War words:language, history and the disciplining of English

Debates about the nature of literacy and literacy practices have been conducted extensively in the last fifteen years or so. The fact that both previous and current British governments have effectively suppressed any real debate makes the publication of this book both timely and important. Here, Urszula Clark stresses the underlying ideological character of such debates and shows that they have deep historical roots. She also makes the point that issues regarding the relationship between language and identity, especially national identity, become sharply focused at times of crisis in that identity. By undertaking a comparison with other major English-speaking countries, most notably Australia, New Zealand and the USA, Clark shows how these times of crisis reverberate around the globe.

Relating two simultaneous events in discourse: the role of on-goingness devices in L1 Tunisian Arabic, L1 French and L2 French by Tunisian learners

Our PhD study focuses on the role of aspectual marking in expressing simultaneity of events in Tunisian Arabic as a first language, French as a first language, as well as in French as a second language by Tunisian learners at different acquisitional stages. We examine how the explicit markers of on-goingness qa:’id and «en train de» in Tunisian Arabic and in French respectively are used to express this temporal relation, in competition with the simple forms, the prefixed verb form in Tunisian Arabic and the présent de l’indicatif in French. We use a complex verbal task of retelling simultaneous events sharing an interval on the time axis based on eight videos presenting two situations happening in parallel. Two types of simultaneity are exploited: perfect simultaneity (when the two situations are parallel to each other) and inclusion (one situation is framed by the second one). Our informants in French and in Tunisian Arabic have two profiles, highly educated and low educated speakers. We show that the participants’ response to the retelling task varies according to their profiles, and so does their use of the on-goingness devices in the expression of simultaneity. The differences observed between the two profile groups are explained by the degree to which the speakers have developed a habit of responding to tasks. This is a skill typically acquired during schooling. We notice overall that the use of qa:’id as well as of «en train de» is less frequent in the data than the use of the simple forms. However, qa:’id as well as «en train de» are employed to play discursive roles that go beyond the proposition level. We postulate that despite the shared features between Tunisian Arabic and French regarding marking the concept of on-goingness, namely the presence of explicit lexical, not fully grammaticalised markers competing with other non-marked forms, the way they are used in the discourse of simultaneous events shows clear differences. We explain that «en train de» plays a more contrastive role than qa:’id and its use in discourse obeys a stricter rule. In cases of the inclusion type of simultaneity, it is used to construe the ‘framing’ event that encloses the second event. In construing perfectly simultaneneous events, and when both «en train de» and présent de l’indicatif are used, the proposition with «en train de» generally precedes the proposition with présent de l’indicatif, and not the other way around. qa:id obeys, but to a less strict rule as it can be used interchangeably with the simple form regardless of the order of propositions. The contrastive analysis of French L1 and L2 reveals learners’ deviations from natives’ use of on-goingness devices. They generalise the use of «en train de» and apply different rules to the interaction of the different marked and unmarked forms in discourse. Learners do not master its role in discourse even at advanced stages of acquisition despite its possible emergence around the basic and intermediate varieties. We conclude that the native speakers’ use of «en train de» involves mastering its role at the macro-structure level. This feature, not explicitly available to learners in the input, might persistently present a challenge to L2 acquisition of the periphrasis.

History and symptom taking in contact lens fitting and aftercare

Aim: To appraise history and symptom taking for contact lens consultations, to determine current practice and to make recommendations for best practice. Method: The peer reviewed academic literature was reviewed and the results informed a survey completed by 256 eye care practitioners (ECPs) on their current practice and influences. Results: The last eye-test date, last contact lens aftercare (for existing wearers) and reason for visit are key questions for most ECPs. Detailed use of contact lens questions are more commonly applied in aftercares than when refitting patients who have previously discontinued wear (87% vs 56% use), whereas questions on ocular and general history, medication and lifestyle were generally more commonly utilised for new patients than in aftercares (72% vs 50%). 75% of ECPs requested patients bring a list of their medication to appointments. Differential diagnosis questioning was thorough in most ECPs (87% of relevant questions asked). Attempts to optimise compliance included oral instruction (95% always) and written patient instructions (95% at least sometimes). Abbreviations were used by 39% of respondents (26% used ones provided by a professional body). Conclusion: There is scope for more consistency in history and symptom taking for contact lens consultations and recommendations are made.

Paradigms lost:integrating history and organization studies

This article reviews recent attempts at mapping research paradigms in Management and Organizational History and argues that the old distinctions between supplementarist, integrationist, and reorientationist approaches have been superseded by attempts at integrating historical research in organization studies. A typology of these integrationist approaches differentiates between pluralist and unitary integration, as well as between models based on either historical theory or organization theory. Each has distinct weaknesses and strengths, but essentially all limit their integration of historical research paradigms to only a few. As a result, there is a danger that history might become reduced to a methodology, an empirical endeavor, narrative representations, or indeed be considered the subject of research rather than a research approach in its own right. I argue that all of these present an impoverished picture of the rich research traditions available in the discipline of history, which has unique insights and approaches to offer to the study of organizations.