Grounding semantic transparency in context

We present the results of a large-scale corpus-based comparison of two German event nominalization patterns: deverbal nouns in -ung (e.g., die Evaluierung, ‘the evaluation’) and nominal infinitives (e.g., das Evaluieren, ‘the evaluating’). Among the many available event nominalization patterns for German, we selected these two because they are both highly productive and challenging from the semantic point of view. Both patterns are known to keep a tight relation with the event denoted by the base verb, but with different nuances. Our study targets a better understanding of the differences in their semantic import.The key notion of our comparison is that of semantic transparency, and we propose a usage-based characterization of the relationship between derived nominals and their bases. Using methods from distributional semantics, we bring to bear two concrete measures of transparency which highlight different nuances: the first one, cosine, detects nominalizations which are semantically similar to their bases; the second one, distributional inclusion, detects nominalizations which are used in a subset of the contexts of the base verb. We find that only the inclusion measure helps in characterizing the difference between the two types of nominalizations, in relation with the traditionally considered variable of relative frequency (Hay, 2001). Finally, the distributional analysis allows us to frame our comparison in the broader coordinates of the inflection vs. derivation cline.

Work Group Inclusion: Test of a Scale and Model

We develop a theoretically based 10-item measure of work group inclusion comprised of two components (belongingness and uniqueness) and use this measure to empirically test the nomological network of work group inclusion developed by Shore et al. In Phase 1, we use two samples of full-time employees to develop and refine items as well as establish content validity. In Phase 2, we demonstrate convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity with both conceptually related and unrelated constructs. In Phase 3, we use data from an additional sample of employees and supervisors to test criterion-related validity and mediation by examining the multilevel relationships between inclusion and important antecedents and outcomes. Across the three phases of our study, the results demonstrate support not only for the factor structure, reliability, and validity of our work group inclusion measure but also for a theoretical model in which the construct of inclusion has important implications for individuals and organizations.