Suchergebnisse

Russian school of book science attributed to the Continental European bibliography school is at present one of the strongest since it has deep traditions of this science which have for a long time been influencing (and are still influencing) the development of the book science in the neighboring countries, the republics of the former Soviet Union and other countries. This research is a work on the book science history the object of which is an independent book science which has formed in the 2nd – 3rd decade of the 20th century in Russia when its relation with bibliography playing the generalizing role of the book science radically changed. The object of research is new on the one part due to its non-traditional scholarly organizational aspect and on the other part it's new in chronological sense because no other research of the history of the book science has been carried out which included all period of independent existence of the Russian book science, i.e. the 20th century. Thus this paper is the first attempt to discover systematically the development of the Russian book science in the 20th century with the help of scholarly organizational system analysis – such was the aim of this research. Organizational system of the Russian book science was analyzed in three levels: book science institutions, book science conferences and book science press. Despite the method of analysis used, there was no attempt to separate mechanically the elements of the research since due to their close interaction a completely isolated (at least in the first stage of the research) research would have been neither effective nor probably generally possible. Due to the limited size of the paper and broadness of the topic only the most notable and the most significant moments of organization of the Russian book science are presented. Besides, the emphasis on autonomy of the book science as such pushed the organizational status of bibliography and librarianship, which are gaining greater and greater independence in the latter years, beyond the scope of the research. In order to reach the aim the following tasks were formulated: 1. to find out the most important institutions, events (conferences) and the state of the press of the Russian book science in the 20th century; 2. to show the change of the general level of the Russian book science organization in the 20th century, to distinguish between its stages of development, more prominent tendencies and the causes of changes; 3. to show the significance of manifestations of science organization to the general development of the book science; 4. to check the hypothesis about analytical (individual) and synthesized (general) research of the distinguished levels of science organization as a means for revealing the development of the Russian book science in the 20th century. The following general scientific and theoretical methods of research were used: analysis, synthesis, bibliographic and comparative (comparative – historical, comparative analysis). The researched showed that organizational system of the book science being the most public, human factor and practice related side of the science has always reacted sensitively to political-economical factors and was under their influence. Moreover, it was proved that each individual level of the book science organization and especially their synthesized research reflects the general development of the Russian book science and corresponds to its traditional periodization. On the one hand, this fact proved the hypothesis raised at the beginning of the research and, on the other hand, it undoubtedly pointed to the fact that the scholarly organizational aspect was one of the most important and strongest arguments in determining chronological boundaries of the stages of development of the Russian book science in the 20th century.

Russian school of book science attributed to the Continental European bibliography school is at present one of the strongest since it has deep traditions of this science which have for a long time been influencing (and are still influencing) the development of the book science in the neighboring countries, the republics of the former Soviet Union and other countries. This research is a work on the book science history the object of which is an independent book science which has formed in the 2nd – 3rd decade of the 20th century in Russia when its relation with bibliography playing the generalizing role of the book science radically changed. The object of research is new on the one part due to its non-traditional scholarly organizational aspect and on the other part it's new in chronological sense because no other research of the history of the book science has been carried out which included all period of independent existence of the Russian book science, i.e. the 20th century. Thus this paper is the first attempt to discover systematically the development of the Russian book science in the 20th century with the help of scholarly organizational system analysis – such was the aim of this research. Organizational system of the Russian book science was analyzed in three levels: book science institutions, book science conferences and book science press. Despite the method of analysis used, there was no attempt to separate mechanically the elements of the research since due to their close interaction a completely isolated (at least in the first stage of the research) research would have been neither effective nor probably generally possible. Due to the limited size of the paper and broadness of the topic only the most notable and the most significant moments of organization of the Russian book science are presented. Besides, the emphasis on autonomy of the book science as such pushed the organizational status of bibliography and librarianship, which are gaining greater and greater independence in the latter years, beyond the scope of the research. In order to reach the aim the following tasks were formulated: 1. to find out the most important institutions, events (conferences) and the state of the press of the Russian book science in the 20th century; 2. to show the change of the general level of the Russian book science organization in the 20th century, to distinguish between its stages of development, more prominent tendencies and the causes of changes; 3. to show the significance of manifestations of science organization to the general development of the book science; 4. to check the hypothesis about analytical (individual) and synthesized (general) research of the distinguished levels of science organization as a means for revealing the development of the Russian book science in the 20th century. The following general scientific and theoretical methods of research were used: analysis, synthesis, bibliographic and comparative (comparative – historical, comparative analysis). The researched showed that organizational system of the book science being the most public, human factor and practice related side of the science has always reacted sensitively to political-economical factors and was under their influence. Moreover, it was proved that each individual level of the book science organization and especially their synthesized research reflects the general development of the Russian book science and corresponds to its traditional periodization. On the one hand, this fact proved the hypothesis raised at the beginning of the research and, on the other hand, it undoubtedly pointed to the fact that the scholarly organizational aspect was one of the most important and strongest arguments in determining chronological boundaries of the stages of development of the Russian book science in the 20th century.

Russian school of book science attributed to the Continental European bibliography school is at present one of the strongest since it has deep traditions of this science which have for a long time been influencing (and are still influencing) the development of the book science in the neighboring countries, the republics of the former Soviet Union and other countries. This research is a work on the book science history the object of which is an independent book science which has formed in the 2nd – 3rd decade of the 20th century in Russia when its relation with bibliography playing the generalizing role of the book science radically changed. The object of research is new on the one part due to its non-traditional scholarly organizational aspect and on the other part it's new in chronological sense because no other research of the history of the book science has been carried out which included all period of independent existence of the Russian book science, i.e. the 20th century. Thus this paper is the first attempt to discover systematically the development of the Russian book science in the 20th century with the help of scholarly organizational system analysis – such was the aim of this research. Organizational system of the Russian book science was analyzed in three levels: book science institutions, book science conferences and book science press. Despite the method of analysis used, there was no attempt to separate mechanically the elements of the research since due to their close interaction a completely isolated (at least in the first stage of the research) research would have been neither effective nor probably generally possible. Due to the limited size of the paper and broadness of the topic only the most notable and the most significant moments of organization of the Russian book science are presented. Besides, the emphasis on autonomy of the book science as such pushed the organizational status of bibliography and librarianship, which are gaining greater and greater independence in the latter years, beyond the scope of the research. In order to reach the aim the following tasks were formulated: 1. to find out the most important institutions, events (conferences) and the state of the press of the Russian book science in the 20th century; 2. to show the change of the general level of the Russian book science organization in the 20th century, to distinguish between its stages of development, more prominent tendencies and the causes of changes; 3. to show the significance of manifestations of science organization to the general development of the book science; 4. to check the hypothesis about analytical (individual) and synthesized (general) research of the distinguished levels of science organization as a means for revealing the development of the Russian book science in the 20th century. The following general scientific and theoretical methods of research were used: analysis, synthesis, bibliographic and comparative (comparative – historical, comparative analysis). The researched showed that organizational system of the book science being the most public, human factor and practice related side of the science has always reacted sensitively to political-economical factors and was under their influence. Moreover, it was proved that each individual level of the book science organization and especially their synthesized research reflects the general development of the Russian book science and corresponds to its traditional periodization. On the one hand, this fact proved the hypothesis raised at the beginning of the research and, on the other hand, it undoubtedly pointed to the fact that the scholarly organizational aspect was one of the most important and strongest arguments in determining chronological boundaries of the stages of development of the Russian book science in the 20th century.

Russian school of book science attributed to the Continental European bibliography school is at present one of the strongest since it has deep traditions of this science which have for a long time been influencing (and are still influencing) the development of the book science in the neighboring countries, the republics of the former Soviet Union and other countries. This research is a work on the book science history the object of which is an independent book science which has formed in the 2nd – 3rd decade of the 20th century in Russia when its relation with bibliography playing the generalizing role of the book science radically changed. The object of research is new on the one part due to its non-traditional scholarly organizational aspect and on the other part it's new in chronological sense because no other research of the history of the book science has been carried out which included all period of independent existence of the Russian book science, i.e. the 20th century. Thus this paper is the first attempt to discover systematically the development of the Russian book science in the 20th century with the help of scholarly organizational system analysis – such was the aim of this research. Organizational system of the Russian book science was analyzed in three levels: book science institutions, book science conferences and book science press. Despite the method of analysis used, there was no attempt to separate mechanically the elements of the research since due to their close interaction a completely isolated (at least in the first stage of the research) research would have been neither effective nor probably generally possible. Due to the limited size of the paper and broadness of the topic only the most notable and the most significant moments of organization of the Russian book science are presented. Besides, the emphasis on autonomy of the book science as such pushed the organizational status of bibliography and librarianship, which are gaining greater and greater independence in the latter years, beyond the scope of the research. In order to reach the aim the following tasks were formulated: 1. to find out the most important institutions, events (conferences) and the state of the press of the Russian book science in the 20th century; 2. to show the change of the general level of the Russian book science organization in the 20th century, to distinguish between its stages of development, more prominent tendencies and the causes of changes; 3. to show the significance of manifestations of science organization to the general development of the book science; 4. to check the hypothesis about analytical (individual) and synthesized (general) research of the distinguished levels of science organization as a means for revealing the development of the Russian book science in the 20th century. The following general scientific and theoretical methods of research were used: analysis, synthesis, bibliographic and comparative (comparative – historical, comparative analysis). The researched showed that organizational system of the book science being the most public, human factor and practice related side of the science has always reacted sensitively to political-economical factors and was under their influence. Moreover, it was proved that each individual level of the book science organization and especially their synthesized research reflects the general development of the Russian book science and corresponds to its traditional periodization. On the one hand, this fact proved the hypothesis raised at the beginning of the research and, on the other hand, it undoubtedly pointed to the fact that the scholarly organizational aspect was one of the most important and strongest arguments in determining chronological boundaries of the stages of development of the Russian book science in the 20th century.

An important role in the formation of modern Lithuanian society was played by pharmacists who at the beginning of the 20th century were one of the most numerous parts of Lithuanian intelligentsia. They chose a job in a pharmacy not as a mission of life but due to political, social, and economic reasons. The majority of pharmacists were children of peasants who had refused to obey their parents and study in the seminary of priests. Those people who had been ousted from gymnasiums because of an anticzarist activity or those who had not finished school due to the lack of money also became pharmacists. Young men who had chosen a way of self-support left to the biggest cities of Russia and started the practice of an apprentice in a pharmacy. Later, they took examinations to become an assistant of a pharmacist, and after two years of studies at university, they took examinations of a pharmacist at last. Having got a diploma, they usually did not return to their motherland because there was a large network of pharmacies; thus, business conditions were harder, of course. They established pharmacies in various provinces of Russia most often, and it is supposed that only 10% of Lithuanian pharmacists worked in their native country. Living and working in a Russian environment, however, they enshrined national patriotic ideas, were active participants in social activities, published a Lithuanian professional newspaper "Farmaceutų reikalai" (translation, "Matters of pharmacists"), and attempted to unite all Lithuanians living in czarist Russia to struggle against denationalization, to encourage people to return to their motherland, and to work for its good. This article deals with the path for a career of Lithuanian pharmacists in czarist Russia and their national patriotic activity.

An important role in the formation of modern Lithuanian society was played by pharmacists who at the beginning of the 20th century were one of the most numerous parts of Lithuanian intelligentsia. They chose a job in a pharmacy not as a mission of life but due to political, social, and economic reasons. The majority of pharmacists were children of peasants who had refused to obey their parents and study in the seminary of priests. Those people who had been ousted from gymnasiums because of an anticzarist activity or those who had not finished school due to the lack of money also became pharmacists. Young men who had chosen a way of self-support left to the biggest cities of Russia and started the practice of an apprentice in a pharmacy. Later, they took examinations to become an assistant of a pharmacist, and after two years of studies at university, they took examinations of a pharmacist at last. Having got a diploma, they usually did not return to their motherland because there was a large network of pharmacies; thus, business conditions were harder, of course. They established pharmacies in various provinces of Russia most often, and it is supposed that only 10% of Lithuanian pharmacists worked in their native country. Living and working in a Russian environment, however, they enshrined national patriotic ideas, were active participants in social activities, published a Lithuanian professional newspaper "Farmaceutų reikalai" (translation, "Matters of pharmacists"), and attempted to unite all Lithuanians living in czarist Russia to struggle against denationalization, to encourage people to return to their motherland, and to work for its good. This article deals with the path for a career of Lithuanian pharmacists in czarist Russia and their national patriotic activity.

The master thesis "Reform of the Civil Procedure law in Russia 1990 – 2010" is aimed at analysing the assumptions for the civil procedure law reform, identifying the steps according to which the reform has been carried out, their trends and essential features. Even before the entry into force of the Code of Civil Procedure of Russian Federation, major changes and additions were made in the Code of Civil Procedure that was in force in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. After entry into force of the Code of Civil Procedure of Russian Federation became effective in 2003, the law reform of the civil procedure is continued in accordance with the concept mixed (liberal civil procedure law and schools of the social civil law). Despite the fact that the Russians are a form of civil procedure extended through several stages, the differentiation of the forms of procedure was established, disposition and adversarial principles were developed, there was an active court and the activation of the parties – these are the main trends according to which the reform was carried out. The paper attempts to assess the legislator's position, based on the analysis only got at, as well as to highlight the assumed problems.

The master thesis "Reform of the Civil Procedure law in Russia 1990 – 2010" is aimed at analysing the assumptions for the civil procedure law reform, identifying the steps according to which the reform has been carried out, their trends and essential features. Even before the entry into force of the Code of Civil Procedure of Russian Federation, major changes and additions were made in the Code of Civil Procedure that was in force in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. After entry into force of the Code of Civil Procedure of Russian Federation became effective in 2003, the law reform of the civil procedure is continued in accordance with the concept mixed (liberal civil procedure law and schools of the social civil law). Despite the fact that the Russians are a form of civil procedure extended through several stages, the differentiation of the forms of procedure was established, disposition and adversarial principles were developed, there was an active court and the activation of the parties – these are the main trends according to which the reform was carried out. The paper attempts to assess the legislator's position, based on the analysis only got at, as well as to highlight the assumed problems.

In solving the problem of preserving its sovereignty and assurances of connection with Kaliningrad, Moscow turned that Oblast into a geopolitical hostage - a territory that it received as the spoils of war in the process of cession whereby it is sought not only to maintain (the internal aspect) but also to force other countries or international institutions to carry out or abstain from carrying out any act as direct or indirect liberation of the hostage (the external aspect). Due to the specific situation of the Kaliningrad Oblast (the Potsdam train, geographical position, social-economic factors) it is the interior aspect that might be of more significance to Moscow, which is officially "covered" by the exterior one. Formally Moscow does not oppose, and even encourages that the Kaliningrad Oblast should be treated as a specific, unique region of Russia. However, in practice it does not allow this peculiarity to manifest itself. In this way it seeks to stimulate and maintain the Stockholm syndrome in the Oblast - the residents of Kaliningrad themselves must put up with the status of an ordinary Russian region. In the article are presented concrete cases revealing how this mechanism of a Russian hostage functions in political practice: by involving the Kaliningrad exclave into the "high politics" to create the air of its peculiarity, and at the level of the "low politics, though keeping alive hopes of peculiarity in the exclave, by preventing them from being realised in. [to full text]

In solving the problem of preserving its sovereignty and assurances of connection with Kaliningrad, Moscow turned that Oblast into a geopolitical hostage - a territory that it received as the spoils of war in the process of cession whereby it is sought not only to maintain (the internal aspect) but also to force other countries or international institutions to carry out or abstain from carrying out any act as direct or indirect liberation of the hostage (the external aspect). Due to the specific situation of the Kaliningrad Oblast (the Potsdam train, geographical position, social-economic factors) it is the interior aspect that might be of more significance to Moscow, which is officially "covered" by the exterior one. Formally Moscow does not oppose, and even encourages that the Kaliningrad Oblast should be treated as a specific, unique region of Russia. However, in practice it does not allow this peculiarity to manifest itself. In this way it seeks to stimulate and maintain the Stockholm syndrome in the Oblast - the residents of Kaliningrad themselves must put up with the status of an ordinary Russian region. In the article are presented concrete cases revealing how this mechanism of a Russian hostage functions in political practice: by involving the Kaliningrad exclave into the "high politics" to create the air of its peculiarity, and at the level of the "low politics, though keeping alive hopes of peculiarity in the exclave, by preventing them from being realised in. [to full text]

In solving the problem of preserving its sovereignty and assurances of connection with Kaliningrad, Moscow turned that Oblast into a geopolitical hostage - a territory that it received as the spoils of war in the process of cession whereby it is sought not only to maintain (the internal aspect) but also to force other countries or international institutions to carry out or abstain from carrying out any act as direct or indirect liberation of the hostage (the external aspect). Due to the specific situation of the Kaliningrad Oblast (the Potsdam train, geographical position, social-economic factors) it is the interior aspect that might be of more significance to Moscow, which is officially "covered" by the exterior one. Formally Moscow does not oppose, and even encourages that the Kaliningrad Oblast should be treated as a specific, unique region of Russia. However, in practice it does not allow this peculiarity to manifest itself. In this way it seeks to stimulate and maintain the Stockholm syndrome in the Oblast - the residents of Kaliningrad themselves must put up with the status of an ordinary Russian region. In the article are presented concrete cases revealing how this mechanism of a Russian hostage functions in political practice: by involving the Kaliningrad exclave into the "high politics" to create the air of its peculiarity, and at the level of the "low politics, though keeping alive hopes of peculiarity in the exclave, by preventing them from being realised in. [to full text]

In solving the problem of preserving its sovereignty and assurances of connection with Kaliningrad, Moscow turned that Oblast into a geopolitical hostage - a territory that it received as the spoils of war in the process of cession whereby it is sought not only to maintain (the internal aspect) but also to force other countries or international institutions to carry out or abstain from carrying out any act as direct or indirect liberation of the hostage (the external aspect). Due to the specific situation of the Kaliningrad Oblast (the Potsdam train, geographical position, social-economic factors) it is the interior aspect that might be of more significance to Moscow, which is officially "covered" by the exterior one. Formally Moscow does not oppose, and even encourages that the Kaliningrad Oblast should be treated as a specific, unique region of Russia. However, in practice it does not allow this peculiarity to manifest itself. In this way it seeks to stimulate and maintain the Stockholm syndrome in the Oblast - the residents of Kaliningrad themselves must put up with the status of an ordinary Russian region. In the article are presented concrete cases revealing how this mechanism of a Russian hostage functions in political practice: by involving the Kaliningrad exclave into the "high politics" to create the air of its peculiarity, and at the level of the "low politics, though keeping alive hopes of peculiarity in the exclave, by preventing them from being realised in. [to full text]

Safety and Health Guarantees of Employees in Lithuania and Russia Summary Employee's safety and health guarantees, consolidated in the international law acts, Lithuanian Republic's law and Russian Federation's law sources, were studied/researched in the master's work. The aim of this work is to evaluate, traverse and sort out employee's safety and health guarantees in the international law sources of Lithuanian Republic and Russian Federation. The principal/key goals are to unfold and define the concept of employee's safety and health guarantee; to evaluate and sort out employee's safety and health guarantees in Lithuanian Republic and in Russian Federation; to evaluate and sort out employee's safety and health guarantees consolidated in the international law sources; to evaluate how employee safety and health guarantees differ and how they are alike in Lithuanian Republic and in Russian Federation; to traverse employee's safety and health guarantees ensuring institutions and their functions in the employee's safety and health field. In summarizing this final master's work it is necessary to note that employee's safety and health guarantees are fairly ensured in Lithuanian Republic's and Russian Federation's law system. Significance of these guarantees is seen in the fact that they are consolidated in the supreme national law acts of Lithuanian Republic's and Russian Federation's constitutions, in this way ascribing them to constitutional. It is possible to draw inferences from traversing employee's safety and health guarantees that: 1. It is possible to define the concept of employee's safety and health guarantee as: employee's safety and health guarantee is the system of appropriate (juridical, economical, etc.) conditions, means, methods, manners and principles, which provides for each and all equal possibilities to implement their rights and liberties in the employee's safety and health field. 2. It is possible to sort out the kinds of employee's safety and health guarantees in Lithuanian Republic and Russian Federation according to: a) kinds of safety and health guarantees according to in what law sources they are consolidated (countries' constitutions, international law acts, work codes, legislations, sublegislative law acts); b) safety and health guarantees according to what subjects they are being applied (guarantees are applied to individuals up to 18 years, disabled people, pregnant women, recently given birth and breastfeeding mothers); c) social, economical, and organizational employee's safety and health guarantees. 3. National and independent guarantee ensuring subjects are participating in the securing of employee's safety and health guarantees. The Executive Branch institutions navigating the control of safety and health at work place are ascribed to the national safety and health guarantees ensuring subjects. Labor unions and their established regulatory institutions navigating the social control of safety and health at work place are ascribed to the independent subjects.