BackgroundThe fetal and infant life are periods of rapid development, characterized by high susceptibility to exposures. Birth cohorts provide unique opportunities to study early-life exposures in association with child development and health, as well as, with longer follow-up, the early life origin of adult diseases. Piccolipiù is an Italian birth cohort recently set up to investigate the effects of environmental exposures, parental conditions and social factors acting during pre-natal and early post-natal life on infant and child health and development. We describe here its main characteristics.Methods/designPiccolipiù is a prospective cohort of expected 3000 newborns, who will be recruiting in six maternity units of five Italian cities (Florence, Rome, Trieste, Turin and Viareggio) since October 2011. Mothers are contacted during pregnancy or at delivery and are offered to participate in the study. Upon acceptance, their newborns are recruited at birth and followed up until at least 18 years of age. At recruitment, the mothers donate a blood sample and complete a baseline questionnaire. Umbilical cord blood, pieces of umbilical cord and heel blood spots are also collected. Postnatal follow-up currently occurs at 6, 12, and 24 months of age using on-line or postal self administered questionnaire; further questionnaires and medical examinations are envisaged. Questionnaires collect information on several factors, including mother’s and/or child’s environmental exposures, anthropometric measures, reproductive factors, diet, supplements, medical history, cognitive development, mental health and socioeconomic factors. Health promotion materials are also offered to parents.DiscussionPiccolipiù will broaden our understanding of the contribution of early-life factors to infant and child health and development. Several hypotheses on the developmental origins of health can be tested or piloted using the data collected from the Piccolipiù cohort. By pooling these data with those collected by other existing birth cohorts it will be possible to validate previous findings and to study rare exposures and outcomes.

Welcome to EVALITA 2020! EVALITA is the evaluation campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian. EVALITA is an initiative of the Italian Association for Computational Linguistics (AILC, http://www.ai-lc.it) and it is endorsed by the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence (AIxIA, http://www.aixia.it) and the Italian Association for Speech Sciences (AISV, http://www.aisv.it).This volume includes the reports of both task organisers and participants to all of the EVALITA 2020 challenges. In the 2020 edition, we coordinated the organization of 14 different tasks belonging to five research areas, being: (i) Affect, Hate, and Stance, (ii) Creativity and Style, (iii) New Challenges in Long-standing Tasks, (iv) Semantics and Multimodality, Time and Diachrony.The volume is opened by an overview to the EVALITA 2020 campaign, in which we describe the tasks, provide statistics on the participants and task organizers as well as our supporting sponsors. The abstract of the keynote speech made by Preslav Nakov titled "Flattening the Curve of the COVID-19 Infodemic: These Evaluation Campaigns Can Help!" is also included in this collection.Due to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, the traditional workshop was held online, where several members of the Italian NLP Community presented the results of their research. Despite the circumstances, the workshop represented an occasion for all participants from both academic institutions and private companies to disseminate their work and results and to share ideas through online sessions dedicated to each task and a general discussion during the plenary event.We carried on with the tradition of the "Best system across tasks" award. As in 2018, it represented an incentive for students, IT developers and researchers to push the boundaries of the state of the art by facing tasks in new ways, even if not winning.

l a producción literaria de Alonso de Castillo solórzano-y sobre todo su narrativa-ha sido objeto de muchas críticas por sus límites estilísticos, la falta de originalidad y el escaso interés de las vicisitudes narradas 2. se le ha considerado-y no sin razón-un simple profesional de la escritura al servicio de un público cortesano hambriento de historias amorosas, casos curiosos y aventuras; un autor, pues, que se muestra como perfectamente alineado con el género de literatura-por así decir "comercial"-que se leía en aquella época 3. otro defecto que se le imputa a menudo es la pasiva imitación-pese a la incesante defensa de la originalidad de su obra-de los novellieri y de la tradición novelística italiana, no solo por lo que atañe a elementos estructurales (como el marco que incluye sus narraciones breves), sino también a estilemas, topoi e incluso historias 1 este trabajo se inscribe en el marco del Proyecto i+d+i del mineCo la novela corta del siglo xvii (y ii) (FFi2013-41264-P). 2 la crítica moderna ha reevaluado el juicio sobre el autor vallisoletano-alabado por sus contemporáneos y muy exitoso en su época-, y sobre todo a partir de los años 50 del siglo pasado, se ha vuelto particularmente severa. más que dura resulta la opinión de dunn (1952), autor de la primera monografía sobre el vallisoletano, quien describe a Castillo como un claro ejemplo de la decadencia de la narrativa barroca; por su parte, Velasco Kindelán (1983) lo define como un escritor poco original; en particular: «Castillo es un hábil componedor de historias de "honesto entretenimiento", a base de unos materiales que no son otros que los que le vienen dados por la tradición literaria y algunos escritores contemporáneos suyos […]. Pero sobre todo por los consensos comunes, las ideologías vigentes, los criterios aceptados, aquello en lo que "todos" están de acuerdo. Castillo es un espíritu conservador, transmisor de un consenso común» (1983: 17). 3 sobre la fortuna editorial de la narrativa española del siglo de oro se remite a Whinnom (1980), Pacheco-ransanz (1986) y Fernández insuela (1993).

No abstract

El presente trabajo se propone estudiar las vicisitudes editoriales del Lisardo enamorado de Alonso de Castillo Solórzano (Valencia, 1629) y de su primera versión, los Escarmientos de amor moralizados (Sevilla, 1628), pasando revista a los elementos lingüísticos e ideológicos que los distinguen e identificando las modalidades de reelaboración empleadas por su autor.