Get Advances in Social and Occupational Ergonomics Richard H. M. Goossens Free All Chapters
Get Advances in Social and Occupational Ergonomics Richard H. M. Goossens Free All Chapters
Get Advances in Social and Occupational Ergonomics Richard H. M. Goossens Free All Chapters
com
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-
social-and-occupational-ergonomics-richard-h-
m-goossens/
textbookfull
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
https://textbookfull.com/product/work-design-occupational-
ergonomics-seventh-edition-stephan-konz/
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-ergonomics-in-
design-francisco-rebelo/
https://textbookfull.com/product/virtual-reality-and-virtual-
environments-a-tool-for-improving-occupational-safety-and-health-
occupational-safety-health-and-ergonomics-1st-edition-grabowski/
Advances in Human Factors and Ergonomics in Healthcare
and Medical Devices Nancy J. Lightner
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-human-factors-and-
ergonomics-in-healthcare-and-medical-devices-nancy-j-lightner/
https://textbookfull.com/product/james-m-buchanan-a-theorist-of-
political-economy-and-social-philosophy-richard-e-wagner/
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-experimental-social-
psychology-54-1st-edition-james-m-olson-and-mark-p-zanna-eds/
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-psychology-and-law-
volume-4-brian-h-bornstein/
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing 792
Advances in Social
and Occupational
Ergonomics
Proceedings of the AHFE 2018
International Conference on Social and
Occupational Ergonomics, July 21–25,
2018, Loews Sapphire Falls Resort at
Universal Studios, Orlando, Florida, USA
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing
Volume 792
Series editor
Janusz Kacprzyk, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland
e-mail: kacprzyk@ibspan.waw.pl
The series “Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing” contains publications on theory,
applications, and design methods of Intelligent Systems and Intelligent Computing. Virtually all
disciplines such as engineering, natural sciences, computer and information science, ICT, economics,
business, e-commerce, environment, healthcare, life science are covered. The list of topics spans all the
areas of modern intelligent systems and computing such as: computational intelligence, soft computing
including neural networks, fuzzy systems, evolutionary computing and the fusion of these paradigms,
social intelligence, ambient intelligence, computational neuroscience, artificial life, virtual worlds and
society, cognitive science and systems, Perception and Vision, DNA and immune based systems,
self-organizing and adaptive systems, e-Learning and teaching, human-centered and human-centric
computing, recommender systems, intelligent control, robotics and mechatronics including
human-machine teaming, knowledge-based paradigms, learning paradigms, machine ethics, intelligent
data analysis, knowledge management, intelligent agents, intelligent decision making and support,
intelligent network security, trust management, interactive entertainment, Web intelligence and multimedia.
The publications within “Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing” are primarily proceedings
of important conferences, symposia and congresses. They cover significant recent developments in the
field, both of a foundational and applicable character. An important characteristic feature of the series is
the short publication time and world-wide distribution. This permits a rapid and broad dissemination of
research results.
Advisory Board
Chairman
Nikhil R. Pal, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India
e-mail: nikhil@isical.ac.in
Members
Rafael Bello Perez, Universidad Central “Marta Abreu” de Las Villas, Santa Clara, Cuba
e-mail: rbellop@uclv.edu.cu
Emilio S. Corchado, University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain
e-mail: escorchado@usal.es
Hani Hagras, University of Essex, Colchester, UK
e-mail: hani@essex.ac.uk
László T. Kóczy, Széchenyi István University, Győr, Hungary
e-mail: koczy@sze.hu
Vladik Kreinovich, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, USA
e-mail: vladik@utep.edu
Chin-Teng Lin, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan
e-mail: ctlin@mail.nctu.edu.tw
Jie Lu, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
e-mail: Jie.Lu@uts.edu.au
Patricia Melin, Tijuana Institute of Technology, Tijuana, Mexico
e-mail: epmelin@hafsamx.org
Nadia Nedjah, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
e-mail: nadia@eng.uerj.br
Ngoc Thanh Nguyen, Wroclaw University of Technology, Wroclaw, Poland
e-mail: Ngoc-Thanh.Nguyen@pwr.edu.pl
Jun Wang, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong
e-mail: jwang@mae.cuhk.edu.hk
Advances in Social
and Occupational
Ergonomics
Proceedings of the AHFE 2018 International
Conference on Social and Occupational
Ergonomics, July 21–25, 2018, Loews
Sapphire Falls Resort at Universal Studios,
Orlando, Florida, USA
123
Editor
Richard H. M. Goossens
Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering
Delft University of Technology
Delft, Zuid-Holland
The Netherlands
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer International Publishing AG
part of Springer Nature
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Advances in Human Factors
and Ergonomics 2018
v
vi Advances in Human Factors and Ergonomics 2018
(continued)
Advances in Artificial Intelligence, Software Tareq Z. Ahram
and Systems Engineering
Advances in Human Factors, Sustainable Urban Jerzy Charytonowicz and Christianne
Planning and Infrastructure Falcão
Advances in Physical Ergonomics & Human Ravindra S. Goonetilleke and Waldemar
Factors Karwowski
Advances in Interdisciplinary Practice in WonJoon Chung and Cliff Sungsoo Shin
Industrial Design
Advances in Safety Management and Human Pedro Miguel Ferreira Martins Arezes
Factors
Advances in Social and Occupational Ergonomics Richard H. M. Goossens
Advances in Manufacturing, Production Waldemar Karwowski, Stefan
Management and Process Control Trzcielinski, Beata Mrugalska, Massimo
Di Nicolantonio and Emilio Rossi
Advances in Usability, User Experience Tareq Z. Ahram and Christianne Falcão
and Assistive Technology
Advances in Human Factors in Wearable Tareq Z. Ahram
Technologies and Game Design
Advances in Human Factors in Communication Amic G. Ho
of Design
Preface
vii
viii Preface
ix
x Contents
Abstract. In manual material handling, workers are often at risk for work-
related injuries and musculoskeletal diseases. This study used an ergonomic risk
assessment methodology to motivate development of a worker muscle stretching
program, towards injury rate reduction in gas cylinder handling. We followed a
three-phase approach: (1) an OSHA log analysis of the gas cylinder delivery
company; (2) a tasks analysis including ride-alongs and ERA to gas delivery
operations to identify tasks posing the greatest number of risk factors; and
(3) design of a job-readiness program with a focus on stretching and targeting
muscles of vulnerable body segments. The study yielded a novel and productive
approach to stretching program development for workplace injury risk reduc-
tion. The exercise card will be evaluated in a follow-on field test.
1 Introduction
design handles), many of the delivery tasks maintained inherent risks, such as high
force in pulling dewars. These risks motivated company interest for additional controls,
including developing a “job-readiness” or stretching program as a potential MSD
preventive measure.
A review of literature was conducted on corporate exercise programs revealing
potential benefits of a stretching program. While a stretching program does not elim-
inate job risks, there is some evidence of effectiveness in controlling the rate of injury
in the workforce. Costa and Vieira [1] reported benefits of stretching to include pre-
vention of work-related MSDs, especially in high-intensity work environments. Other
studies have claimed benefits of implementing stretching programs in manufacturing
environments, including lower risk of musculoskeletal injury [2, 3], reduced rate and
length of sick days attributable to back pain [4], and reduced workers perceived pain
due to musculoskeletal injuries and illness [5]. Although the origins of the benefits of
stretching has received limited scientific attention, one line of reasoning is that
increased flexibility due to stretching leads to a reduced risk of work-related MSDs [6].
Considering the company’s internal ergonomics program actions and results of the
prior research on stretching programs, this present work sought to address three
research questions: (1) What are the most common injuries during gas cylinder deliver
operations? (2) What are the risky tasks and most vulnerable body parts during the gas
delivery operation? (3) How can a stretching program be designed as an ergonomic
intervention to potentially control musculoskeletal injury risks in gas cylinder delivery
operations? The subsequent sections describe the methodology and results of three
research phases of this study. This writing also provides inferences on the findings of
this process, identifies study limitations as well as directions of future works.
2 Method
The case study was broken-down into three phases. The first phase focused on
assessing the OSHA logs provided by the company in order to characterize the most
common injuries and body parts sustaining frequent injuries. In the second phase,
researchers conducted “ride-alongs” with delivery drivers and reviewed safety training
videos in order to identify the tasks completed by drivers on a regular basis. For tasks
identified to pose extended periods of risk exposure, an ergonomic risk assessment
(ERA) was applied. The last phase of the study used the results of the previous two
phases in order to develop a stretching intervention program that could be implemented
by drivers with the intent of reducing the frequency and severity of workplace injuries
for the company.
Based on the injury descriptions included in the company’s OSHA logs, each injury
event was coded according to categories used in the Liberty Mutual Index [7]. Two
analyses were conducted with the first looking at the injury type, while the second
analysis focused on the injured body part. The categories of injury type and body parts
were both identified through injury descriptions appearing in the OSHA records. Due to
a lack of information on some types of injuries, similar categories were grouped
together for this analysis. For example, falls at the same level and to a lower level were
combined into one group for the injury type analysis.
Ride-Alongs. In order to identify those gas delivery tasks posing high ergonomic risks
to delivery drivers, ride-alongs were organized for researchers to observe daily driver
task performance. (This research activity was reviewed and approved by the North
Carolina State University Institutional Review Board (IRB). Consent of participants
was obtained prior to the study.) Two company drivers were recruited for ride-alongs
and one additional driver was observed handling gas products at a regional company
delivery and retail facility. In each ride-along, researchers accompanied the drivers as
they made deliveries during 8–12 h. shifts throughout Eastern North Carolina,
including the coastal region. Prior to the ride-alongs and onsite observation, researchers
familiarized themselves with standard operating procedures (SOPs) of the company by
viewing training videos intended for drivers. During the following observation sessions
(i.e., ride-alongs and onsite), the researchers took notes of risky operations and any
deviations from the SOPs.
In total, ten deliveries were observed and videotaped over two separate days. During
ride-alongs and onsite observations, researchers recorded drivers performing the range
of delivery duties. Tasks included moving cylinders with a handcart, rolling a single
cylinder, rolling two cylinders, pushing dewars, loading and unloading propane tanks,
and transporting small cylinders, among other tasks (Fig. 1). Videos and observation
notes were used as basis for the follow-on Ergonomic Risk Analysis (ERA).
Ergonomic Risk Analysis. The ERA methodology applied in this study was devel-
oped by The Ergonomic Center of North Carolina (ECNC). This method is based on
several established physical work analysis tools, including the Borg scale [8–10], the
Rapid Upper-Limb Assessment (RULA) method [11] and the Moore-Garg Strain Index
[12]. The method involves qualitative evaluation of force, motion and posture in target
tasks. The assessment covers a range of body segments, including: (1) neck,
6 O. Morejon et al.
Fig. 1. Left - pulling a dewar; Middle - rolling two cylinders; Right - lifting small cylinders.
(2) shoulders, (3) arms/elbows, (4) hands/wrists, (5) torso/back, and (6) legs/knees/feet.
Risk factors ratings are made for each body segment within each task. A 10-point rating
scale is used with higher ratings corresponding to riskier motions, forces, and postures.
The force factor refers to the force required by a worker to perform an identified task.
The low-risk level for force is identified as requiring no (or minimal) force representing
<30% of maximum voluntary muscle contractions (MVC), while the moderate-risk
level falls in the 30% to 60% range of MVC and the high-risk level requires >60% of
MVC. The posture factor refers to the posture required of workers in performing
delivery operations. Ratings are selected based on the postures held for the longest
period during a task or in which the highest load exposure occurs. The motion risk
factor takes into account the number of repetitions of movements of each body part as
well as the duration for which a posture is held. A low-risk level indicates that the
identified movement is repeated less than one time per minute and the posture is held
for under 6 s at a time. A medium-risk level indicates that the identified movement is
repeated between one and five times per minute and the posture is held between 6–20 s
in each iteration; whereas, high-risk level motions are performed 6 or more times per
minute and held for longer than 20 s at a time. The sensitivity of the ECNC ERA has
been demonstrated in application to veterinary clinic operations and rice plowing
activities [13, 14].
In this study, direct observations of delivery task performance, video recordings
taken during the ride-alongs, company safety training videos, and information gathered
from unstructured interviews with delivery drivers provided the basis for application of
the ERA. Three researchers independently assigned risk ratings for each of the critical
MMH tasks identified through the ride-alongs. The analysis was also broken-down by
body segment and risk factor exposure during task performance. All analyst ratings
were compiled and average scores were determined for each risk factor for each body
segment in each task.
The ERA method also involves determining “body segment priority levels” as a
basis for recommending ergonomic risk controls. The sum of all three average risk
factor scores (force, motion and posture) for each body segment was calculated to yield
the body segment priority. A body segment priority matrix was also developed to
determine an overall risk priority level for each task. A total body risk score, or “Job
Screening Score”, was also calculated by determining the number of body segments
Ergonomic Risk Assessment 7
deemed to be of low, moderate or high-risk priority for each task. The number of body
segments for each priority was summed up and a multiplier was applied depending on
the risk priority. Multipliers included 1x for low risk priority segments, 2x for moderate
risk priority segments, and 4x for high priority segments. For example, there were 3
low priority body segments for rolling cylinders, 1 moderate, and 6 high leading to a
job screening score of 29. This process was completed for all tasks. The results were
used to identify those high-risk body segments and muscles for task performance. This
information was use for design of the muscle stretching program.
3 Results
3.1 Phase 1: OSHA Analysis
Results from the OSHA log analysis are summarized in Fig. 2. Overexertion and other
exertions included 50+ cases, accounting for 34% of the total injury cases, more than
any other category. It is important to note that in this analysis, 14 injury cases were
classified as, “not enough information,” due to a lack of sufficient incident descriptions
in the logs. The body part analysis (Fig. 2b) revealed the hands/fingers/wrist to be the
most injured body parts. Most of these injuries (43 of 48) were due to being struck
against an object, or compressed by or caught in equipment.
Fig. 2. Number of occurrences within reporting period by injury type (a) and body part (b)
The next two most commonly injured body parts, the arm/shoulder and the back,
were primarily impacted by overexertion incidents. It is important to note that in this
analysis, 13 injury cases were also classified as, “Not enough information,” due to
limited descriptions in the OSHA 300 logs. Consequently, additional hands/fingers/
wrist might have occurred.
Ergonomic Risk Assessment 9
Fig. 3. Graph of overall job screening score by task (Orange line indicates upper threshold for
moderate risk (score of 17–25) and red line indicates threshold for high risk (score >25)).
Figure 4 shows the sums of the mean ratings for each ergonomic risk (posture,
force, motion) to create a risk score specific to each body segment and task. The risk
scores provided verification of the most risky body segments during task performance,
which were also identified through video analysis and direct observation.
Based on this assessment, the most at-risk segments in pulling a dewar included the
shoulders, arms/elbows, back, wrists, and legs. Due to the weight of the dewar and the
act of pulling the cylinder, the upper extremities and the back were identified as
primary areas of concern. For dewar pulling, walking backwards also posed potential
risk for both legs. For rolling two cylinders, the most at-risk body segments included
the wrists, arms/elbows, shoulders, and back. Again, the upper extremities and the back
were identified as areas of concern due to the weight of the cylinders. In addition, the
10 O. Morejon et al.
repetition of the rolling motion for the upper extremities led to the wrists being
identified as areas of risk exposure. The most at-risk body segments in lifting small
cylinders included the wrists, arms/elbows, shoulders, and the back. The wrists and
arms/elbows shared the most extreme risk levels due to the awkward lifting posture of
the arms/elbows, ulnar deviation at the wrists, and the compounding factor of cylinder
weight.
Table 2. Task identification and stretch selection. Note: Each stretch last 20 s and is to be
performed 3 times for each side of the body.
Task Body segment Eccentric movement muscles Stretches that yield
eccentric contractions
Moving Back Trapezius, latimus dorsi, 1. Parallel Arm Shoulder
dewars rhomboids Stretch
2. Hamstring and Low
Back Stretch
Shoulder Posterior deltoid, biceps 1. Upper Arm Shoulder
Upper Arm brachii, triceps brachii, Stretch
rhomboids, trapezius 2. Chest and Bicep Stretch
Lower Flexor carpi ulnarus 1. Finger Flexor Stretch
arm/Elbow
Rolling Hand/wrist Opponens pollicis, flexor 1. Finger Flexor Stretch
two digiti minimi, flexor pollicis 2. Finger Extensor Stretch
cylinders brevis, abductor pollicis
brevis, oppenens digiti
minimi
Lower Brachio radialis, flexor carpi 1. Finger Flexor Stretch
arm/Elbow radialis, flexor digitorum
superficialis, palmaris longus
Shoulder/Upper Brachio radialis, trapezius, 1. Upper Arm Shoulder
Arm posterior deltoid, biceps Stretch
brachii 2. Chest and Bicep Stretch
3. Parallel Arm Shoulder
Stretch
Back Trapezius 1. Chest and Bicep
Stretch
Lifting Hand/wrist N/A 1. Finger Flexor Stretch
small 2. Finger Extensor Stretch
cylinders Lower Brachio radialis 1. Finger Flexor Stretch
arm/Elbow
Shoulder/Upper Reach: Biceps brachii, 1. Upper Arm Shoulder
Arm posterior deltoid, trapezius, Stretch
rhomboids, brachialis 2. Parallel Arm Shoulder
Lift: Triceps brachii, anterior Stretch
deltoid 3. Chest and Bicep Stretch
Back Reach: Latimus dorsi, teres 1. Parallel Arm Shoulder
major, rhomboids, trapezius Stretch
Lift: n/a 2. Chest and Bicep Stretch
3. Upper Arm Shoulder
Stretch
12 O. Morejon et al.
Fig. 5. The final version of the reminder card designed for the stretching regimen.
4 Discussion
The purpose of this study was to use ERA, along with injury log analysis, as basis for
design of a worker muscle stretching program towards reduction of potential risk of
workplace injuries. It was expected that the injury log for the delivery drivers would
reveal the back to be one of the most injured areas for drivers. Bovenzi et al. [17] said
awkward seated posture in truck driving and secondary MMH activities, are critical
components in a multifactorial origin of back pain for drivers. The gas delivery
company injury dataset for the 2-year period was partly in-line with this prior inves-
tigation. Arm and shoulder injuries were also expected to be frequent as it has been
shown that frequent, heavy lifting in truck drivers is positively correlated with neck and
shoulder pain [18]. The data on actual worker injuries revealed arm and shoulder
impacts to be only second to hand and wrist injuries. Overexertion injuries, as recorded
by the company supervisors, implied damage to muscles responsible for generating
force during physical activities. Furthermore, due to the associations between driver
work task activities and shoulder and back injuries, as identified in the literature, it was
Ergonomic Risk Assessment 13
inferred that any stretching program should target those muscles involved in movement
of the specific segments. In addition, the literature also provided a basis for the
expectation that an exercise or stretching program, in advance of strenuous MMH task
performance, could be an appropriate tool for further reducing the potential for
overexertion injuries in the gas cylinder delivery operations.
With respect to the stretching program design, certain exercises were not included
due to work environment restrictions. The stretching protocol was designed to be
performed by drivers at client sites in advance of delivery operations. For this reason,
stretches involving sitting or lying on the ground (a paved surface, in most cases) were
excluded from the protocol, including some stretches for the low back. Given the
autonomous nature of delivery driver activity, there was a need to provide written and
visual instructions on a reminder card to ensure proper stretch performance. Pilot study
confirmed exercise instructions were clear and would lead to drivers performing the
proper stretch when working alone on deliveries.
5 Conclusion
References
1. da Costa, B.R., Vieira, E.R.: Stretching to reduce work-related musculoskeletal disorders: a
systematic review. J. Rehabil. Med. 40(5), 321–328 (2008)
2. Gartley, R.M., Prosser, J.L.: Stretching to prevent musculoskeletal injuries: an approach to
workplace wellness. AAOHN J. 59(6) (2011)
3. Smith, K.: Evaluation of a stretching program to increase worker flexibility. AAOHN J. 61
(8) (2013). https://doi.org/10.3928/21650799-20130726-30
4. Kellett, K.M., Kellett, D.A., Nordholm, L.A.: Effects of an exercise program on sick leave
due to back pain. Phys. Ther. 71(4), 283–291 (1991)
5. Zebis, M.K., Andersen, L.L., Pedersen, M.T., Mortensen, P., Andersen, C.H., Pedersen, M.
M., Sjøgaard, G.: Implementation of neck/shoulder exercises for pain relief among industrial
workers: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 12(1), 205 (2011)
6. Muyor, J.M., López-Miñarro, P.A., Casimiro, A.J.: Effect of stretching program in an
industrial workplace on hamstring flexibility and sagittal spinal posture of adult women
workers: a randomized controlled trial. J. Back Musculoskelet. Rehabil. 25(3), 161–169
(2012)
7. Liberty Mutual: Workplace safety index. From Research to Reality (2008). www.mhi.org/
downloads/industrygroups/ease/technicalpapers/Liberty-Mutual-2008-Safety-index-most-
disabling-injuries.pdf
8. Borg, G., Ottoson, D.: The perception of exertion in physical work. In: Wennergren Center
International Symposium Series (1986)
9. Borg, G.: Psychophysical scaling with applications in physical work and the perception of
exertion. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health 16, 55–58 (1990)
10. Borg, G.: Borg’s Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales. Human Kinetics, Champaign (1998)
11. McAtamney, L., Corlett, E.N.: RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related
upper limb disorders. Appl. Ergon. 24(2), 91–99 (1993)
12. Steven Moore, J., Garg, A.: The strain index: a proposed method to analyze jobs for risk of
distal upper extremity disorders. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. 56(5), 443–458 (1995)
13. Rogers, M., Kaber, D.B., Taylor, K.: Identifying and evaluating risk factors for
musculoskeletal disorders in equine veterinary work. In: Proceedings of the 2012 Applied
Human Factors and Ergonomics Conference. Taylor & Francis CRC Press, Boca Raton
(2012)
14. Swangnetr, M., Namkorn, P., Phimphasak, C., Saenlee, K., Kaber, D., Buranruk, O., et al.:
Ergonomic analysis of rice field plowing. In: 4th International Conference on Applied
Human Factors and Ergonomics, San Francisco, CA (2012)
15. Kisner, C., Colby, L.A.: Therapeutic Exercise: Foundations and Techniques. F.A. Davis,
Philadelphia (2007)
16. Schneiders, A.G., Zusman, M., Singer, K.P.: Exercise therapy compliance in acute low back
pain patients. Man. Ther. 3(3), 147–152 (1998)
17. Bovenzi, M., Rui, F., Negro, C., D’Agostin, F., Angotzi, G., Bianchi, S., Rondina, L.: An
epidemiological study of low back pain in professional drivers. J. Sound Vib. 298(3), 514–
539 (2006)
18. Magnusson, M.L., Pope, M.H., Wilder, D.G., Areskoug, B.: Are occupational drivers at an
increased risk for developing musculoskeletal disorders. Spine J. 21(6), 710–717 (1996)
19. Goldenhar, L.M., Stafford, P.: If you’ve seen one construction worksite stretch and flex
program… you’ve seen one construction worksite stretch and flex program. J. Saf. Res. 55,
73–79 (2015)
Ergonomic Risk Assessment 15
20. Elberson, K.L., Daniels, K.K., Miller, P.M.: Structured and nonstructured exercise in a
corporate wellness program. A comparison of physiological outcomes. Outcomes Manag.
Nurs. Pract. 5(2), 82–86 (2000)
21. Bernacki, E.J., Baun, W.B.: The relationship of job performance to exercise adherence in a
corporate fitness program. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 26(7), 529–531 (1984)
Evaluating Training for Manual Handling
in the Workplace
1 Introduction
e poco dopo:
Ed il secondo:
E altrove
Immolet æquis
Hic Porca Laribus.
Così nelle Feste Compitali, che ai Lari erano sacre gli antichissimi
Romani descritti da Properzio (lib. 4. eleg. 1) sagrificavano il porco
FINE.
INDICE
CAPITOLO I.
CAPITOLO II.
CAPITOLO III.
CAPITOLO IV.
CAPITOLO V.
8. Il culto dei Sardi per la barba è espresso nel proverbio: homine de paga
barba, homine de paga proe; uomo di poca barba uomo di poco valore.
11. Avere il panno vale avere il premio, vincere; ed è preso dai Berberi che
danno ai cavalli vincitori nella corsa un pezzo di broccato o di panno.
13. Tommaso Pischedda. Canti popolari dei classici poeti sardi tradotti ed
illustrati. Sassari, 1854, pag. 183.