Dutch preposition stranding and ellipsis: ‘Merchant’s Wrinkle’ ironed out

The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics ◽

10.1007/s10828-021-09129-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

James Griffiths ◽

Güliz Güneş ◽

Anikó Lipták ◽

Jason Merchant

Keyword(s):

Empirical Support ◽

Structural Domains ◽

Preposition Stranding

AbstractThis paper provides an explanation for the unexpected ban on preposition stranding by wh-R-pronouns under sluicing in Dutch. After showing that previous prosodic and syntactic explanations are untenable, we propose that the observed ban is a by-product of an EPP condition that applies in the PP domain in Dutch. Our analysis revolves around the idea that ellipsis bleeds EPP-driven movement, an idea that already has empirical support from independent patterns of ellipsis found in English and in other structural domains in Dutch. Our claim is that: (1) R-pronominalization involves a pronominal argument of P moving to the periphery of its extended PP domain (PlaceP) in order to satisfy a PP-internal EPP condition, (2) this EPP-driven movement is bled under sluicing, and (3) because SpecPlaceP is the ‘escape hatch’ through which R-pronouns must move in order to exit the PP domain to form preposition stranding configurations, bleeding the EPP-driven movement of R-pronouns to SpecPlaceP therefore precludes R-pronouns from undergoing the wh-movement required to form a sluicing configuration.

Download Full-text

South Asian Stories: Firsthand Client Perspectives on Barriers to Accessing Speech-Language Pathology Services

Perspectives on Communication Disorders and Sciences in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations ◽

10.1044/cds19.1.29 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

pp. 29-36 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Nidhi Mahendra

Keyword(s):

South Asian ◽

Empirical Support ◽

Communication Disorders ◽

Speech Language Pathology ◽

Client Experiences ◽

Individual Interviews ◽

Timely Access ◽

Phenomenological Perspective ◽

Case Vignettes ◽

Language Pathology

This article details the experience of two South Asian individuals with family members who had communication disorders. I provide information on intrinsic and extrinsic barriers reported by these clients in responses to a survey and during individual ethnographic interviews. These data are part of a larger study and provide empirical support of cultural and linguistic barriers that may impede timely access to and utilization of speech-language pathology (SLP) services. The purpose of this article is to shed light on barriers and facilitators that influence South Asian clients' access to SLP services. I provide and briefly analyze two case vignettes to provide readers a phenomenological perspective on client experiences. Data about barriers limiting access to SLP services were obtained via client surveys and individual interviews. These two clients' data were extracted from a larger study (Mahendra, Scullion, Hamerschlag, Cooper, & La, 2011) in which 52 racially/ethnically diverse clients participated. Survey items and interview questions were designed to elicit information about client experiences when accessing SLP services. Results reveal specific intrinsic and extrinsic barriers that affected two South Asian clients' access to SLP services and have important implications for all providers.

Download Full-text

Capturing the Four-Phase Team Adaptation Process With Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)

European Journal of Psychological Assessment ◽

10.1027/1015-5759/a000503 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 36 (2) ◽

pp. 336-347

Author(s):

Eleni Georganta ◽

Felix C. Brodbeck

Keyword(s):

Rating Scales ◽

Empirical Support ◽

Team Development ◽

Adaptation Process ◽

Adaptation Studies ◽

Team Processes ◽

Team Adaptation ◽

The Common ◽

Acceptable Reliability ◽

Adaptation Phase

Abstract. As a response to the lack of quantitative and reliable measures of the team adaptation process, the aim of the present study was to develop and validate an instrument for assessing the four phases of the team adaptation process as described by Rosen and colleagues (2011) . Two trained raters and two subject matter expert groups contributed to the development of four behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) that span across the spectrum of team processes involved in each team adaptation phase. To validate the four BARS, two different trained raters assessed independently the team adaptation phases of 66 four-person teams. The validation study provided empirical support for the BARS’ psychometric adequacy. The BARS measures overcame the common middle anchor problem, showed sensitivity in differentiating between teams and between the four phases, showed evidence for acceptable reliability, construct, and criterion validity, and supported the theoretical team adaptation process assumptions. The study contributes to research and praxis by enabling the direct assessment of the overall team adaptation process, thereby facilitating our understanding of this complex phenomenon. This allows the identification of behavioral strengths and weaknesses for targeted team development and comprehensive team adaptation studies.

Download Full-text