| s-1
| Introduction |
| s-2
| Research on adult-learned second language (L2) has provided considerable insight into the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying the learning and processing of L2 grammar [1]–[11]. |
| s-3
| Of interest here, studies suggest that, despite the difficulties in acquiring L2 grammar, adult learners can approximate native-like levels of use and neurocognitive processing [12]–[15]. |
| s-4
| However, it is not enough to have attained such native-like levels. |
| s-5
| Crucially, it is also desirable to retain them, even in the absence of continued practice or exposure to the L2. |
| s-6
| In fact, substantial periods (months to years) of limited or no exposure following L2 training are not uncommon, and may even be the norm [16]. |
| s-7
| Such a scenario may be found in different situations, including when one studies a language in a classroom and then stops taking classes [17], [18] and when one is immersed in a foreign language setting and then moves away [19]. |
| s-8
| In the present study, we examine the outcomes of such a period of no exposure on the neurocognition of L2 grammar: that is, whether a substantial period of no exposure leads to decreased proficiency and/or less native-like neural processes (“use it or lose it” [20]), no such changes, or perhaps whether even higher proficiency and/or more native-like processing may be observed. |
| s-9
| Additionally, we test whether any such outcomes might vary as a function of the type of L2 training, in particular between classroom-like and immersion-like contexts. |
| s-10
| Previous Research |
| s-11
| We are aware of six studies designed to investigate the effects of a substantial period of limited exposure following adult L2 training [17], [18], [21]–[24], all of which were restricted to the examination of behavioral (performance) outcomes. |
| s-12
| (Note that we do not consider case studies, purely observational data, or research on L2s acquired by children; for a comprehensive review, see [16]). |
| s-13
| The six studies tested L2 learners after periods of 1 month to 50 years of limited L2 exposure, mainly on general language skills [17], [18], [21], [23], [24], though also on more specific paradigms meant to target aspects of grammatical abilities [17], [18] or lexical abilities [22], [23]. |
| s-14
| These language measures were compared in most studies to the same measures in a different set of subjects who had not experienced a period of limited exposure [17], [18], [22], [23], or to retrospective ratings of the same subjects [21], with only one longitudinal study testing the same subjects before and after a period of limited exposure [24]. |
| s-15
| Across the studies, the periods of limited exposure followed either classroom training [17], [18], [22], [24] or mixed classroom and immersion training [21], [23], [24]. |
| s-16
| The training lasted varying lengths of time, apparently usually in the range of a few years, and resulted in seemingly varying proficiency levels (though not directly measured, except by [24]) prior to the period of limited exposure. |
| s-17
| Overall, the results of the six studies have been taken to suggest the following. |
| s-18
| A period of limited exposure generally leads to attrition (loss) of L2 performance or knowledge [17], [18], [21], [23]. |
| s-19
| Such loss has been observed after as little as a few months of limited exposure, e.g., after a 1-7 month [23] or 6 month delay [21], as well as after 2 years [18], though in one case it was observed only by 3-5 years, and not earlier [17]. |
| s-20
| Although attrition may take place within the first few years, some studies suggest that it then appears to level off, with no further losses occurring [17], [18]. |
| s-21
| Higher levels of proficiency (or exposure) may be associated with less attrition [17], [18], [21], [23] or even with no observed losses [21]. |
| s-22
| Moreover, one study found no changes at all in performance, across proficiency levels, after either 2 or 4 years of limited exposure [22]. |
| s-23
| Finally, in some cases a gain in performance has been observed: after 1.5 years of limited exposure in one study, particularly for L2 learners with immersion as well as classroom training [24], and in another study after 2 years, though only for some abilities, such as listening and reading comprehension [18]. |
| s-24
| It remains unclear what might explain such gains, which have been attributed to motivation and to L2 experience during the period of ostensibly limited exposure [24], or to factors related to general maturation, cognitive development, or continued academic training [18]. |
| s-25
| Digital Humanities Clinics - |
| s-26
| Leading Dutch Librarians into DH |
| s-27
| Michiel Cock m.p.cock@vu.nl Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands |
| s-28
| Lotte Wilms lotte.wilms@kb.nl National Library of the Netherlands, the Netherlands |
| s-29
| In 2015, an initiative was started to set up a Dutch speaking DH+Lib community in the Netherlands and Belgium, based on the example of the American communal space of librarians, archivists, LIS graduate students, and information specialists to discuss topics ‘Where the Digital Humanities and Libraries meet’. |
| s-30
| At the initial meeting it became apparent that most participants were there to learn more about digital humanities and were not (yet) in the situation where they were able to offer expertise on the subject. |
| s-31
| On the administrative level, the directors of the libraries participating in the consortium of Dutch academic libraries (UKB) also expressed the wish that librarians become more fluent in DH. |
| s-32
| A year later, the National Library of the Netherlands (Koninklijke Bibliotheek), and the University Library of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam again concluded that librarians at their institutes who wanted to get involved in DH needed more training to adequately support researchers and students in this field. |
| s-33
| Therefore both institutes joined forces to develop a set of clinics on DH for librarians. |
| s-34
| The two institutes were later joined by the Leiden University Libraries. |
| s-35
| We see this as the ideal opportunity to provide these educative sessions not only to our own librarians, but also to the academic librarians of other Dutch research libraries. |
| s-36
| In essence, we want to teach our country’s librarians the ins and outs of DH in order for them to take up their natural role of facilitating and supporting research and ideally become the research partner needed in DH projects. |
| s-37
| The aim of these clinics is to provide basic methodological competencies and technical skills in DH, for a diverse group of librarians, consisting of both subject and technical librarians with basic technical skills. |
| s-38
| The content of these sessions should enable them to provide services to researchers and students, identify remaining gaps in knowledge or skills that they could address by self-directed learning and (perhaps) to automate their daily library work. |
| s-39
| We are not setting out to turn them into programmers or data crunchers, but want to boost their knowledge level to where they feel comfortable providing information about DH projects, follow the literature and research, follow online tutorials and hopefully take up the challenge of finishing this professional development by engaging with the DH community. |
| s-40
| In order to design this curriculum we follow a four step approach with a Working Out Loud-principle (Williams, 2010): |
| s-41
| Desk research about what being a DH librarian entails (e.g. Hartsell-Gundy et al., 2015; Mulligan, 2016; also see the Zotero library of the LIBER Digital Humanities working group); |
| s-42
| Identify possible subjects, based on experience, a comparison of existing teaching material related to DH (e.g. The Programming Historian, the Digital Scholarship Training Programme at the British Library and Columbia University's Developing Librarian project) and the TaDiRAH taxonomy of research activities; |
| s-43
| Get feedback from researchers on possible subjects, based on the knowledge and skills they feel librarians need; |
| s-44
| Get feedback from librarians on possible subjects, based on already known gaps in their knowledge and skills. |
| s-45
| With these in hand, we will design the curriculum of clinics, based on the method of 'constructive alignment' (Biggs et al., 2011), to make sure that the intended learning objectives and the teaching/learning activities stay aligned. |
| s-46
| Our plan is to organize a maximum of 6 clinics, each one full day. |
| s-47
| Each day starts with one or more lectures by researchers, that address the conceptual knowledge needed. |
| s-48
| The afternoon sessions will be devoted to the hands-on training of skills, following the Library Carpentry model as closely as possible. |
| s-49
| By having researchers provide the lecture sessions, we hope to fuel the enthusiasm of the librarians with the inspiration of direct contact with researchers and to provide access to a network within and across universities. |
| s-50
| With these clinics, we hope to initiate a stream of DH activities in Dutch universities, making access to support easier for new digital scholars. |
| s-51
| The poster at DH2017 will present the curriculum, its position in the international context and offer the lessons learned from both the design process and the first clinics. |
| s-52
| We welcome discussion about our efforts and the possibilities of applying this in other contexts. |
| s-53
| Education and early loves |
| s-54
| Byron received his early formal education at Aberdeen Grammar School, and in August 1799 entered the school of Dr. William Glennie, in Dulwich. [17] |
| s-55
| Placed under the care of a Dr. Bailey, he was encouraged to exercise in moderation but not restrain himself from 'violent' bouts in an attempt to overcompensate for his deformed foot. |
| s-56
| His mother interfered with his studies, often withdrawing him from school, with the result that he lacked discipline and his classical studies were neglected. |
| s-57
| In 1801, he was sent to Harrow, where he remained until July 1805. [6] |
| s-58
| An undistinguished student and an unskilled cricketer, he did represent the school during the very first Eton v Harrow cricket match at Lord's in 1805. [19] |
| s-59
| His lack of moderation was not restricted to physical exercise. |
| s-60
| Byron fell in love with Mary Chaworth, whom he met while at school, [6] and she was the reason he refused to return to Harrow in September 1803. |
| s-61
| His mother wrote, 'He has no indisposition that I know of but love, desperate love, the worst of all maladies in my opinion. In short, the boy is distractedly in love with Miss Chaworth.' [6] |
| s-62
| In Byron's later memoirs, 'Mary Chaworth is portrayed as the first object of his adult sexual feelings.' [20] |
| s-63
| Byron finally returned in January 1804, [6] to a more settled period which saw the formation of a circle of emotional involvements with other Harrow boys, which he recalled with great vividness: 'My school friendships were with me passions (for I was always violent).' [21] |
| s-64
| The most enduring of those was with John FitzGibbon, 2nd Earl of Clare — four years Byron's junior — whom he was to meet unexpectedly many years later in Italy (1821). [22] |
| s-65
| His nostalgic poems about his Harrow friendships, Childish Recollections (1806), express a prescient 'consciousness of sexual differences that may in the end make England untenable to him.' [23] |
| s-66
| Letters to Byron in the John Murray archive contain evidence of a previously unremarked if short-lived romantic relationship with a younger boy at Harrow, John Thomas Claridge. |
| s-67
| John FitzGibbon, 2nd Earl of Clare |
| s-68
| Ah! |
| s-69
| Sure some stronger impulse vibrates here, Which whispers friendship will be doubly dear To one, who thus for kindred hearts must roam, And seek abroad, the love denied at home. |
| s-70
| The following autumn, he went up to Trinity College, Cambridge, [24] where he met and formed a close friendship with the younger John Edleston. |
| s-71
| About his 'protégé' he wrote, 'He has been my almost constant associate since October, 1805, when I entered Trinity College. His voice first attracted my attention, his countenance fixed it, and his manners attached me to him for ever.' |
| s-72
| In his memory Byron composed Thyrza, a series of elegies. [25] |
| s-73
| In later years, he described the affair as 'a violent, though pure love and passion'. |
| s-74
| This statement, however, needs to be read in the context of hardening public attitudes toward homosexuality in England and the severe sanctions (including public hanging) against convicted or even suspected offenders. [26] |
| s-75
| The liaison, on the other hand, may well have been 'pure' out of respect for Edleston's innocence, in contrast to the (probably) more sexually overt relations experienced at Harrow School. [27] |
| s-76
| Byron spent three years at Trinity College, engaging in sexual escapades, boxing, horse riding and gambling. [28] |
| s-77
| Also while at Cambridge he formed lifelong friendships with men such as John Cam Hobhouse, who initiated him into the Cambridge Whig Club, which endorsed liberal politics, [28] and Francis Hodgson, a Fellow at King's College, with whom he corresponded on literary and other matters until the end of his life. |
| s-78
| Emperor Norton |
| s-79
| Joshua Abraham Norton (c. 1818 – January 8, 1880), known as Emperor Norton, was a citizen of San Francisco, California, who in 1859 proclaimed himself 'Norton I, Emperor of the United States'. |
| s-80
| He later expanded his pretense by claiming to be 'Protector of Mexico' as well. |
| s-81
| Born in England, Norton spent most of his early life in South Africa. |
| s-82
| After the death of his mother in 1846 and his father in 1848, he sailed west, arriving in San Francisco possibly in November 1849. |
| s-83
| Norton initially made a living as a businessman, but he lost his fortune investing in Peruvian rice. |
| s-84
| After he lost a lawsuit in which he tried to void his rice contract, Norton's public prominence faded. |
| s-85
| He reemerged in September 1859, laying claim to the position of Emperor of the United States. |
| s-86
| He had no political power, and his influence extended only so far as he was humored by those around him; |
| s-87
| nevertheless, he was treated deferentially in San Francisco, and currency issued in his name was honored in the establishments he frequented. |
| s-88
| Though some considered him insane or eccentric, citizens of San Francisco celebrated his regal presence and his proclamations, such as his order that the United States Congress be dissolved by force and his numerous decrees calling for a bridge connecting San Francisco to Oakland, and a corresponding tunnel to be built under San Francisco Bay. |
| s-89
| Long after his death, similar structures were built in the form of the San Francisco – Oakland Bay Bridge and the Transbay Tube, and there have been campaigns to rename the bridge 'The Emperor Norton Bridge'. |
| s-90
| On January 8, 1880, Norton collapsed at the corner of California and Dupont (now Grant) streets and died before he could be given medical treatment. |
| s-91
| Nearly 30,000 people packed the streets of San Francisco to pay him homage at his funeral. |
| s-92
| Norton has been immortalized as the basis of characters in the literature of writers Mark Twain, Robert Louis Stevenson, Christopher Moore, Morris and Goscinny, Selma Lagerlöf, and Neil Gaiman. |
| s-93
| Norton I, Emperor of the United States, photograph, c. 1871 – 72 |
| s-94
| Declares himself emperor |
| s-95
| Emperor Joshua Norton, in full military regalia, circa 1880 or earlier |
| s-96
| By 1859, Norton had become completely disgruntled with what he considered the inadequacies of the legal and political structures of the United States. |
| s-97
| On September 17, 1859, he took matters into his own hands and distributed letters to the various newspapers in the city, proclaiming himself 'Emperor of these United States': |
| s-98
| At the peremptory request and desire of a large majority of the citizens of these United States, I, Joshua Norton, formerly of Algoa Bay, Cape of Good Hope, and now for the last 9 years and 10 months past of S. F., Cal., declare and proclaim myself Emperor of these U. S.; |
| s-99
| and in virtue of the authority thereby in me vested, do hereby order and direct the representatives of the different States of the Union to assemble in Musical Hall, of this city, on the 1st day of Feb. next, then and there to make such alterations in the existing laws of the Union as may ameliorate the evils under which the country is laboring, and thereby cause confidence to exist, both at home and abroad, in our stability and integrity. |
| s-100
| — NORTON I, Emperor of the United States. |