Giving in Numbers: 2013 Edition

Developed by CECP in association with The Conference Board, "Giving in Numbers: 2013 Edition" is based on data from 2companies including 60 of the largest 100 companies in the Fortune 500. The sum of contributions across all respondents of the 2012 Corporate Giving Survey (CGS), from which the data is pulled, totaled more than $20 billion in cash and in-kind giving. This report not only presents a profile of corporate philanthropy in 2012, but also pinpoints how corporate giving is evolving and becoming more focused since before the recession of 2008 and 2009. This is the ninth annual report on trends in corporate giving

Giving In Numbers: 2014 Edition

Developed by CECP, in association with The Conference Board, 'Giving in Numbers: 2014 Edition' is based on data from 261 companies, including 62 of the largest 100 companies in the Fortune 500. The sum of contributions across all respondents of the recent survey on 2013 contributions totaled more than $25 billion in cash and in-kind giving. This report not only presents a profile of corporate philanthropy and employee engagement in 2013, but also pinpoints how corporate community engagement is evolving and becoming more focused following the end of the Great Recession. This is the tenth annual report on trends in corporate giving

A quantitative and qualitative analysis of swine finishing house dust with scanning electron and light microscopy

Call number: LD2668 .R4 AGE 1987 S77Master of ScienceBiological and Agricultural Engineerin

On the structure of psych-verb constructions

One of the recent challenges to the Government-Binding framework has been to explain the reversal properties of psych-verbs like worry, terrify, and concern. Two GB-type explanations for the reversal properties of psych-verbs have been proposed: one claims that the reversal properties arise because psych-verbs are unaccusative verbs (Belletti and Rizzi (1988) and Kim and Larson (1989)) and the other claims that the reversals arise because psych-verbs have reversed argument structures

On Extraposition and Expletive-Movement

Movement analyses of extraposition such as Baltin\u27s (1982) have been called into question by the base generated adjunction analyses of extraposition proposed in Gueron and May (1984) and Culicover and Rochemont (1990) and by the base generated VP-internal analysis of extraposition proposed in Haider (1993). In this paper, however, I defend a movement analysis of the extraposition data illustrated in (la). Following Kayne\u27s (1993) claim that extraposed constructions are formed by leftward movement, I argue that (la) is derived via leftward movement of the expletive from (Spec CP] position to (Spec AGR..P] position (in the same way that (lb) is derived by the leftward movement of the NP Sue from (Spec IP) to [Spec AGRnP))

Reinforcing and neurochemical effects of cannabinoid CB1 receptor agonists, but not cocaine, are altered by an adenosine A2A receptor antagonist

Several recent studies suggest functional and molecular interactions between striatal adenosine A2A and cannabinoid CB1 receptors. Here, we demonstrate that A2A receptors selectively modulate reinforcing effects of cannabinoids. We studied effects of A2A receptor blockade on the reinforcing effects of delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and the endogenous CB1 receptor ligand anandamide under a fixed‐ratio schedule of intravenous drug injection in squirrel monkeys. A low dose of the selective adenosine A2A receptor antagonist MSX‐3 (1 mg/kg) caused downward shifts of THC and anandamide dose‐response curves. In contrast, a higher dose of MSX‐3 (3 mg/kg) shifted THC and anandamide dose‐response curves to the left. MSX‐3 did not modify cocaine or food pellet self‐administration. Also, MSX‐3 neither promoted reinstatement of extinguished drug‐seeking behavior nor altered reinstatement of drug‐seeking behavior by non‐contingent priming injections of THC. Finally, using in vivo microdialysis in freely‐moving rats, a behaviorally active dose of MSX‐3 significantly counteracted THC‐induced, but not cocaine‐induced, increases in extracellular dopamine levels in the nucleus accumbens shell. The significant and selective results obtained with the lower dose of MSX‐3 suggest that adenosine A2A antagonists acting preferentially at presynaptic A2A receptors might selectively reduce reinforcing effects of cannabinoids that lead to their abuse. However, the appearance of potentiating rather than suppressing effects on cannabinoid reinforcement at the higher dose of MSX‐3 would likely preclude the use of such a compound as a medication for cannabis abuse. Adenosine A2A antagonists with more selectivity for presynaptic versus postsynaptic receptors could be potential medications for treatment of cannabis abuse

Delayed valuation: a reanalysis of goal features, “upwards” complementizer agreement, and the mechanics of Case

There are at least four opposing views on the directionality and configuration of Agree relations. In mainstream Minimalism, Agree is strictly downward “probing” (Chomsky 2000, 2001, Boskovic 2007, Epstein & Seely 2006), but some recent works argue instead that Agree always looks upwards (Zeijlstra 2012; Wurmbrand 2012). A third perspective takes agreement to follow from the Spec, head configuration (Koopman 2006; and see Chomsky’s 2013 labeling through shared prominent features), and under a fourth proposal, the directionality of Agree varies parametrically (Baker 2008). While each of these approaches has some empirical support, none achieves the strict conceptual necessity that is a central goal of Minimalist theory. In this paper I argue, following Epstein’s 1999 approach to c-command, that a downward directionality for Agree follows automatically and necessarily from the bottom-to-top construction of syntactic objects. But if a uF does not find any source of valuation in its c-command domain at first Merge, directionality-free matching and DELAYED VALUATION are possible up to the point of cyclic Transfer. The approach eliminates several stipulations from agreement theory, deducing that the uFs making goals “active” in Agree relations are simply those that find no match in their c-command domains at Merge