<p>An earlier corpus study on Swedish university students’ errors concerning the use of apostrophes when writing in English (overuse, omission and misplacement) is contrasted to a new corpus study of upper secondary pupils’ texts. The results turn out to be similar: omissions are numerous among the upper secondary pupils, but overuses negligible. The proportionally most common errors are omissions in genitive constructions. This is contrasted to the views of the classes’ teacher, who perceived contractions to be more problematic due to these errors being more numerous. The essay also briefly deals with the teaching and the future of the apostrophe.</p>

Thesis (M.S.)--Brock University, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 79-84).

Thesis (M.Sc.)--York University, 2005. Graduate Programme in Kinesiology and Health Science. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 45-47). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:MR11739

Thesis (M.Sc.)--York University, 2007. Graduate Programme in Kinesiology and Health Science. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 76-88). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:MR29623

Thesis (doctoral)--Lund University, 1995. / Added t.p. with thesis statement inserted.

Thesis ( Ph. D.)--Walden University, 2003. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references ([111]-117).

Thesis ( Ph. D.)--Walden University, 2003. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references ([111]-117).

Thesis (doctoral)--Lund University, 1995. / Added t.p. with thesis statement inserted.

The overuse of agrochemicals by arable crop farmers in Guyana is of increasing concern. But the literature reveals a paucity of information concerning the reasons for farmers‟ persistence of this inappropriate practice. No previous study has been conducted using a structured format to reveal the scope or reasons for farmers‟ sustained overuse of these chemicals. This research adopted an original structured-type approach, suitable for unearthing and explaining the reasons for this phenomenon. The study was theoretically and analytically guided by the theory of practices and critical realist theory respectively, to identify the prevalence, intensity and significant factors of farmer‟s pesticide and fertiliser overuse, but more importantly to elucidate reasons for overuse and formulate relevant recommendations. This investigation utilised a mixed methods strategy of complementary quantitative and qualitative techniques; comprising analysis of data from 229 farm unit surveys and 38 farmer and 19 key informant interviews, respectively. Quantitative analysis, conducted via SPSS software using tables and regression, revealed widespread prevalence of both pesticide and fertiliser overuse among farmers. The overuse consisted of high frequencies and concentrations of the chemicals. The study notes the factors which were significantly associated with overuse including farmers‟ age, education level, area cultivated, land tenure status and the „source-type‟ of information they accessed. However, qualitative analysis, utilising a grounded-theory approach with the aid of NVivo software, demonstrated that unlike the suggestions by other studies, the reasons for farmers‟ overuse were not the single factors which showed statistical significance for overuse practices. On the contrary, this study revealed original findings, which indicated that the reasons for farmers‟ overuse practices were embedded within an intricate network of contingent, support and contextual factors. These explained both the instigation and continuance of agrochemical overuse by farmers. Overall the findings emphasise the need for policy redress, especially regarding the mandate and conduct of farmer-training regarding chemical use, and the regulatory enforcement of appropriate agrochemical use. Understanding the reasons for farmers‟ inappropriate practices revealed new insight into the interpretation of these practices; as consequences of policy deficiency instead of farmer delinquency. Thus, the implications provided to address this problem of farmers‟ agrochemical overuse presented a new orientation to the type of suggestions previously suggested in other studies. The proposals indicated by this study for a targeted resolution of overuse in arable farmers of Guyana are more policy-oriented than farmer-targeted, since this study revealed that farmers‟ overuse behaviour is largely a response to policy-influenced support and contextual factors.

La prise en charge de la démence est un défi pour les cliniciens tant ces patients constituent une population hétérogène. Dans le cadre de cette prise en charge, l’intérêt des antidémentiels (anticholinestérasiques et mémantine) est débattue : l’efficacité clinique semble discutable et les effets indésirables non négligeables. En 2010, des recommandations de bonnes pratiques ont laissé libre choix aux médecins de prescrire ou non ces médicaments. Depuis des questions restent en suspens : 1/ quelle est l’évolution des taux de prescription de ces médicaments depuis ces recommandations, en d’autres termes comment l’expertise clinique des médecins, un des piliers du tryptique de l’evidence based medicine, s’est-elle exprimée ? 2/ quels sont les facteurs qui restent associés aujourd’hui au fait de prescrire ou non ces médicaments ? et 3/ y a-t-il une sur-hospitalisation liée à leurs effets indésirables ?La question de la surmédicalisation est au cœur de notre problématique de thèse. Dans ce travail, nous avons répondu à ces 3 questions posées qui ont constitué nos 3 objectifs. Nous avons pu montrer que les médecins semblaient de moins en moins confiants vis-à-vis des antidémentiels avec une diminution de leur prescription depuis 2010 et des conséquences importantes en termes de coûts évités. Lorsqu’ils continuaient d’être prescrits, ces traitements l’étaient essentiellement chez les patients les plus jeunes ou en meilleur état de santé. Enfin, les anticholinestérasiques, essentiellement la rivastigmine, augmentaient le risque d’hospitalisation via des effets indésirables cardiaques et digestifs. Nos résultats plaident en défaveur de la prescription d’antidémentiels tant du point de vue de la morbidité que des dépenses de santé. La question du point de vue du patient reste posée. / Patients with dementia raise therapeutic challenges, as they constitute a heterogeneous population. As part of this management, the interest of antidementia drugs (cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine) is debated: the clinical efficacy seems questionable and the adverse effects appear to be significant. The 2010 recommendations gave to cliniciens the choice to prescribe or not these drugs. Since questions remain unanswered: 1 / what is the evolution of prescription rates of these drugs since these recommendations, in other words how the clinical expertise of cliniciens, one of the pillars the evidence based medicine, is expressed? 2 / what are the factors that remain today associated with prescribing these drugs or not? and 3 / Is there over-hospitalization related to their side effects?The question of medical overuse is a central point of our thesis problem. In this work, we answered these 3 questions which constituted our 3 objectives. We were able to show that cliniciens seemed less and less confident about antidementia drugs with a decrease in their prescription since 2010 and significant consequences in terms of avoided costs. When they continued to be prescribed, these treatments were mainly used in the youngest or most healthy patients. Finally, cholinesterase inhibitors, mainly rivastigmine, increased the risk of hospitalization via cardiac and digestive side effects. Our results argue against the prescription of antidementia drugs both from the point of view of morbidity and health expenditures. The question from the patient's point of view remains.