Still searching for graves: an analytical strategy for interpreting geophysical data used in the search for “unmarked” graves

Searching for and mapping the physical extent of unmarked graves using geophysical techniques has proven difficult in many cases. The success of individual geophysical techniques for detecting graves depends on a site-by-site basis. Significantly, detection of graves often results from measured contrasts that are linked to the background soils rather than the type of archaeological feature associated with the grave. It is evident that investigation of buried remains should be considered within a 3D space as the variation in burial environment can be extremely varied through the grave. Within this paper, we demonstrate the need for a multi-method survey strategy to investigate unmarked graves, as applied at a “planned” but unmarked pauper’s cemetery. The outcome from this case study provides new insights into the strategy that is required at such sites. Perhaps the most significant conclusion is that unmarked graves are best understood in terms of characterization rather than identification. In this paper, we argue for a methodological approach that, while following the current trends to use multiple techniques, is fundamentally dependent on a structured approach to the analysis of the data. The ramifications of this case study illustrate the necessity of an integrated strategy to provide a more holistic understanding of unmarked graves that may help aid in management of these unseen but important aspects of our heritage. It is concluded that the search for graves is still a current debate and one that will be solved by methodological rather than technique-based arguments.

Evidence from neurolinguistic methodologies: can it actually inform linguistic/ language acquisition theories and translate to evidence-based applications?

This special issue is a testament to the recent burgeoning interest by theoretical linguists, language acquisitionists and teaching practitioners in the neuroscience of language. It offers a highly valuable, state-of-the-art overview of the neurophysiological methods that are currently being applied to questions in the field of second language (L2) acquisition, teaching and processing. Research in the area of neurolinguistics has developed dramatically in the past twenty years, providing a wealth of exciting findings, many of which are discussed in the papers in this volume. The goal of this commentary is twofold. The first is to critically assess the current state of neurolinguistic data from the point of view of language acquisition and processing—informed by the papers that comprise this special issue and the literature as a whole—pondering how the neuroscience of language/processing might inform us with respect to linguistic and language acquisition theories. The second goal is to offer some links from implications of exploring the first goal towards informing language teachers and the creation of linguistically and neurolinguistically-informed evidence-based pedagogies for non-native language teaching.