To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Drawing on critical realist ontology and critical realist discourse analysis, the chapter analyses how the concept of resilience can be and has been applied to Black, Asian, and minority ethnic families and communities in ways that are biased, stigmatising, and pathologising. It argues that current definitions of resilience need to be redefined and reconceptualised, particularly in settings dominated by White middle-class voices that define what ‘positive emotions’, ‘successful traits’, and ‘coping mechanisms’ entail. Here, through racism and flawed perceptions and interpretations of resilience and ‘Othering’, members from ethnic minority communities are defined as in need of resilience support, whilst at the same time their experience of structural racism is being erased. Reframing resilience thus means taking account of multifaceted and interactive effects of personal, material, institutional, and political factors that impact on behaviour, well-being and resilience, as well as acknowledging that the way in which ‘behaviour’ is received is by default flawed, if this is largely informed by an oppressive White middle-class viewpoint.
In this chapter we review the essential highlights from previous cross-linguistic research on the acquisition of relativization. Specifically, we review studies that are relevant to the acquisition of headedness at earliest stages of complex sentence formation in the child. The preponderance of this research is based on observations of natural speech samples. This review reveals an absence of headedness in early child attempts at relativization, and a variety of evidence supporting children’s early creation of headless relativization. We suggest that these early data cohere with our leading hypothesis and with the proposed UG template.