Suchergebnisse

In the paper ethnic identity, concepts of ethnic identity and strategies of those concepts in Lithuanian Exile are analysed. Usually in Lithuanian Exile surveys ethnic and national identities are handled as systematized and relatively stable forms of nationalism. In this paper ethnic identity is analysed on the basis of internal contradictions within diaspora and power relations (on the basis of gender, racial, ethnic groups' relations). In the paper we predicate that forms and practices of national collectivity are and can not only be transferred to emigrant community but are constantly transformed while changing boundaries and carrying other shifts in relation to other ethnic communities, and is a part of political formation of identity. In ethnic identity surveys collective identity and ethnic culture were handled as coherent unity, whereas ethnic identity is a part of constantly constructed and shifting processes. Hence in the topic not acculturation theory is chosen either but broader analytical model – through discursive practices, taking into account newspapers' analysis and organizational network in diaspora. Empirical material in the survey chosen is diaspora press and institutions in diaspora. Analytical model – newspapers' content analysis, analysis of strategies, making presumption that linguistic meanings and structural realization are bound together, analysis of practises of implementation – through diaspora institutions and family model. Tasks in the paper – to identify existing perceptions of Lithuanian identity, narratives and discourses of "lithuanianess", to analyse dominant strategies and forms (practices of exclusion and admission of group members, internal group contradictions). Particular attention is committed to youth organizations and role of women in Lithuanian diaspora in implementing political identity formation strategies. The paper conclusion is that Lithuanian intelligentsia had an access in constructing ethnic identity, on the basis of conservative discourse constructed by intellectuals complete social network of diaspora was established which functioned for implementing ethnic identity and ethnic culture. To sustain collective ethnic identity mechanisms of excluding group members were employed, as a result – ethnic continuity was not preserved.

In the paper ethnic identity, concepts of ethnic identity and strategies of those concepts in Lithuanian Exile are analysed. Usually in Lithuanian Exile surveys ethnic and national identities are handled as systematized and relatively stable forms of nationalism. In this paper ethnic identity is analysed on the basis of internal contradictions within diaspora and power relations (on the basis of gender, racial, ethnic groups' relations). In the paper we predicate that forms and practices of national collectivity are and can not only be transferred to emigrant community but are constantly transformed while changing boundaries and carrying other shifts in relation to other ethnic communities, and is a part of political formation of identity. In ethnic identity surveys collective identity and ethnic culture were handled as coherent unity, whereas ethnic identity is a part of constantly constructed and shifting processes. Hence in the topic not acculturation theory is chosen either but broader analytical model – through discursive practices, taking into account newspapers' analysis and organizational network in diaspora. Empirical material in the survey chosen is diaspora press and institutions in diaspora. Analytical model – newspapers' content analysis, analysis of strategies, making presumption that linguistic meanings and structural realization are bound together, analysis of practises of implementation – through diaspora institutions and family model. Tasks in the paper – to identify existing perceptions of Lithuanian identity, narratives and discourses of "lithuanianess", to analyse dominant strategies and forms (practices of exclusion and admission of group members, internal group contradictions). Particular attention is committed to youth organizations and role of women in Lithuanian diaspora in implementing political identity formation strategies. The paper conclusion is that Lithuanian intelligentsia had an access in constructing ethnic identity, on the basis of conservative discourse constructed by intellectuals complete social network of diaspora was established which functioned for implementing ethnic identity and ethnic culture. To sustain collective ethnic identity mechanisms of excluding group members were employed, as a result – ethnic continuity was not preserved.

This scientific report overviews the most important results and achievements of the scientific research fulfilled by the political scientists group of the VMU cluster "European public space: politics, communication, discourse" in 2012. Within the analyzed period of time 3 important scientific groups' projects were implemented and two of them were devoted to the analysis of Lithuania's national identity construction and the influencing factors. The genesis of 9 selected political initiatives (non-electoral campaigns) of 2006-2011 in Lithuania were also examined by making media monitoring in 5 main Lithuania's internet media portals. Furthermore, in 2012 four scientific dissertations were finalized and successfully defended. Therefore the scientific group of political science researchers of the cluster made an amount and enriching research and published over 15 scientific articles in 2012.

This scientific report overviews the most important results and achievements of the scientific research fulfilled by the political scientists group of the VMU cluster "European public space: politics, communication, discourse" in 2012. Within the analyzed period of time 3 important scientific groups' projects were implemented and two of them were devoted to the analysis of Lithuania's national identity construction and the influencing factors. The genesis of 9 selected political initiatives (non-electoral campaigns) of 2006-2011 in Lithuania were also examined by making media monitoring in 5 main Lithuania's internet media portals. Furthermore, in 2012 four scientific dissertations were finalized and successfully defended. Therefore the scientific group of political science researchers of the cluster made an amount and enriching research and published over 15 scientific articles in 2012.

This scientific report overviews the most important results and achievements of the scientific research fulfilled by the political scientists group of the VMU cluster "European public space: politics, communication, discourse" in 2012. Within the analyzed period of time 3 important scientific groups' projects were implemented and two of them were devoted to the analysis of Lithuania's national identity construction and the influencing factors. The genesis of 9 selected political initiatives (non-electoral campaigns) of 2006-2011 in Lithuania were also examined by making media monitoring in 5 main Lithuania's internet media portals. Furthermore, in 2012 four scientific dissertations were finalized and successfully defended. Therefore the scientific group of political science researchers of the cluster made an amount and enriching research and published over 15 scientific articles in 2012.

The idea of European identity and multilingualism, especially of a European public sphere – of media-sustained imaginary spaces where all of the diversities and commonalities of multicultural Europe are expressed and celebrated – is an appealing and thought-provoking concept and one that continuously attracts the attention of scholars, policy-makers, writers, journalists, and artists from all over Europe. At the same time, in spite of their popularity, multifaceted nature, and inclusivity, many of these debates lack optimism. Discussions often lead to the conclusion that a common arena for cultural exchange and inspiring debates, maintained and preserved by the conventional mass media, simply does not exist. It does not exist as a common public sphere where differing points of view could be presented, and which would enable the emergence of a mutual discourse rich in diverse interpretations – of a space which would stimulate the imagination of Europe as an experience. Therefore, the goal of the research perspective "European Public Sphere – politics, communication, discourse" is to find commonalities and intersections among those very diverse fields of europenization studies ranging from journalism, communication studies and identity issues, to regional studies, comparative politics and international relations. At the same time, this research perspective seeks to address new questions and includes these into the comparative research agenda. It looks into changes and. [to full text]

The idea of European identity and multilingualism, especially of a European public sphere – of media-sustained imaginary spaces where all of the diversities and commonalities of multicultural Europe are expressed and celebrated – is an appealing and thought-provoking concept and one that continuously attracts the attention of scholars, policy-makers, writers, journalists, and artists from all over Europe. At the same time, in spite of their popularity, multifaceted nature, and inclusivity, many of these debates lack optimism. Discussions often lead to the conclusion that a common arena for cultural exchange and inspiring debates, maintained and preserved by the conventional mass media, simply does not exist. It does not exist as a common public sphere where differing points of view could be presented, and which would enable the emergence of a mutual discourse rich in diverse interpretations – of a space which would stimulate the imagination of Europe as an experience. Therefore, the goal of the research perspective "European Public Sphere – politics, communication, discourse" is to find commonalities and intersections among those very diverse fields of europenization studies ranging from journalism, communication studies and identity issues, to regional studies, comparative politics and international relations. At the same time, this research perspective seeks to address new questions and includes these into the comparative research agenda. It looks into changes and. [to full text]

The idea of European identity and multilingualism, especially of a European public sphere – of media-sustained imaginary spaces where all of the diversities and commonalities of multicultural Europe are expressed and celebrated – is an appealing and thought-provoking concept and one that continuously attracts the attention of scholars, policy-makers, writers, journalists, and artists from all over Europe. At the same time, in spite of their popularity, multifaceted nature, and inclusivity, many of these debates lack optimism. Discussions often lead to the conclusion that a common arena for cultural exchange and inspiring debates, maintained and preserved by the conventional mass media, simply does not exist. It does not exist as a common public sphere where differing points of view could be presented, and which would enable the emergence of a mutual discourse rich in diverse interpretations – of a space which would stimulate the imagination of Europe as an experience. Therefore, the goal of the research perspective "European Public Sphere – politics, communication, discourse" is to find commonalities and intersections among those very diverse fields of europenization studies ranging from journalism, communication studies and identity issues, to regional studies, comparative politics and international relations. At the same time, this research perspective seeks to address new questions and includes these into the comparative research agenda. It looks into changes and. [to full text]

University mergers could be perceived as a political process – at least during the first stages of the pro-cess, which contain discussions about common visions, goals, and measures. Therefore, a university merger could be analyzed using the methods of political discourse analysis, which allows to understand how public discourses about merging universities have been constructed, legitimized, and institutionalized.It is important to understand the process of university mergers as a political phenomenon that is constructed by stakeholders using public discourses. Public discourses, reflected in the media, form the society's opinion about a university merger and have influence on policy decisions and the implementation process of these decisions. In this context, the purpose of this article is to analyze the written content related to university merger issues pub-lished in online media during the course of three years (2016–2018). Quantitative content analysis was made using software Hamlet II 3.0. Some trends of public discourse related to university mergers have been detected. It is no-ticed that a university merger is primarily related to the improvement of higher education quality and the needs of business and the state in public discourse. However, the declared political goal of seeking competitiveness and qual-ity of research is not developed and reflected in the media. This shows a certain fragmentation of ideas in the process of merging universities, because the society, the academic community, and the government agree (as reflected in the documents (2017)) that only a unity of research and studies could assure the highest quality university education and international recognition.Also, differences between business and university mergers have been noticed. More rational arguments are used to justify business mergers than social and cultural ones (Vaara, Tienari 2002) when compared to university mergers. Stakeholders usually use a combination of social and rational arguments in public discourse to justify university mergers.

University mergers could be perceived as a political process – at least during the first stages of the pro-cess, which contain discussions about common visions, goals, and measures. Therefore, a university merger could be analyzed using the methods of political discourse analysis, which allows to understand how public discourses about merging universities have been constructed, legitimized, and institutionalized.It is important to understand the process of university mergers as a political phenomenon that is constructed by stakeholders using public discourses. Public discourses, reflected in the media, form the society's opinion about a university merger and have influence on policy decisions and the implementation process of these decisions. In this context, the purpose of this article is to analyze the written content related to university merger issues pub-lished in online media during the course of three years (2016–2018). Quantitative content analysis was made using software Hamlet II 3.0. Some trends of public discourse related to university mergers have been detected. It is no-ticed that a university merger is primarily related to the improvement of higher education quality and the needs of business and the state in public discourse. However, the declared political goal of seeking competitiveness and qual-ity of research is not developed and reflected in the media. This shows a certain fragmentation of ideas in the process of merging universities, because the society, the academic community, and the government agree (as reflected in the documents (2017)) that only a unity of research and studies could assure the highest quality university education and international recognition.Also, differences between business and university mergers have been noticed. More rational arguments are used to justify business mergers than social and cultural ones (Vaara, Tienari 2002) when compared to university mergers. Stakeholders usually use a combination of social and rational arguments in public discourse to justify university mergers.

University mergers could be perceived as a political process – at least during the first stages of the pro-cess, which contain discussions about common visions, goals, and measures. Therefore, a university merger could be analyzed using the methods of political discourse analysis, which allows to understand how public discourses about merging universities have been constructed, legitimized, and institutionalized.It is important to understand the process of university mergers as a political phenomenon that is constructed by stakeholders using public discourses. Public discourses, reflected in the media, form the society's opinion about a university merger and have influence on policy decisions and the implementation process of these decisions. In this context, the purpose of this article is to analyze the written content related to university merger issues pub-lished in online media during the course of three years (2016–2018). Quantitative content analysis was made using software Hamlet II 3.0. Some trends of public discourse related to university mergers have been detected. It is no-ticed that a university merger is primarily related to the improvement of higher education quality and the needs of business and the state in public discourse. However, the declared political goal of seeking competitiveness and qual-ity of research is not developed and reflected in the media. This shows a certain fragmentation of ideas in the process of merging universities, because the society, the academic community, and the government agree (as reflected in the documents (2017)) that only a unity of research and studies could assure the highest quality university education and international recognition.Also, differences between business and university mergers have been noticed. More rational arguments are used to justify business mergers than social and cultural ones (Vaara, Tienari 2002) when compared to university mergers. Stakeholders usually use a combination of social and rational arguments in public discourse to justify university mergers.

University mergers could be perceived as a political process – at least during the first stages of the pro-cess, which contain discussions about common visions, goals, and measures. Therefore, a university merger could be analyzed using the methods of political discourse analysis, which allows to understand how public discourses about merging universities have been constructed, legitimized, and institutionalized.It is important to understand the process of university mergers as a political phenomenon that is constructed by stakeholders using public discourses. Public discourses, reflected in the media, form the society's opinion about a university merger and have influence on policy decisions and the implementation process of these decisions. In this context, the purpose of this article is to analyze the written content related to university merger issues pub-lished in online media during the course of three years (2016–2018). Quantitative content analysis was made using software Hamlet II 3.0. Some trends of public discourse related to university mergers have been detected. It is no-ticed that a university merger is primarily related to the improvement of higher education quality and the needs of business and the state in public discourse. However, the declared political goal of seeking competitiveness and qual-ity of research is not developed and reflected in the media. This shows a certain fragmentation of ideas in the process of merging universities, because the society, the academic community, and the government agree (as reflected in the documents (2017)) that only a unity of research and studies could assure the highest quality university education and international recognition.Also, differences between business and university mergers have been noticed. More rational arguments are used to justify business mergers than social and cultural ones (Vaara, Tienari 2002) when compared to university mergers. Stakeholders usually use a combination of social and rational arguments in public discourse to justify university mergers.

The rhetoric and the stylistics – the choice of text style, genre, and rhetorical devices – of Soviet bad news discourse is analysed in this paper. This discourse is represented by 193 reports regarding disasters, crimes, and violation of socialistic moral which were published in the daily paper Komjaunimo tiesa (eng. The Truth of the Komsomol) in 1970–1973. It was found that the bad news in the selection of official texts of this period distinguishes by a much lower register of Newspeak – unlike as in the articles of first pages, there is almost no pathos here, the militaristic metaphors are used in the text of the article only, but they cannot be seen in the headings. One of the main rhetorical devices is an irony, which is created by using phraseology, jargon, famous quotes, dialogues, etc., – everything, which looks like a daily colloquial language. The choice of text form which is more related to fiction than to journalism (essay, satire) may be treated as one of the pretexts which justify in the eyes of the readers an idea of an author to write in a different language than it was ordinary in the context of ideologized press language of that period. By using the corresponding rhetoric, they believed to accomplish the propagandistic aim of these texts more efficiently – to suggest an image of more safe, democratic, successful, and self-critical country than it really was.

The rhetoric and the stylistics – the choice of text style, genre, and rhetorical devices – of Soviet bad news discourse is analysed in this paper. This discourse is represented by 193 reports regarding disasters, crimes, and violation of socialistic moral which were published in the daily paper Komjaunimo tiesa (eng. The Truth of the Komsomol) in 1970–1973. It was found that the bad news in the selection of official texts of this period distinguishes by a much lower register of Newspeak – unlike as in the articles of first pages, there is almost no pathos here, the militaristic metaphors are used in the text of the article only, but they cannot be seen in the headings. One of the main rhetorical devices is an irony, which is created by using phraseology, jargon, famous quotes, dialogues, etc., – everything, which looks like a daily colloquial language. The choice of text form which is more related to fiction than to journalism (essay, satire) may be treated as one of the pretexts which justify in the eyes of the readers an idea of an author to write in a different language than it was ordinary in the context of ideologized press language of that period. By using the corresponding rhetoric, they believed to accomplish the propagandistic aim of these texts more efficiently – to suggest an image of more safe, democratic, successful, and self-critical country than it really was.

This article analyzes coordination that in the Varieties of capitalism (Voc) approach is described as ways in which firms and other actors engage in political-economic relations. it answers the question about the main conditions influencing the establishment of coordination and the achievement of particular coordination equilibriums in political economy. The Voc approach proposes two answers. firstly, coordination depends on institutions supporting its particular way. Secondly, particular actors' qualities called common knowledge are necessary. These qualities enable actors to estimate expected behavior of each other and predict equilibriums reached during coordination. While the support of political leadership can enable coordinating institutions and while coordination equilibriums are not achieved easily, common knowledge is an object of hegemonic support. in order to analyze the "openness" of coordination to hegemonic support, coordination is understood as a process of production and exchange of meaning. By applying analytical tools of discourse based on Paul ricoeur's discourse theory and roman Jacobson's discourse model, basic factors influencing the way meaning is established in discursive coordination are identified. These factors also refer to common knowledge that is specific to each way of coordination. market coordination is based on the common knowledge connected to the acceptance of market code and its application skills. Strategic coordination relies on actors' context, which includes trust and experiences of their past interactions. in both cases common knowledge related to market code and common knowledge related to context are the factors open to hegemonic influence.