Suchergebnisse

Project "Culture Index" is a reflection of two different countries cultures. This project aims to combine three cultural dimensions - history, politics and art, in order to show their importance in overall portrait of the country.

The French Minister of Culture suggested extending to a European level the "Monuments' Open Doors" initiative launched in France in 1984. Several European countries, such as The Netherlands, Luxemburg, Malta, Belgium, the United Kingdom (Scotland) and Sweden soon set up similar events. In 1991, the Council of Europe officially launched the European Heritage Days (EHDs) with the support of the European Commission. In 1999, this initiative became a joint action of the Council of Europe and the European Commission. Throughout Europe, during the weekends of September, the European Heritage Days open the doors of numerous monuments and sites, many of them usually closed to the public, allowing Europe's citizens to enjoy and learn about their shared cultural heritage and encouraging them to become actively involved in the safeguard and enhancement of this heritage for present and future generations. Today, the European Heritage Days can be considered an essential instrument for fostering a tangible experience of European culture and history in addition to raising the awareness of the public about the multiple values of our common heritage and the continuous need for its protection. All 49 States parties to the European Cultural Convention actively take part in the initiative and the number of annual visitors is now estimated to be around 20 million at more than 30,000 participating monuments and sites. The EHDs have succeeded in stimulating civil society's participation, the specific involvement of youth, voluntary work and cross-border cooperation, thereby promoting the core principles of intercultural dialogue, partnership and civic responsibility. Like in the rest of Europe, in its European Heritage Days Lithuania is trying to draw attention to a certain area of our national heritage, to make us able to gain a deeper recognition of the long-term role and potential of heritage in the context of modern civilisation and culture. In particular, Heritage Days focus on youth thus hoping to inspire in them more aspirations and interest in the cultural history of their own and neighbouring European countries which have become as close as never before. As regards municipalities and other responsible or involved organisations, these events should become a stimulus to preserve and nurture cultural heritage of Lithuania more carefully and take a more innovative approach as regards its integration into information flows of European cultural heritage, as well as promote cultural tourism. In Lithuania European heritage days began only at 1995 and lasts till now already for 12 years. The themes were: jewish heritage in Lithuania, wooden, technical heritage, parks and gardens, cultural tourism and others. This year European heritage days will be – "Europe: common heritage. Cultural routes". With the support of the Council of Europe, the Photo experience from 1995 allows young people, in the framework of the European Heritage Days, to become familiar with the richness of their heritage, their history and their environment, from the past and from today. The international photo contest is a very good experience for young people. In Lithuania the campaign started at 1999.

The French Minister of Culture suggested extending to a European level the "Monuments' Open Doors" initiative launched in France in 1984. Several European countries, such as The Netherlands, Luxemburg, Malta, Belgium, the United Kingdom (Scotland) and Sweden soon set up similar events. In 1991, the Council of Europe officially launched the European Heritage Days (EHDs) with the support of the European Commission. In 1999, this initiative became a joint action of the Council of Europe and the European Commission. Throughout Europe, during the weekends of September, the European Heritage Days open the doors of numerous monuments and sites, many of them usually closed to the public, allowing Europe's citizens to enjoy and learn about their shared cultural heritage and encouraging them to become actively involved in the safeguard and enhancement of this heritage for present and future generations. Today, the European Heritage Days can be considered an essential instrument for fostering a tangible experience of European culture and history in addition to raising the awareness of the public about the multiple values of our common heritage and the continuous need for its protection. All 49 States parties to the European Cultural Convention actively take part in the initiative and the number of annual visitors is now estimated to be around 20 million at more than 30,000 participating monuments and sites. The EHDs have succeeded in stimulating civil society's participation, the specific involvement of youth, voluntary work and cross-border cooperation, thereby promoting the core principles of intercultural dialogue, partnership and civic responsibility. Like in the rest of Europe, in its European Heritage Days Lithuania is trying to draw attention to a certain area of our national heritage, to make us able to gain a deeper recognition of the long-term role and potential of heritage in the context of modern civilisation and culture. In particular, Heritage Days focus on youth thus hoping to inspire in them more aspirations and interest in the cultural history of their own and neighbouring European countries which have become as close as never before. As regards municipalities and other responsible or involved organisations, these events should become a stimulus to preserve and nurture cultural heritage of Lithuania more carefully and take a more innovative approach as regards its integration into information flows of European cultural heritage, as well as promote cultural tourism. In Lithuania European heritage days began only at 1995 and lasts till now already for 12 years. The themes were: jewish heritage in Lithuania, wooden, technical heritage, parks and gardens, cultural tourism and others. This year European heritage days will be – "Europe: common heritage. Cultural routes". With the support of the Council of Europe, the Photo experience from 1995 allows young people, in the framework of the European Heritage Days, to become familiar with the richness of their heritage, their history and their environment, from the past and from today. The international photo contest is a very good experience for young people. In Lithuania the campaign started at 1999.

This article analyzes Lithuanian cultural policy, particularly the implementation of the "arm's length" principle. The first part of the article describes the concept of the principle, gives an overview of its history, and examines its main instrument of implementation—the council for culture. The article compares the activity of similar councils in various countries and describes their most important functions and features. The second part of the article deals with the formation of the "arm's length" cultural policy model in Lithuania. This model was chosen as the direction for cultural policy reform in the Lithuanian Government's 1991 program, and was also recommended by the experts during Lithuania's participation in the Council of Europe program National Cultural Policy Reviews 1996–1998. The process of forming the model lasted until 2013. The article analyzes public discussions about Lithuanian cultural policy, Lithu

This article analyzes Lithuanian cultural policy, particularly the implementation of the "arm's length" principle. The first part of the article describes the concept of the principle, gives an overview of its history, and examines its main instrument of implementation—the council for culture. The article compares the activity of similar councils in various countries and describes their most important functions and features. The second part of the article deals with the formation of the "arm's length" cultural policy model in Lithuania. This model was chosen as the direction for cultural policy reform in the Lithuanian Government's 1991 program, and was also recommended by the experts during Lithuania's participation in the Council of Europe program National Cultural Policy Reviews 1996–1998. The process of forming the model lasted until 2013. The article analyzes public discussions about Lithuanian cultural policy, Lithu

This article analyzes Lithuanian cultural policy, particularly the implementation of the "arm's length" principle. The first part of the article describes the concept of the principle, gives an overview of its history, and examines its main instrument of implementation—the council for culture. The article compares the activity of similar councils in various countries and describes their most important functions and features. The second part of the article deals with the formation of the "arm's length" cultural policy model in Lithuania. This model was chosen as the direction for cultural policy reform in the Lithuanian Government's 1991 program, and was also recommended by the experts during Lithuania's participation in the Council of Europe program National Cultural Policy Reviews 1996–1998. The process of forming the model lasted until 2013. The article analyzes public discussions about Lithuanian cultural policy, Lithu

This article analyzes Lithuanian cultural policy, particularly the implementation of the "arm's length" principle. The first part of the article describes the concept of the principle, gives an overview of its history, and examines its main instrument of implementation—the council for culture. The article compares the activity of similar councils in various countries and describes their most important functions and features. The second part of the article deals with the formation of the "arm's length" cultural policy model in Lithuania. This model was chosen as the direction for cultural policy reform in the Lithuanian Government's 1991 program, and was also recommended by the experts during Lithuania's participation in the Council of Europe program National Cultural Policy Reviews 1996–1998. The process of forming the model lasted until 2013. The article analyzes public discussions about Lithuanian cultural policy, Lithu

During World War II Lithuania was ruled by three completely different political regimes. In the first year Lithuania was authoritarian state ruled by group of nationalists, in 1940 Lithuania was occupied by Soviet Union and in 1941 State was occupied by Nazi Germany. All these political powers was undemocratic and propagated their ideologies. One of the most important aspect of every ideology is to suggest new concept of time. This change of perception of time could be seen in the change of cultural memory. Article try to analyze this change using the most popular Lithuanian periodical press of the period. This research analyzed main historical periods and the most popular themes represented in the main newspapers. Using theories of Anthony D. Smith and Raoul Girardet research showed what historical periods was seen positively and what negatively, what was main historical heroes and enemies; also how foreign history was represented in the periodical press. The quantitative content analysis showed that while representations of history in the so called independent Lithuania and in Lithuania occupied by Nazis was quite similar, historical representations during first Soviet occupation was unique. Qualitative content analysis showed that there was three very different paradigms of cultural memories, represented in periodical press. Lithuanian nationalist mostly tried to promote Lithuanian medieval times and especially Lithuanian dukes and historical capital Vilnius, also they tried to justify their politics creating myth of great welfare during their rule. They praised Soviet history, criticized Poland and poles, but wrote about most of the countries quite neutral. During Soviet occupation all Lithuanian history was harshly criticized and showed as negative times, this regime promoted only few Lithuanian heroes who died young or was known for their left wing politics. Main historical past represented in the newspapers was history of Soviet Union, other countries was ignored. Main enemies of Soviets was Lithuanian gentry, and Lithuanian rulers of the past. During Nazi occupation there was more Lithuanian national history than German history, but the main appreciable historical periods was Lithuanian prehistory and the 19th Century. Regime promoted history of Lithuanian culture and language, but tried to ignore Lithuanian state. Foreign history was mostly binary – propaganda criticized Soviet Union as well as Tsarist Russia, USA and United Kingdom, but appreciated history of Italy, Japan, Finland, Turkey, Spain etc. Main historical enemies were of course Bolsheviks and Jews.

During World War II Lithuania was ruled by three completely different political regimes. In the first year Lithuania was authoritarian state ruled by group of nationalists, in 1940 Lithuania was occupied by Soviet Union and in 1941 State was occupied by Nazi Germany. All these political powers was undemocratic and propagated their ideologies. One of the most important aspect of every ideology is to suggest new concept of time. This change of perception of time could be seen in the change of cultural memory. Article try to analyze this change using the most popular Lithuanian periodical press of the period. This research analyzed main historical periods and the most popular themes represented in the main newspapers. Using theories of Anthony D. Smith and Raoul Girardet research showed what historical periods was seen positively and what negatively, what was main historical heroes and enemies; also how foreign history was represented in the periodical press. The quantitative content analysis showed that while representations of history in the so called independent Lithuania and in Lithuania occupied by Nazis was quite similar, historical representations during first Soviet occupation was unique. Qualitative content analysis showed that there was three very different paradigms of cultural memories, represented in periodical press. Lithuanian nationalist mostly tried to promote Lithuanian medieval times and especially Lithuanian dukes and historical capital Vilnius, also they tried to justify their politics creating myth of great welfare during their rule. They praised Soviet history, criticized Poland and poles, but wrote about most of the countries quite neutral. During Soviet occupation all Lithuanian history was harshly criticized and showed as negative times, this regime promoted only few Lithuanian heroes who died young or was known for their left wing politics. Main historical past represented in the newspapers was history of Soviet Union, other countries was ignored. Main enemies of Soviets was Lithuanian gentry, and Lithuanian rulers of the past. During Nazi occupation there was more Lithuanian national history than German history, but the main appreciable historical periods was Lithuanian prehistory and the 19th Century. Regime promoted history of Lithuanian culture and language, but tried to ignore Lithuanian state. Foreign history was mostly binary – propaganda criticized Soviet Union as well as Tsarist Russia, USA and United Kingdom, but appreciated history of Italy, Japan, Finland, Turkey, Spain etc. Main historical enemies were of course Bolsheviks and Jews.

During World War II Lithuania was ruled by three completely different political regimes. In the first year Lithuania was authoritarian state ruled by group of nationalists, in 1940 Lithuania was occupied by Soviet Union and in 1941 State was occupied by Nazi Germany. All these political powers was undemocratic and propagated their ideologies. One of the most important aspect of every ideology is to suggest new concept of time. This change of perception of time could be seen in the change of cultural memory. Article try to analyze this change using the most popular Lithuanian periodical press of the period. This research analyzed main historical periods and the most popular themes represented in the main newspapers. Using theories of Anthony D. Smith and Raoul Girardet research showed what historical periods was seen positively and what negatively, what was main historical heroes and enemies; also how foreign history was represented in the periodical press. The quantitative content analysis showed that while representations of history in the so called independent Lithuania and in Lithuania occupied by Nazis was quite similar, historical representations during first Soviet occupation was unique. Qualitative content analysis showed that there was three very different paradigms of cultural memories, represented in periodical press. Lithuanian nationalist mostly tried to promote Lithuanian medieval times and especially Lithuanian dukes and historical capital Vilnius, also they tried to justify their politics creating myth of great welfare during their rule. They praised Soviet history, criticized Poland and poles, but wrote about most of the countries quite neutral. During Soviet occupation all Lithuanian history was harshly criticized and showed as negative times, this regime promoted only few Lithuanian heroes who died young or was known for their left wing politics. Main historical past represented in the newspapers was history of Soviet Union, other countries was ignored. Main enemies of Soviets was Lithuanian gentry, and Lithuanian rulers of the past. During Nazi occupation there was more Lithuanian national history than German history, but the main appreciable historical periods was Lithuanian prehistory and the 19th Century. Regime promoted history of Lithuanian culture and language, but tried to ignore Lithuanian state. Foreign history was mostly binary – propaganda criticized Soviet Union as well as Tsarist Russia, USA and United Kingdom, but appreciated history of Italy, Japan, Finland, Turkey, Spain etc. Main historical enemies were of course Bolsheviks and Jews.

During World War II Lithuania was ruled by three completely different political regimes. In the first year Lithuania was authoritarian state ruled by group of nationalists, in 1940 Lithuania was occupied by Soviet Union and in 1941 State was occupied by Nazi Germany. All these political powers was undemocratic and propagated their ideologies. One of the most important aspect of every ideology is to suggest new concept of time. This change of perception of time could be seen in the change of cultural memory. Article try to analyze this change using the most popular Lithuanian periodical press of the period. This research analyzed main historical periods and the most popular themes represented in the main newspapers. Using theories of Anthony D. Smith and Raoul Girardet research showed what historical periods was seen positively and what negatively, what was main historical heroes and enemies; also how foreign history was represented in the periodical press. The quantitative content analysis showed that while representations of history in the so called independent Lithuania and in Lithuania occupied by Nazis was quite similar, historical representations during first Soviet occupation was unique. Qualitative content analysis showed that there was three very different paradigms of cultural memories, represented in periodical press. Lithuanian nationalist mostly tried to promote Lithuanian medieval times and especially Lithuanian dukes and historical capital Vilnius, also they tried to justify their politics creating myth of great welfare during their rule. They praised Soviet history, criticized Poland and poles, but wrote about most of the countries quite neutral. During Soviet occupation all Lithuanian history was harshly criticized and showed as negative times, this regime promoted only few Lithuanian heroes who died young or was known for their left wing politics. Main historical past represented in the newspapers was history of Soviet Union, other countries was ignored. Main enemies of Soviets was Lithuanian gentry, and Lithuanian rulers of the past. During Nazi occupation there was more Lithuanian national history than German history, but the main appreciable historical periods was Lithuanian prehistory and the 19th Century. Regime promoted history of Lithuanian culture and language, but tried to ignore Lithuanian state. Foreign history was mostly binary – propaganda criticized Soviet Union as well as Tsarist Russia, USA and United Kingdom, but appreciated history of Italy, Japan, Finland, Turkey, Spain etc. Main historical enemies were of course Bolsheviks and Jews.

The purpose of this masters' thesis is to analyze the possible issues who appears when translating literature. The goals of this masters' thesis is to clear out if foreigner readers adequate understand the meaning found in the translated text with theat in original fiction novels. Thesis deals with cultural factor in translation who are also undeniable if not so obvious. No communication is possible unless the message transmitted through texts is well understood by the communicants. But this understanding can be achieved only if the information contained in language units is supplemented by background knowledge of facts referred to in the message. People belonging to the same linguistic community are members of a certain type of culture. They share many traditions, habits, ways of doing and saying things. They have much common knowledge about their country, its geography, history, climate, its political, economic, social and cultural institutions, accepted morals, taboos and many other things. All this information is the basis of the communicants presuppositions which enable them to produce and to understand messages in their linguistic form. The core of the translation theory is the general theory of translation which is concerned with the fundamental aspects of translation inherent in the nature of interlingual communication and therefore common to all translation events, irrespective of what languages are involved or what kind of text and under what circumstances is translated. Basically, replacement of the source text by the target text of the same communicative value is possible because both texts are produced in human speech governed by the same rules and involving the same relationships between language, reality and the human mind. All languages are means of communication, each language is used to externalize and shape human thinking, all language units are meaningful entities related to nonlingualistic realities, all speech units convey information to the communicants. In each language communication is achieved through a complicated interpretation of the speech units by the communications, involving an assessment of the meaning of the language units against the background information derived from the contextual situation, general knowledge, previous experience, various associations and other factors. The general theory of translation deals, so to speak, with translation universais and is the basis for all other theoretical studies in this field, since it describes what translation is and what makes it possible. To sum up. The linguistic and cultural aspects of translation need not be opposed for they are complementary. Cultural translation problems can usually be reformulated as language problems and incorporated in the original text. However bias between original text and it's translation always exists.

The purpose of this masters' thesis is to analyze the possible issues who appears when translating literature. The goals of this masters' thesis is to clear out if foreigner readers adequate understand the meaning found in the translated text with theat in original fiction novels. Thesis deals with cultural factor in translation who are also undeniable if not so obvious. No communication is possible unless the message transmitted through texts is well understood by the communicants. But this understanding can be achieved only if the information contained in language units is supplemented by background knowledge of facts referred to in the message. People belonging to the same linguistic community are members of a certain type of culture. They share many traditions, habits, ways of doing and saying things. They have much common knowledge about their country, its geography, history, climate, its political, economic, social and cultural institutions, accepted morals, taboos and many other things. All this information is the basis of the communicants presuppositions which enable them to produce and to understand messages in their linguistic form. The core of the translation theory is the general theory of translation which is concerned with the fundamental aspects of translation inherent in the nature of interlingual communication and therefore common to all translation events, irrespective of what languages are involved or what kind of text and under what circumstances is translated. Basically, replacement of the source text by the target text of the same communicative value is possible because both texts are produced in human speech governed by the same rules and involving the same relationships between language, reality and the human mind. All languages are means of communication, each language is used to externalize and shape human thinking, all language units are meaningful entities related to nonlingualistic realities, all speech units convey information to the communicants. In each language communication is achieved through a complicated interpretation of the speech units by the communications, involving an assessment of the meaning of the language units against the background information derived from the contextual situation, general knowledge, previous experience, various associations and other factors. The general theory of translation deals, so to speak, with translation universais and is the basis for all other theoretical studies in this field, since it describes what translation is and what makes it possible. To sum up. The linguistic and cultural aspects of translation need not be opposed for they are complementary. Cultural translation problems can usually be reformulated as language problems and incorporated in the original text. However bias between original text and it's translation always exists.

The main purpose of this thesis is to examine condition of the Sámi historical memory in Sweden. This is done by analysing and comparing Sámi history representations in two museums: Nordiska museum, which reflects Swedish perspective and Ájtte museum, which reflects Sámi perspective. Sweden receives a lot of criticism from international organs (such as United Nations and Council of Europe) regarding restrictions of Sámi rights and influence. Sámi communities are concerned about failed inclusion of Sámi history into the major narrative. Nowadays stories about Sámi people history are heard more often but despite that criticism does not disappear. By examining narratives of the chosen museums I will try to understand why it is so. In this research I apply qualitative method and perform comparative analysis of two exhibitions, I also conduct interviews with museums' representatives and visitors. Theoretical base that I construct for this research consists of collective memory and cultural trauma theories. They provide a framework which allows to understand history representations, as well it predicts possible perpetrators' and survivors' narratives. In this case it appeared that they did not reflect actual narratives, which says that chosen representations have to be analysed in consideration of what mnemonic actor present them. It also shows that cultural trauma that develops out of longstanding history of the routine harm is not so different from trauma process which begin with some sort of shock. In the end they both produce similar narratives. Museums' narratives can be understood as attempts to cope with historical trauma. In Ájtte museum it is done by creating a new narrative for Sámi people, which do not include Sweden as a main actor and trauma as a main process. Nordiska museum choose a different approach – it reveals history of Sámi oppression and reflects how the museum was part of it. It seems that these narratives should lead to conciliation, but actually they do not make a difference. Why Sámi people are still disappointed about how they history is treated? There are two reasons: first of all, it is because of representations itself. Even though Nordiska talks about the oppression, in most cases representations are shallow, they lack deeper analysis and personal stories, and furthermore, Sámi are seen in relation with the state and Swedish society, which do not reflect them as active actors in their own history. Second of all, this new narrative of the perpetrators do not affect official state position and politics in any way.

The main purpose of this thesis is to examine condition of the Sámi historical memory in Sweden. This is done by analysing and comparing Sámi history representations in two museums: Nordiska museum, which reflects Swedish perspective and Ájtte museum, which reflects Sámi perspective. Sweden receives a lot of criticism from international organs (such as United Nations and Council of Europe) regarding restrictions of Sámi rights and influence. Sámi communities are concerned about failed inclusion of Sámi history into the major narrative. Nowadays stories about Sámi people history are heard more often but despite that criticism does not disappear. By examining narratives of the chosen museums I will try to understand why it is so. In this research I apply qualitative method and perform comparative analysis of two exhibitions, I also conduct interviews with museums' representatives and visitors. Theoretical base that I construct for this research consists of collective memory and cultural trauma theories. They provide a framework which allows to understand history representations, as well it predicts possible perpetrators' and survivors' narratives. In this case it appeared that they did not reflect actual narratives, which says that chosen representations have to be analysed in consideration of what mnemonic actor present them. It also shows that cultural trauma that develops out of longstanding history of the routine harm is not so different from trauma process which begin with some sort of shock. In the end they both produce similar narratives. Museums' narratives can be understood as attempts to cope with historical trauma. In Ájtte museum it is done by creating a new narrative for Sámi people, which do not include Sweden as a main actor and trauma as a main process. Nordiska museum choose a different approach – it reveals history of Sámi oppression and reflects how the museum was part of it. It seems that these narratives should lead to conciliation, but actually they do not make a difference. Why Sámi people are still disappointed about how they history is treated? There are two reasons: first of all, it is because of representations itself. Even though Nordiska talks about the oppression, in most cases representations are shallow, they lack deeper analysis and personal stories, and furthermore, Sámi are seen in relation with the state and Swedish society, which do not reflect them as active actors in their own history. Second of all, this new narrative of the perpetrators do not affect official state position and politics in any way.