@article{FyndanisLindVarlokostaetal.2017,
  author    = {Fyndanis, Valantis and Lind, Marianne and Varlokosta, Spyridoula and Kambanaros, Maria and Soroli, Efstathia and Ceder, Klaudia and Grohmann, Kleanthes K. and Rofes, Adri{\`a} and Simonsen, Hanne Gram and Bjekić, Jovana and Gavarr{\´o}, Anna and Kraljević, Jelena Kuvač and Mart{\´i}nez-Ferreiro, Silvia and Munarriz, Amaia and Pourquie, Marie and Vuksanović, Jasmina and Zakari{\´a}s, Lilla and Howard, David},
  title     = {Cross-linguistic adaptations of The Comprehensive Aphasia Test},
  series = {Clinical linguistics \& phonetics},
  volume    = {31},
  journal   = {Clinical linguistics \& phonetics},
  number    = {7-9},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Philadelphia},
  issn      = {0269-9206},
  doi       = {10.1080/02699206.2017.1310299},
  pages     = {697 -- 710},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Comparative research on aphasia and aphasia rehabilitation is challenged by the lack of comparable assessment tools across different languages. In English, a large array of tools is available, while in most other languages, the selection is more limited. Importantly, assessment tools are often simple translations and do not take into consideration specific linguistic and psycholinguistic parameters of the target languages. As a first step in meeting the needs for comparable assessment tools, the Comprehensive Aphasia Test is currently being adapted into a number of languages spoken in Europe. In this article, some key challenges encountered in the adaptation process and the solutions to ensure that the resulting assessment tools are linguistically and culturally equivalent, are proposed. Specifically, we focus on challenges and solutions related to the use of imageability, frequency, word length, spelling-to-sound regularity and sentence length and complexity as underlying properties in the selection of the testing material.},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{Grohmann2011,
  author    = {Grohmann, Marie},
  title     = {Zur Vereinbarkeit von flexiblen Arbeitsm{\"a}rkten und sozialer Sicherheit am Beispiel der Bundesrepublik Deutschland},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-60108},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Aus dem Inhalt: 1 Einleitung 2 Entwicklungen auf dem deutschen Arbeitsmarkt 2.1 Das Normalarbeitsverh{\"a}ltnis und seine Bedeutung f{\"u}r den deutschen Arbeitsmarkt 2.2 Flexibilit{\"a}t von Besch{\"a}ftigungsverh{\"a}ltnissen 2.3 Die Entwicklung der Besch{\"a}ftigungsverh{\"a}ltnisse in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 3 Das deutsche System sozialer Sicherung 3.1 Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland als konservativer Wohlfahrtsstaat 3.2 Zur Prekarit{\"a}t atypischer Besch{\"a}ftigung im deutschen System sozialer Sicherung 4 Die Flexicurity-Strategie anderer L{\"a}nder 4.1 D{\"a}nemark 4.2 Niederlande 5 Die Bew{\"a}hrung der dargestellten arbeitsmarkt- und sozialpolitischen Modelle und Schlussfolgerungen f{\"u}r die Bundesrepublik 5.1 Zur Performanz der Modelle in D{\"a}nemark, Deutschland und den Niederlanden 5.2 Ansatzpunkte f{\"u}r die Bundesrepublik Deutschland 6 Fazit und Ausblick},
  language  = {de}
}