Suchergebnisse

The article attempts to reconstruct some of the political stakes in the conceptual and methodological debates among two groups of literary critics during the 1960ies and the 1970ies in Bulgaria: the structuralists and their opponents, the so-called "Imperssionist critics". This debate seems to be a pertinent context for addressing the emergence of poststructuralism since it was the intellectual ferment, in which Julia Kristeva formed her conceptual background, before later becoming among the first poststructuralist critics of structuralism in France. Before, emigrating, Kristeva was part of the group of the "impressionist critics", who were developing ways of resisting official Marxist doctrine while retaining claims for Marxists legitimacy. They were very critical of the structuralists, who also were attempting to gain legitimacy, though by aligning with Marxism as a materialist science, a stance the "impressionists" viewed as contributing to alienation. ; Статья пытается восстановить поли- тический залог в концептуальных и методологических дискуссиях между двумя группами литературо- ведов в 1960-х и 1970-х годах в Болга- рии – между структуралистами и их противниками, так называемыми «импрессионистскими критика- ми». Эта дискуссия, по-видимому, является важным контекстом воз- никновения постструктурализма, поскольку она представляет собой интеллектуальную среду, в кото- рой Юлия Кристева первоначально сформировала свои идеи, перед тем как впоследствии стала одним из первых критиков структурализма во Франции. До эмиграции Кристева является членом группы импрес- сионистских критиков, которые пытаются разработать стратегии противостояния официальной марк- систской доктрине, не отказываясь от поиска марксистской легитим- ности. Они критикуют структура- листов, которые также стремятся к легитимности, но основываясь на настойчивости марксизма как материалистической науки – пози- ция, в которой «импрессионистские критики» видят фактор, способству- ющий отчуждению.

Тематски Зборник Свакодневна култура у постсоцијалистичком периоду настао је као резултат научне сарадње Етнографског института САНУи Етнографског института и музеја БАН. Велике политичке и друштвене промене током деведесетих година 20.века озбиљно су се одразиле на свакодневну културу балканских земаља. Управо у периоду кризе, две суседне етнолошке установе, бугарска и српска, које више деценија током социјалисатичког периода нису сарађивале, отпочеле су заједнички рад на истраживању свакодневне културе. Зборник показује у ком правацу су се одвијали културни процеси у Србији и Бугарској, које су сличности и разлике међу њима, али и шта се дешава у постсоцијалистичком периоду у појединим сегментима свакодневне култура Словака, Руса и Македонаца. ; The Collection of Papers entitled ―Everyday Culture in post-socialist period is a result of collaboration between the Institute of Ethnography, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, and the Institute of Ethnography and Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. The enormous political and social changes during the 1990's influenced also everyday culture of the Balkans states. After decades of hinder, and precisely in the period of crisis, two neighboring ethnological institutions, the Bulgarian and Serbian, started to cooperate together in the study of everyday culture.The Collection of Papers demonstrates the directions of the cultural processes in Serbia and Bulgaria, accentuating the differences and similarities among the two states, and also explains the deeds within certain segments of everyday cultures of Slovaks, Russians and Macedonians. ; Зборник радова Етнографског института САНУ 22 / Collection of Papers of the Institute of Ethnography SASA 22

When something or someone is being declared "the best of everything possible" this a priori and a posteriori wrong. This is not useful for that "something" or that "someone" because their natural competitors do not share that thought and they do not sleep. Nobody can stop the development, regardless of the direction, in some or other assessment criteria. Long ago the political democracy has been declared such a perfect "something". But credibility in it begins to fall exactly where it has taken strong roots. For opponents, this is a thing that has been known long ago. Now there are empirically on the subject, but there are no convincing explanations of the data. The article offers a possible interpretation of that crisis of confidence in democracy. Specific tools developed by author and called by him Scanner, were used for the analysis. The conclusions are: democratization as a process is supported by its actual effectivity, and it is cyclical; there are many different democratic models competing with each other; nowhere ever has existed uninterrupted and one-way democratic development; democratic content is most often helpless a form countering undemocratic aggression outside. The text is not a requiem for democracy, but an attempt to breathe new life into the political process and to understand the emerging new phenomena in the world understood in today's mainstream as a subversion of modernity – for example in USA (Trump (UK (Brexit (China (Xi Jinping (Russia (Putin (Philippines (DuTerte (South Africa (Zuma (Turkey (Erdogan (and many other places in the 21st century.

Książka stanowi tom studiów autorstwa polskich i zagranicznych językoznawców poświęcony zmianom we współczesnych językach słowiańskich, szczególnie widocznym w słownictwie i słowotwórstwie. Uwzględnienie aspektu stylowo-funkcjonalnego w rozwoju leksyki pozwala lepiej zrozumieć dynamikę zmian językowych i skuteczność działań komunikacyjnych. Celowościowy i pragmatyczny charakter zachowań komunikacyjnych ujawnia się szeroko w uwzględnionych przez Autorów kontekstach społecznych, politycznych i kulturowych. Prace zostały pogrupowane w trzy działy tematyczne: - Zjawiska, procesy i tendencje rozwojowe w słownictwie specjalistycznym (terminologii); - Dynamika mechanizmów słowotwórczych i leksykalnych; - Zmiany leksykalne we współczesnej komunikacji językowej i dyskursie. Wyodrębnione działy pomagają uporządkować przedstawioną w tomie problematykę, wskazując na dominantę tematyczną w poszczególnych tekstach. Zakresy tych grup nie są jednak ostre, złożona i wielowarstwowa problematyka tendencji i zmian we współczesnym słownictwie słowiańskim jest omawiana w różnym stopniu w każdym z wydzielonych działów. W większości prac zastosowano podejście konfrontatywne, pozostałe stanowią podstawę do takiego ujęcia. Do badań wykorzystany został bogaty materiał języków słowiańskich: polskiego, czeskiego, słowackiego, białoruskiego, rosyjskiego, ukraińskiego, bułgarskiego, słoweńskiego, a także innych języków, jak np. nowogreckiego. ; This volume of studies by Polish and international linguists is devoted to changes in modern Slavic languages, which are especially noticeable in the spheres of vocabulary and word formation. Taking into consideration the stylistic and functional aspect of lexis development allows for a better understanding of the dynamics of language change and the efficacy of communicational acts. The purposeful and pragmatic character of communicational behaviour manifests itself widely in the social, political and cultural contexts considered by the Authors. The works comprising the volume are divided into three thematic sections: - Phenomena, processes and tendencies in the development of specialist lexis (terminology); - Word formation and lexical mechanisms dynamics; - Lexical change in modern language communication and discourse. The sections help organize the volume by highlighting the dominant theme in particular texts. The scopes of the sections are, nevertheless, not sharply delineated – each section is to an equal extent devoted to the complex and multifaceted subject-matter of the tendencies and changes in modern Slavic vocabulary. Most of the works comprised in the volume adopt a contrastive approach, the remaining ones can serve as bases for contrastive studies. The text analyse the rich material of the Slavic languages – Polish, Czech, Slovak, Belarusian, Russian, Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Slovene – as well as of other languages, like Modern Greek. ; Publikacja finansowana ze środków Instytutu Slawistyki Polskiej Akademii Nauk

Informal patient payments are deeply rooted in Central and Eastern European countries. Despite the socio-political changes in the health care sectors after 1990s and the subsequent health care reforms, informal payments for health care services continue to serve patients` and physicians` interests. These payments also fill gaps in health care funding in this European region. Nevertheless, unofficial payments are not a desirable payment channel. They lack transparency and distort the efficiency and equity in health care provision. Still, the successful elimination of these payments will depend on the public attitude towards these payments. This study aims to compare public attitudes towards informal patient payments and payment experience in six Central and Eastern European: Bulgaria, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, and Ukraine. The data have been collected in 2010 in nation-wide representative surveys using an identical standardized question- naire administrated via face-to-face interviews. We have collected about 1000 questionnaires in each country. The results show that a major group of respondents in each country expresses a negative attitude towards both informal cash payments and in-kind gifts. 208, 187, and 174 respondents paid informally for out-patient service in Ukraine, Romania, and Hungary respectively. We also analyse the relation between public attitudes and respondents` past experience with informal payments, e.g. whether they have paid informally payment for out-patient service used last year. In Bulgaria and Poland, negative attitude is mostly observed among those who have not paid informally. The existence of positive and indifferent attitudes towards informal pay- ments as reported in our study, indicates a challenge for policy makers in Central and Eastern European countries. The acceptance of government initiatives aimed at the elimination of informal payments will largely depend on the governments` ability to create a social resistance towards these payments.