On the basis of corpus-derived data, the present paper examines the collocational patterns of the singular and the plural forms of a pair of etymologically and semantically related quantifying nouns (QNs), namely English heap and its Polish equivalent kupa ‘heap’. The primary aim is to determine their respective levels of numeralization, operationalized as the frequency of co-occurrence with animate and abstract N2-collocates in purely quantificational uses, in an attempt to establish whether, and to what extent, the addition of the plurality morpheme bears on the grammaticalization of a nominal of this kind into an indefinite quantifier. Following the observations arrived at by Brems (2003, 2011), the hypothesis is that pluralization should yield a facilitating effect on the numeralization of nouns referring to large quantities by amplifying their inherent scalar implications. The results demonstrate that whereas heaps indeed exhibits a higher percentage of such numeralized uses than heap, kupy ‘heaps’ has turned out to be grammaticalized in the quantifying function to a markedly lesser degree than kupa ‘heap’. It is argued that this apparently aberrant behaviour of kupy ‘heaps’ can nonetheless be elucidated in terms of the specificity of numeralization in Polish, since at its advanced, morphosyntactic stage, the process in question affects solely the singular (accusative) forms of QNs.
This article is devoted to the official forms in the inflection of chosen toponyms in Poland and the variety of dialectal singular and plural place names. The variety of place names often diverges from the rules of language use, and causes language users problems. The toponyms have peculiar, locally used inflected forms; the outside-linguistic (non-linguistic) factors that are social and local factors, play an important role in the inflection of place names. The local population often uses other forms than those recommended by official sources. I focus my attention on the genitive forms of toponyms because it is mainly here that one can see clear variations in the official and local inflection of place names. The material shows that the singular masculine toponyms have genitive endings: -a (in the official variety), -u (in the local variety), for example Biłgoraj, gen. Biłgoraja, but in the local dialect: biłgoraju. The singular feminine place names have genitive endings: -ej (in the official variety), -y||-i (in the local variety): Brzezowa, gen. Brzezowej, but Brzezowy in the local dialect. The plural toponyms have genitive endings: -ø, -ów, -i (-y), but in the local circulation the ending -ów is dominant and demonstrates a wider expansion in use. For example Brzózki, gen. Brzózek, in the local variety Brzuskuf; Budy, official gen. Bud, but Buduf; Burnie, gen. Burni, in the local dialect: Burniuf. The gathered material reflects a hesitation in the inflection of toponyms, as the linguistic customs and presented dialectal records of forms of genit ives of place names show a significantly diverse approach towards the Polish language.
The ideas of pluralism, their various theoretical developments and ideological concretizations, as well as their promotion and the attempts at implementing them in social practice, constitute a current signum temporis. Pedagogical reflection seems to be particularly sensitive to the issue of pluralism, to its understanding and practising, to multidimensional references of pluralism to the world of values. This especially concerns the values and conflicts of values which are close to various forms of educational activity. What is considered – more or less critically – in pedagogical reflection are different aspects and consequences of the idea of pluralism concerning the currently existing ideas. Simultaneously, the multitude of the ideas of pluralism is taken into account – the ideas which refer to the broadly treated sphere of pedagogical activities and institutions. Pedagogical reflection also considers the threats which co-occur with pluralism or are aimed against it and which are carried by pluralism itself, e.g. in the sphere of education. An expert in the contemporary pedagogical thought and practice, Bogusław Śliwerski, asks: “Will we manage to save the world of pedagogical thought, the pedagogy open to difference, to pluralism (not to be mistaken for another illness which is relativism)?”. By confronting pluralistic perspectives of pedagogy with current ideological and social challenges, he makes this question one of the leading issues in pedagogical and metapedagogical studies. What seems to be heard in this question as well is the appeal to save the world of pedagogical thought as an open world characterized by pluralism, doing this through honest reasoning conducted from different standpoints and perspectives. The assumption of this question comprises the axiologically consolidated belief that it is worth “to save the world of pedagogical thought, the pedagogy open to pluralism”. This is also an inspiration to undertake the (presented in this text) thought concerning the pluralistic perspectives of pedagogy and various faces of pluralisms in the critical recognition of metapedagogical reflection in the case of the Polish pedagogical thought after 1989.
Axiological chaos and unsustainable man’s acting in a contemporary world has led him to a total confusion. He constantly acts toward environmental and cultural degradation. Also in social dimension a permanent and “general” crisis dominates. The crisis is rooted on multi-category stratification and based on post-truth models of interpersonal communication in traditional and virtual realities. Neoliberal model of economical conquest, in turn, effects unsustainability in economic sphere. Thus, in common reception – for the most people in the world – such situation has become unbearable. So, it is the educators’ duty to look for – with the intention to put into practise – such concepts and pedagogies, which could prepare the whole global society to real – not declaratory false – co-creation of its life in the world, understood as an actual and common home. Taking such perspective, the theory of Argentinian philosopher – Ernesto Laclau becomes an interesting proposition. The time of mono-dimensional – protestant and neoliberal – interpretation of values comes to the end. Now the time has come to accept the equality of different – having their roots in various cultures – value understanding. Possibility of local and particular interpretation of values – along with maintaining the rule of common good – gives the chance to update the education according to real, thus multidimensional humanistic ideal. Such a standpoint presents a way to cure/reform intercultural education, which nowadays is at an impasse. Mainly it uses stiff schemes and repeated patterns, so it has become imitative and conservative. In its contemporary formula intercultural education is not able to respond to present challenges of multicultural and global society. The need to implant into its structure the concept of sustainable development emerges as a must.