This resource book for students introduces the main concepts of multilingualism and provides a wide range of definitions revealing the complex nature of the phenomenon. It also provides knowledge on historical developments, linguistic and cultural changes and emphasizes the historical relevance to the present situation in Europe. The documentation on the EU policy on multilingualism is critically evaluated while placing policy issues in the context of national and institutional perspectives. The resource book for students explores the economic value of languages and the impact of global English as well as the role of other "big" languages in Europe and the world. The case studies of different European countries/ cities provide deeper knowledge and develop understanding of political, educational, economic and socio-cultural aspects of multilingualism. These aspects are highlighted by examining cultural and socio-political factors that may influence or even determine minority/ migrant language loss, their development or maintenance. Finally, it provides an analysis of challenges for the educational sector and the schooling of multilingual children.
This resource book for students introduces the main concepts of multilingualism and provides a wide range of definitions revealing the complex nature of the phenomenon. It also provides knowledge on historical developments, linguistic and cultural changes and emphasizes the historical relevance to the present situation in Europe. The documentation on the EU policy on multilingualism is critically evaluated while placing policy issues in the context of national and institutional perspectives. The resource book for students explores the economic value of languages and the impact of global English as well as the role of other "big" languages in Europe and the world. The case studies of different European countries/ cities provide deeper knowledge and develop understanding of political, educational, economic and socio-cultural aspects of multilingualism. These aspects are highlighted by examining cultural and socio-political factors that may influence or even determine minority/ migrant language loss, their development or maintenance. Finally, it provides an analysis of challenges for the educational sector and the schooling of multilingual children.
This resource book for students introduces the main concepts of multilingualism and provides a wide range of definitions revealing the complex nature of the phenomenon. It also provides knowledge on historical developments, linguistic and cultural changes and emphasizes the historical relevance to the present situation in Europe. The documentation on the EU policy on multilingualism is critically evaluated while placing policy issues in the context of national and institutional perspectives. The resource book for students explores the economic value of languages and the impact of global English as well as the role of other "big" languages in Europe and the world. The case studies of different European countries/ cities provide deeper knowledge and develop understanding of political, educational, economic and socio-cultural aspects of multilingualism. These aspects are highlighted by examining cultural and socio-political factors that may influence or even determine minority/ migrant language loss, their development or maintenance. Finally, it provides an analysis of challenges for the educational sector and the schooling of multilingual children.
With the enlargement of the European Union, Europe is experiencing profound changes. All European nation states are going to face growing cultural and linguistic diversity. Therefore, considerable efforts to understand, respect, and sustain the very contrasts that make Europe so rich and complex will be required from all EU citizens. A specific feature of European cultural life is the ability to engage effectively with diversity. This engagement is linked to its basis in tradition and new developments.
With the enlargement of the European Union, Europe is experiencing profound changes. All European nation states are going to face growing cultural and linguistic diversity. Therefore, considerable efforts to understand, respect, and sustain the very contrasts that make Europe so rich and complex will be required from all EU citizens. A specific feature of European cultural life is the ability to engage effectively with diversity. This engagement is linked to its basis in tradition and new developments.
With the enlargement of the European Union, Europe is experiencing profound changes. All European nation states are going to face growing cultural and linguistic diversity. Therefore, considerable efforts to understand, respect, and sustain the very contrasts that make Europe so rich and complex will be required from all EU citizens. A specific feature of European cultural life is the ability to engage effectively with diversity. This engagement is linked to its basis in tradition and new developments.
Lithuanian authors have challenges to study Russia's politics of history. The analysis is complicated because of a few factors. Diplomatic disputes and informative wars between Lithuania and Russia concerning historical questions have encouraged researches by historians but not by political scientists. In Lithuania, the questions of who and how is forming the history politics of Russia, what is its content and the function it accomplishes, remain unexamined. The analysis is further complicated by disagreement among Russian political scientists, historians, journalists, and politicians over the existence of such politics. The present analysis demonstrates that post-soviet Russia perceives the importance of historical memory, i.e. it understands that historical memory and its forms depend on the states' politics. Russia's political history genesis testifies that trends of such politics depend on the geopolitical orientation of its government. The end of the Cold War did not manage to conceal the fundamental differences between Europe and Russia. The wave of liberalism and democracy, which spread over Central and Eastern Europe as well as Russian Federation, has caused tension in Russia ruled by B. Yeltsin. Yeltsin's Russia was not able to tackle this problem by using measures of history politics in order to lessen the distance between Russia and the West. V. Putin undertook to find the solution to this situation, and he did. By using changes of international politics, he builds the image of Russia as a great power. Politics of history are subordinated to build this image; also, it is used as an instrument in domestic politics. The history politics of Russia has taken the shape of a manipulative form and serves the interests of V. Putins's power.
Lithuanian authors have challenges to study Russia's politics of history. The analysis is complicated because of a few factors. Diplomatic disputes and informative wars between Lithuania and Russia concerning historical questions have encouraged researches by historians but not by political scientists. In Lithuania, the questions of who and how is forming the history politics of Russia, what is its content and the function it accomplishes, remain unexamined. The analysis is further complicated by disagreement among Russian political scientists, historians, journalists, and politicians over the existence of such politics. The present analysis demonstrates that post-soviet Russia perceives the importance of historical memory, i.e. it understands that historical memory and its forms depend on the states' politics. Russia's political history genesis testifies that trends of such politics depend on the geopolitical orientation of its government. The end of the Cold War did not manage to conceal the fundamental differences between Europe and Russia. The wave of liberalism and democracy, which spread over Central and Eastern Europe as well as Russian Federation, has caused tension in Russia ruled by B. Yeltsin. Yeltsin's Russia was not able to tackle this problem by using measures of history politics in order to lessen the distance between Russia and the West. V. Putin undertook to find the solution to this situation, and he did. By using changes of international politics, he builds the image of Russia as a great power. Politics of history are subordinated to build this image; also, it is used as an instrument in domestic politics. The history politics of Russia has taken the shape of a manipulative form and serves the interests of V. Putins's power.
Lithuanian authors have challenges to study Russia's politics of history. The analysis is complicated because of a few factors. Diplomatic disputes and informative wars between Lithuania and Russia concerning historical questions have encouraged researches by historians but not by political scientists. In Lithuania, the questions of who and how is forming the history politics of Russia, what is its content and the function it accomplishes, remain unexamined. The analysis is further complicated by disagreement among Russian political scientists, historians, journalists, and politicians over the existence of such politics. The present analysis demonstrates that post-soviet Russia perceives the importance of historical memory, i.e. it understands that historical memory and its forms depend on the states' politics. Russia's political history genesis testifies that trends of such politics depend on the geopolitical orientation of its government. The end of the Cold War did not manage to conceal the fundamental differences between Europe and Russia. The wave of liberalism and democracy, which spread over Central and Eastern Europe as well as Russian Federation, has caused tension in Russia ruled by B. Yeltsin. Yeltsin's Russia was not able to tackle this problem by using measures of history politics in order to lessen the distance between Russia and the West. V. Putin undertook to find the solution to this situation, and he did. By using changes of international politics, he builds the image of Russia as a great power. Politics of history are subordinated to build this image; also, it is used as an instrument in domestic politics. The history politics of Russia has taken the shape of a manipulative form and serves the interests of V. Putins's power.
Lithuanian authors have challenges to study Russia's politics of history. The analysis is complicated because of a few factors. Diplomatic disputes and informative wars between Lithuania and Russia concerning historical questions have encouraged researches by historians but not by political scientists. In Lithuania, the questions of who and how is forming the history politics of Russia, what is its content and the function it accomplishes, remain unexamined. The analysis is further complicated by disagreement among Russian political scientists, historians, journalists, and politicians over the existence of such politics. The present analysis demonstrates that post-soviet Russia perceives the importance of historical memory, i.e. it understands that historical memory and its forms depend on the states' politics. Russia's political history genesis testifies that trends of such politics depend on the geopolitical orientation of its government. The end of the Cold War did not manage to conceal the fundamental differences between Europe and Russia. The wave of liberalism and democracy, which spread over Central and Eastern Europe as well as Russian Federation, has caused tension in Russia ruled by B. Yeltsin. Yeltsin's Russia was not able to tackle this problem by using measures of history politics in order to lessen the distance between Russia and the West. V. Putin undertook to find the solution to this situation, and he did. By using changes of international politics, he builds the image of Russia as a great power. Politics of history are subordinated to build this image; also, it is used as an instrument in domestic politics. The history politics of Russia has taken the shape of a manipulative form and serves the interests of V. Putins's power.
Economic Diplomacy is a big challenge in the modern day world and opportunity. It allows states to create and maintain bonds with other countries in order to benefit its economy, which is important in an era of reoccurring financial crisis. However, different strategies are developed by different states and it is interesting to see what objective characteristics of the country influence Economic Diplomacy practices and how it does so. This research takes a look into three different states in an attempt to investigate how different characteristics, such as relative power, size and historical background, affect Economic Diplomacy decisions and priorities. Germany, Poland and Lithuania were selected for the research as they provide an opportunity for the comparative analysis of the most different cases. At first, this paper considers the theoretical aspect of Economic Diplomacy, defining the term and naming most relevant theoretical approaches to it. Then, main contextual differences between the states included in the study are established. These differences in political system, relative power and size, and historical background allow for more in depth comparative analysis, because it is possible to place results into a broader context, revealing which countries proportionally are doing better. Finally, Economic Diplomacy structures, priorities and outcomes are analysed. Neorealism perspective allows for a better view of power struggles within the global arena of political economy that all these states are incorporated into. The research reveals that Economic Diplomacy in Lithuania was the most broadly articulated from this selection of states. There is a special institution and strategies devoted specifically for this practice. However, as so far, outcomes are relatively poor because of historical context – inefficient governance and undeveloped image do not allow simple solutions to be effective. Poland can be singled out as a relative leader in FDI field, since it manages to attract significant FDI flows as well as become an important FDI source country. Germany is a big power, immersing into global power games. While Poland and Lithuania are looking for investments, Germany is housing many international corporations and is focusing its Economic Diplomacy towards more global goals and expansion of export market. All of these results confirm initial assumption that power, size and historical background are important, power remaining the most significant one.
Economic Diplomacy is a big challenge in the modern day world and opportunity. It allows states to create and maintain bonds with other countries in order to benefit its economy, which is important in an era of reoccurring financial crisis. However, different strategies are developed by different states and it is interesting to see what objective characteristics of the country influence Economic Diplomacy practices and how it does so. This research takes a look into three different states in an attempt to investigate how different characteristics, such as relative power, size and historical background, affect Economic Diplomacy decisions and priorities. Germany, Poland and Lithuania were selected for the research as they provide an opportunity for the comparative analysis of the most different cases. At first, this paper considers the theoretical aspect of Economic Diplomacy, defining the term and naming most relevant theoretical approaches to it. Then, main contextual differences between the states included in the study are established. These differences in political system, relative power and size, and historical background allow for more in depth comparative analysis, because it is possible to place results into a broader context, revealing which countries proportionally are doing better. Finally, Economic Diplomacy structures, priorities and outcomes are analysed. Neorealism perspective allows for a better view of power struggles within the global arena of political economy that all these states are incorporated into. The research reveals that Economic Diplomacy in Lithuania was the most broadly articulated from this selection of states. There is a special institution and strategies devoted specifically for this practice. However, as so far, outcomes are relatively poor because of historical context – inefficient governance and undeveloped image do not allow simple solutions to be effective. Poland can be singled out as a relative leader in FDI field, since it manages to attract significant FDI flows as well as become an important FDI source country. Germany is a big power, immersing into global power games. While Poland and Lithuania are looking for investments, Germany is housing many international corporations and is focusing its Economic Diplomacy towards more global goals and expansion of export market. All of these results confirm initial assumption that power, size and historical background are important, power remaining the most significant one.
Economic Diplomacy is a big challenge in the modern day world and opportunity. It allows states to create and maintain bonds with other countries in order to benefit its economy, which is important in an era of reoccurring financial crisis. However, different strategies are developed by different states and it is interesting to see what objective characteristics of the country influence Economic Diplomacy practices and how it does so. This research takes a look into three different states in an attempt to investigate how different characteristics, such as relative power, size and historical background, affect Economic Diplomacy decisions and priorities. Germany, Poland and Lithuania were selected for the research as they provide an opportunity for the comparative analysis of the most different cases. At first, this paper considers the theoretical aspect of Economic Diplomacy, defining the term and naming most relevant theoretical approaches to it. Then, main contextual differences between the states included in the study are established. These differences in political system, relative power and size, and historical background allow for more in depth comparative analysis, because it is possible to place results into a broader context, revealing which countries proportionally are doing better. Finally, Economic Diplomacy structures, priorities and outcomes are analysed. Neorealism perspective allows for a better view of power struggles within the global arena of political economy that all these states are incorporated into. The research reveals that Economic Diplomacy in Lithuania was the most broadly articulated from this selection of states. There is a special institution and strategies devoted specifically for this practice. However, as so far, outcomes are relatively poor because of historical context – inefficient governance and undeveloped image do not allow simple solutions to be effective. Poland can be singled out as a relative leader in FDI field, since it manages to attract significant FDI flows as well as become an important FDI source country. Germany is a big power, immersing into global power games. While Poland and Lithuania are looking for investments, Germany is housing many international corporations and is focusing its Economic Diplomacy towards more global goals and expansion of export market. All of these results confirm initial assumption that power, size and historical background are important, power remaining the most significant one.
