Interprétation des insultes et relations de solidarité

This article focuses on the empirical domain of the solidarity uses of certain insults in different varieties of French (standard, Quebec, Burgundy) from diachronic and synchronic points of view. Solidarity uses refers to the usage of axiological terms as terms of endearment to mark social proximity between subjects. This value is signalled by morphosyntactic, prosodic and mimeo-gestural features indicating the speaker's disposition towards the addressee. These psychological and social parameters conspire to attenuate the axiological term's argumentative program, which however can never be entirely evacuated. This argumentative program is nevertheless subordinated to pragmatics, which remains necessary in order to evaluate the extent to which the conventional lexical meaning is maintained in these uses. The attenuation of conventional meaning under solidarity uses shows the relevance of relational and attitudinal notions for the negotiation of meaning. It further establishes that at least in some cases, the analysis of linguistic interpretation require a multidisciplinary approach, most specifically where the relation between Semantics and Pragmatics is concerned.

Carpe diem - HRM led CSR

This paper explores the relationship in theory and practice between strategic HRM on the one hand and the growing interest in business ethics and corporate social responsibility (CSR) on the other and calls for the HRM profession to provide inspirational leadership in the area of CSR. A multidisciplinary approach is taken to highlight the range of theoretical contributions relevant to this debate. This paper puts forward a number of arguments as to why HR professionals should seize the opportunity to be the natural leaders of CSR.

Putting children forward for epilepsy surgery:a qualitative study of UK parents' and health professionals' decision-making experiences

Background Against a backdrop of recommendations for increasing access to and uptake of early surgical intervention for children with medically intractable epilepsy, it is important to understand how parents and professionals decide to put children forward for epilepsy surgery and what their decisional support needs are. Aim The aim of this study was to explore how parents and health professionals make decisions regarding putting children forward for pediatric epilepsy surgery. Methods Individual interviews were conducted with nine parents of children who had undergone pediatric epilepsy surgery at a specialist children's hospital and ten healthcare professionals who made up the children's epilepsy surgery service multidisciplinary healthcare team (MDT). Three MDT meetings were also observed. Data were analyzed thematically. Findings Four themes were generated from analysis of interviews with parents: presentation of surgery as a treatment option, decision-making, looking back, and interventions. Three themes were generated from analysis of interviews/observations with health professionals: triangulating information, team working, and patient and family perspectives. Discussion Parents wanted more information and support in deciding to put their child forward for epilepsy surgery. They attempted to balance the potential benefits of surgery against any risks of harm. For health professionals, a multidisciplinary approach was seen as crucial to the decision-making process. Advocating for the family was perceived to be the responsibility of nonmedical professionals. Conclusion Decision-making can be supported by incorporating families into discussions regarding epilepsy surgery as a potential treatment option earlier in the process and by providing families with additional information and access to other parents with similar experiences.

Learning with other health professions in the United Kingdom MPharm degree:Multidisciplinary and placement education

This paper reviews the approach to multidisciplinary and placement education in UK schools of pharmacy. The methodology involved triangulation of course documentation, staff interviews and a final year student survey. Staff members were supportive of multidisciplinary learning. The advantages were development of a wider appreciation of the students? future professional role and better understanding of the roles of other professional groups. The barriers were logistics (student numbers; multiple sites; different timetables), the achievement of balanced numbers between disciplines and engagement of students from all participating disciplines. Placement education was offered by all schools, predominantly in hospital settings. Key problems were funding and the lack of staff resources. Currently, multidisciplinary learning within the UK for pharmacy students is inadequate and is coupled with relatively low levels of placement education. In order for things to change, there should be a review of funding and support from government and the private sector employers.

Classifying clinical decision making:a unifying approach

This is the first of two linked papers exploring decision making in nursing which integrate research evidence from different clinical and academic disciplines. Currently there are many decision-making theories, each with their own distinctive concepts and terminology, and there is a tendency for separate disciplines to view their own decision-making processes as unique. Identifying good nursing decisions and where improvements can be made is therefore problematic, and this can undermine clinical and organizational effectiveness, as well as nurses' professional status. Within the unifying framework of psychological classification, the overall aim of the two papers is to clarify and compare terms, concepts and processes identified in a diversity of decision-making theories, and to demonstrate their underlying similarities. It is argued that the range of explanations used across disciplines can usefully be re-conceptualized as classification behaviour. This paper explores problems arising from multiple theories of decision making being applied to separate clinical disciplines. Attention is given to detrimental effects on nursing practice within the context of multidisciplinary health-care organizations and the changing role of nurses. The different theories are outlined and difficulties in applying them to nursing decisions highlighted. An alternative approach based on a general model of classification is then presented in detail to introduce its terminology and the unifying framework for interpreting all types of decisions. The classification model is used to provide the context for relating alternative philosophical approaches and to define decision-making activities common to all clinical domains. This may benefit nurses by improving multidisciplinary collaboration and weakening clinical elitism.