In this article, we examine the form and meaning of a subtype of causative adjuncts, purpose adjuncts, in Estonian and Finnish. The analysis is based on the micro-modular approach of Conceptual Semantics (Nikanne 1990, 2005, 2018; Pörn 2004; Paulsen 2011a, 2011b; Petrova 2011). It provides a non-linear approach to linguistic causation, alternative to the linear models. By the term ‘non-linear’ we mean the involvement of separate levels of conceptual structure that influence the causative reading, and a separation of causation from the temporal flow of the situation. We propose two causative operators for subordinate causative structures, BECAUSE OF and LEAD TO. According to their temporal structures, we separate two types of purpose adjuncts: reason-purpose adjuncts and avoidance adjuncts. The causative effect of purpose is in our analysis related to the notion of intentionality.

L'expression durative postverbale en chinois mandarin a été traitée dans quatre approches différentes dans la littérature, à savoir l'approche de complément, l'approche de prédicat, la cooccurrence des structures de complément et de prédicat et l'approche d'adjoint. Dans cet article, nous proposons une analyse combinatoire par adjoint et par prédicat en tenant compte des facteurs à la fois syntaxiques et sémantiques non seulement de l'expression durative postverbale, mais aussi des verbes et des objets auxquels les duratifs peuvent s'attacher. Nous avons pour objectif de montrer que ce sont ces facteurs conjoints qui permettent de déterminer la distribution en surface et la position syntaxique de l'expression durative postverbale en chinois mandarin.

The syntax literature has overwhelmingly adopted the view that Condition C reconstruction takes place in wh-chains for R-expressions contained within arguments, but not within adjuncts of fronted wh-phrases. At the same time, this empirical picture has been questioned by various authors. We undertake a series of grammaticality surveys using Amazon Mechanical Turk in an attempt to clarify the empirical picture regarding reconstruction for Binding Condition C. We find absolutely no evidence of an argument–adjunct distinction in reconstruction for Binding Condition C. Neither arguments nor adjuncts reconstruct for Condition C. We suggest that those speakers who report such a contrast (linguists, primarily) are following a pragmatic bias, and not Condition C. While we do not find reconstruction of dependents of fronted NPs for Binding Condition C, we do find reconstruction of fronted PPs. That is, the NP complement of a fronted P must reconstruct for Binding Condition C. The literature also finds reconstruction of NP complements of verbs and adjectives. This means that fronted Ns are special in not requiring reconstruction of their arguments and adjuncts. We suggest that, syntactically, arguments of Ns are treated as adjuncts: semantic arguments simply adjoin in the same manner as true adjuncts. Syntactic adjuncts can be left out of lower copies in chains, something that we suggest follows from a left-to-right syntactic derivation plus an economy condition on copying.

Catholic social teaching (CST) has long endorsed the right of all workers to unionize. However, many US Catholics exhibit an antiunion bias. In addition, Catholic institutions have engaged in union busting, thereby flouting CST. Focusing on the recent efforts of adjuncts to unionize at Catholic universities, this article argues that union busting jeopardizes the faith and conscience formation of students and undermines the evangelizing mission of Catholic universities. The article debunks the appeal to religious liberty by Catholic institutions to circumvent the National Labor Relations Board's injunctions to allow adjuncts to unionize. It also refutes the argument that the National Labor Relations Act imposes a style of collective bargaining contrary to the harmonious vision of labor relations in CST. Succinctly stated, the article contends there is no legitimate reason for Catholic universities to thwart the unionization efforts of adjuncts, particularly given the systematically unjust work conditions many of them face.

This paper provides evidence that medial adjunct PPs in English are possible. On the basis of corpus data, it is shown that sentence-medial adjunct PPs are not unacceptable and are attested. Our corpus data also reveal a sharp asymmetry between negative and non-negative adjunct PPs. The analysis of the corpus revealed the following pattern: Non-negative adjunct PPs such as at that time resist medial position and instead tend to be postverbal; negative adjunct PPs such as at no time appear medially rather than postverbally. In the second part of the paper, we broaden the empirical domain and include negative complement PPs in the discussion. It is shown that when it comes to the licensing of question tags, English negative complement PPs, which are postverbal, pattern differently from postverbal negative adjunct PPs. That is, sentences with a postverbal negative adjunct PP pattern with negative sentences in taking a positive question tag, while sentences containing a postverbal negative argument PP pattern with affirmative sentences in taking a negative tag. To account for the observed adjunct–argument asymmetry in the licensing of question tags, we propose that clauses are typed for polarity and we explore the hypothesis that a polarity head in the left periphery of the clause is crucially involved in the licensing of sentential negation.

We performed a prospective, randomized study comparing the efficacy and safety of remifentanil, propofol or both for conscious sedation during eye surgery under retrobulbar blockade. Forty-five unpremedicated patients were assigned to receive remifentanil (group R) (n=15, mean dosage: 0.05±0.03 μg kg−1 min−1), propofol (group P) (n=15, 1.5±0.5 mg kg−1 h−1) or a combination (group RP) (n=15, R: 0.03±0.01 μg kg−1 min−1; P: 0.7±0.2 mg kg−1 h−1). Haemodynamic responses were comparable among all groups. Minimum values for respiratory rate were lower in R patients (R: 7 vs. P and RP: 10 breaths min−1). Peri-operative blood gas analysis showed differences in maximum carbon dioxide tensions (R: 51.5 vs. P: 48.3 vs. RP: 45.5 mmHg) and decrease in minimum pH values (R: −0.06 vs. P: −0.0 vs. RP: −0.01). All group P patients reported mild to intense pain during retrobulbar block, while 53% of the group R patients were free from pain. In group RP, 60% of patients experienced no pain and the remaining 40% reported mild pain only. Remifentanil, applied as the sole agent, provided superior pain relief and patient comfort when compared with propofol, but produced greater respiratory depression and postoperative nausea. The combination of remifentanil and propofol provided haemodynamic stability, adequate spontaneous respiration and pain relief, with a low risk of untoward side effects.