Passives without actives: evidence from verbless complement clauses in Spanish

This paper proposes a constructionist analysis à la Goldberg (1995, 2003, 2006) of passive verbless configurations in Spanish lacking a felicitous active counterpart.Under the paradigmatic – rather than syntagmatic – view of passives invoked in this paper, configurations of the type in (1) above, attested with a number of verba cogitandi et dicendi, are handled as instances of the Impersonal Subjective-Transitive construction, whose general skeletal meaning is X (NP1) attributed Y (XPCOMP) by Z (NP2) in a direct, categorical way. Moreover, the analysis proposed here also provides a satisfactory account of the distribution of grammatical subjects and the XPCOMPs, while also capturing the commonalities with “regular” passives (i.e. those with a felicitous active counterpart). In addition, Spanish passive verbless complement configurations with se dice (‘is said’) are shown to illustrate a three-point continuum consisting of (i) non-grammaticalized configurations with an active counterpart, (ii) non-grammaticalized configurations without an active counterpart, and (iii) grammaticalized configurations without an active counterpart. From a synchronic point of view, the structural and semantico-pragmatic properties exhibited by the lower-level lo que se dice XPFOCUS construction, involving a focusing/emphasizer subjunct function (e.g. verdaderamente ‘really’) as well as a reformulatory connective use (e.g. o sea ‘that is’, en otras palabras ‘in other words’) appear to point to an early process of grammaticalization, exhibiting decategorialization as well as generalization of meaning in conjunction with a prominent increase in pragmatic function and subjectification (cf. Traugott 1988, 1995a, 1995b, 2003).

Knowledge-Production Processes in Practice Research - Outcomes and Critical Elements

The welfare sector has seen considerable changes in its operational context. Welfare services respond to an increasing number of challenges as citizens are confronted with life’s uncertainties and a variety of complex situations. At the same time the service-delivery system is facing problems of co-operation and the development of staff competence, as well as demands to improve service effectiveness and outcomes. In order to ensure optimal user outcomes in this complex, evolving environment it is necessary to enhance professional knowledge and skills, and to increase efforts to develop the services. Changes are also evident in the new emergent knowledge-production models. There has been a shift from knowledge acquisition and transmission to its construction and production. New actors have stepped in and the roles of researchers are subject to critical discussion. Research outcomes, in other words the usefulness of research with respect to practice development, is a topical agenda item. Research is needed, but if it is to be useful it needs to be not only credible but also useful in action. What do we know about different research processes in practice? What conceptions, approaches, methods and actor roles are embedded? What is the effect on practice? How does ‘here and now’ practice challenge research methods? This article is based on the research processes conducted in the institutes of practice research in social work in Finland. It analyses the different approaches applied by elucidating the theoretical standpoints and the critical elements embedded in them, and reflects on the outcomes in and for practice. It highlights the level of change and progression in practice research, arguing for diverse practice research models with a solid theoretical grounding, rigorous research processes, and a supportive infrastructure.