Search

This paper describes the research project named MIXPAR, standing for "MIXed PARadigms", which was previously introduced in Štichauer (2022). The project aims to compile and investigate all published data to date about the phenomenon of mixed perfective auxiliation systems in Italo-Romance. The MIXPAR project represents a database developed following standardized principles currently implemented in a series of morphological lexicons. The article first explains the basic nature of these mixed paradigms, widely attested in a range of Italian dialects, where an intraparadigmatic alternation of two auxiliaries, avere/essere ('have/be'), is found, along with free variation and merged auxiliary forms such as jera, eva, and seva. The paper then introduces the individual parameters of the database, justifying their existence and discussing some of the associated issues. A long-format version of the database is presented, including variables for Cell, Verb/Construction, Class, Tense-aspect-mood paradigm, Auxiliary, Phonosyntactic doubling, Geographical information, Dialectal classification, Source, and Notes. It is concluded that the database will undoubtedly become a valuable tool despite the minor problems that will be resolved in due course.

Linguistic and cultural differences can impede comprehension among potential research participants during the informed consent process, but how researchers and IRBs respond to these challenges in practice is unclear. We conducted in-depth interviews with 15 researchers, research ethics committee (REC) chairs and members from 8 different countries with emerging economies, involved in HIV-related research sponsored by HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN), regarding the ethical and regulatory challenges they face in this regard. In the interviews, problems with translating study materials often arose as major concerns. Four sets of challenges were identified concerning linguistic and cultural translations of informed consent documents and other study materials, related to the: (1) context, (2) process, (3) content and (4) translation of these documents. Host country contextual issues included low literacy rates, education (e.g., documents may need to be written below 5th grade reading level), and experiences with research, and different views of written documentation. Certain terms and concepts may not exist in other languages, or have additional connotations that back translations do not always reveal. Challenges arise because of not only the content of word-for-word, literal translation, but the linguistic form of the language, such as tone (e.g., appropriate forms of politeness vs. legalese, seen as harsh), syntax, manner of questions posed, and the concept of the consent); and the contexts of use affect meaning. Problems also emerged in bilateral communications – US IRBs may misunderstand local practices, or communicate insufficiently the reasons for their decisions to foreign RECs. In sum, these data highlight several challenges that have received little, if any, attention in past literature on translation of informed consent and study materials, and have crucial implications for improving practice, education, research and policy, suggesting several strategies, including needs for broader open-source multilingual lexicons, and more awareness of the complexities involved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]