that now does business as Duluth Pack.