This article analyses the latest archaeographical research in the field of Lithuanian Tatar written manuscript heritage. The author gives her answer to the question: was the work of fixing, collecting and description of Lithuanian Tatar manuscripts purposeful. The main emphasis is put on the work stage and its specific character. Archaeography has not always fulfilled tasks equally throughout different historical periods starting with Lithuanian Tatar written language presentation to wide academic society (Fleischer 1838, Muchlinskij 1858) and up to nowadays. While catalogization of manuscripts existed (1935, 1961, 1968, 1997, 2000 and 2003), it was not purposeful since "field archaeography" had been omitted. The publication of complete texts was ascribed to episodical (2000, 2001). Urgency of catalogization and description of manuscripts was based on changes of the situation inside society and also outside it. Nowadays manuscripts in Tatar families are rarity. Because the social and political situation has changed, the approach to this treasury is weakly controlled. Purposeful archaeographical research could assist in saving Lithuanian Tatar cultural heritage and also to analyse it from many perspectives.
This article analyses the latest archaeographical research in the field of Lithuanian Tatar written manuscript heritage. The author gives her answer to the question: was the work of fixing, collecting and description of Lithuanian Tatar manuscripts purposeful. The main emphasis is put on the work stage and its specific character. Archaeography has not always fulfilled tasks equally throughout different historical periods starting with Lithuanian Tatar written language presentation to wide academic society (Fleischer 1838, Muchlinskij 1858) and up to nowadays. While catalogization of manuscripts existed (1935, 1961, 1968, 1997, 2000 and 2003), it was not purposeful since "field archaeography" had been omitted. The publication of complete texts was ascribed to episodical (2000, 2001). Urgency of catalogization and description of manuscripts was based on changes of the situation inside society and also outside it. Nowadays manuscripts in Tatar families are rarity. Because the social and political situation has changed, the approach to this treasury is weakly controlled. Purposeful archaeographical research could assist in saving Lithuanian Tatar cultural heritage and also to analyse it from many perspectives.
This article analyses the latest archaeographical research in the field of Lithuanian Tatar written manuscript heritage. The author gives her answer to the question: was the work of fixing, collecting and description of Lithuanian Tatar manuscripts purposeful. The main emphasis is put on the work stage and its specific character. Archaeography has not always fulfilled tasks equally throughout different historical periods starting with Lithuanian Tatar written language presentation to wide academic society (Fleischer 1838, Muchlinskij 1858) and up to nowadays. While catalogization of manuscripts existed (1935, 1961, 1968, 1997, 2000 and 2003), it was not purposeful since "field archaeography" had been omitted. The publication of complete texts was ascribed to episodical (2000, 2001). Urgency of catalogization and description of manuscripts was based on changes of the situation inside society and also outside it. Nowadays manuscripts in Tatar families are rarity. Because the social and political situation has changed, the approach to this treasury is weakly controlled. Purposeful archaeographical research could assist in saving Lithuanian Tatar cultural heritage and also to analyse it from many perspectives.
This article analyses the latest archaeographical research in the field of Lithuanian Tatar written manuscript heritage. The author gives her answer to the question: was the work of fixing, collecting and description of Lithuanian Tatar manuscripts purposeful. The main emphasis is put on the work stage and its specific character. Archaeography has not always fulfilled tasks equally throughout different historical periods starting with Lithuanian Tatar written language presentation to wide academic society (Fleischer 1838, Muchlinskij 1858) and up to nowadays. While catalogization of manuscripts existed (1935, 1961, 1968, 1997, 2000 and 2003), it was not purposeful since "field archaeography" had been omitted. The publication of complete texts was ascribed to episodical (2000, 2001). Urgency of catalogization and description of manuscripts was based on changes of the situation inside society and also outside it. Nowadays manuscripts in Tatar families are rarity. Because the social and political situation has changed, the approach to this treasury is weakly controlled. Purposeful archaeographical research could assist in saving Lithuanian Tatar cultural heritage and also to analyse it from many perspectives.
This article analyses the latest archaeographical research in the field of Lithuanian Tatar written manuscript heritage. The author gives her answer to the question: was the work of fixing, collecting and description of Lithuanian Tatar manuscripts purposeful. The main emphasis is put on the work stage and its specific character.Archaeography has not always fulfilled tasks equally throughout different historical periods starting with Lithuanian Tatar written language presentation to wide academic society (Fleischer 1838, Muchlinskij 1858) and up to nowadays. While catalogization of manuscripts existed (1935, 1961, 1968, 1997, 2000 and 2003), it was not purposeful since "field archaeography" had been omitted. The publication of complete texts was ascribed to episodical (2000, 2001).Urgency of catalogization and description of manuscripts was based on changes of the situation inside society and also outside it. Nowadays manuscripts in Tatar families are rarity. Because the social and political situation has changed, the approach to this treasury is weakly controlled. Purposeful archaeographical research could assist in saving Lithuanian Tatar cultural heritage and also to analyse it from many perspectives. ; В статье рассматриваются проблемы археографических исследований в области татаристики. Автор ставит перед собой цель определить этапы и специфику подобных исследований с момента открытия памятников письменной культуры литовских татар.
The article analyzes the basic provisions of the draft federal law "On science, technology and innovation activities in the Russian Federation" related to research and innovation infrastructure. The author presents a comparative analysis of the draft law and the norms of the current federal legislation and other normative acts regulating research and innovation infrastructure. The main methods of the research are comparative, technical, analytical and descriptive. In comparison with the current laws, the draft law gives a fuller description of the research infrastructure, in particular, the definitions of its main objects and components (research equipment, scientific collection, unique scientific installation, core facility, megascience installation, fund to support science, etc.). However, there is still no systematic approach to the issue: the draft law doesn't contain neither the definitions of the research infrastructure and its structural features, nor the precise formulation of the relationship between research and innovation infrastructure. All these gaps don't allow obtaining a single interpretation of the research infrastructure, and is a significant disadvantage of the bill. In its further development, the author also recommends taking into account the foreign experience, especially in regulating scientific collections. For example, it is necessary to consider enshrining scientific collections as bioresource centers to provide an opportunity for their subsequent integration with international databases. The article considers the novel about the core facility as an independent legal entity. In addition, the need for creation of the Registry of core shared research facilities, which is stated in the bill, is questionable, given that the web-portal "Research infrastructure of the Russian Federation" (http://ckp-rf.ru) has been successfully operating since 2011. The latest contains information not only about the core facilities, but also unique scientific installations, as well as the results of their ...
The paper discusses the prospects for connecting the universities to use Mega- Science research facilities as an important tool for the integration of world level science and education. The need for such integration of leading universities with research organizations was noted in the RF Government Decision of 19 June 2015 on the results of the joint meeting of the boards of trustees of the Southern and Siberian Federal University. ; Описаны перспективы подключения вузов к использованию научно-исследовательских установок мега-класса, которые являются важнейшим инструментом интеграции науки и образования мирового уровня. Необходимость подобной интеграции ведущих университетов с научными организациями была отмечена в решении Правительства Российской Федерации 19 июня 2015 г. по итогам совместного заседания попечительских советов Южного и Сибирского федеральных университетов.
Секция 2. Методологический потенциал современной философии ; Рассматривается взаимосвязь философии и социально-гуманитарных наук в двух основных аспектах. Диахронических аспект характеризует особенности становления и развития наук об обществе и статусе человека в нем, начиная с XVII века. Характеризуется специфика и проблемное поле четырех основных этапов в развитии обществознания – классический этап, этап институционализации социально-гуманитарных наук, этапы неклассического и современного постнеклассического обществознания. Синхронический (функциональный) аспект анализа темы предполагает экспликацию взаимодействия философии и социальных наук на основе существования у них взаимного прагматического интереса. Он осуществляется в трех ракурсах, Во-первых, существования исследовательских программ в обществознании, во-вторых, существования междисциплинарных систем знания об обществе – политической, экономической и др. философии, в-третьих, координации тематических разделов в программах и практике преподавания этих дисциплин. ; The article discusses correlation between philosophy and social science in two principal aspects. Diachronic aspect characterizes the special features in evolution of the branch of sciences studying society and human from XVII century. The specificity and problematic area of four main stages in history of social science is characterized (including classic stage, stage of social science institutionalization, stages of non-classic and post-non-classic social science). Synchronic (functional) aspect explicates the cooperation between philosophy and social science because of mutual pragmatic interest. It reveals in three ways: in research programs in social science; in cross-disciplinary systems of social knowledge such as political, economic philosophy, etc.; in coordination of thematic parts in programmes and practice of teaching of these courses.
Research is one of the fundamental bases of university teaching. The contemporary university operates as a learning, scientific and practical complex which connects and harmonizes learning (knowledge transfer), scientific (systematization and generation of new knowledge) and practical (knowledge application) functions. The task of the teacher is to encourage the student to discover new heights in their profession, to teach them to construct research optimally and organizationally correctly and thereby not only to prepare a specialist needed by the country and the society, but also to educate a harmonious personality.Research in the broad sense is a system of measures which familiarizes a person with creative activities, contributes to professional skills development and forms a high level of intellectual, emotional, and social environment. Specific forms of research can be divided into two unequal blocks. The first is research work integrated in the learning process (workshop, report, abstract, etc.). The second is extracurricular activities (competitions, contests, work in student clubs, etc.). In the narrow sense, research process is an activity designed to build and prove hypotheses, as well as to form new approaches and concepts.The fundamental difference between scientific research and all other types and forms of research activity as seen by the author is its ability, and even duty, to penetrate deeper than superficial understanding of phenomena, which is not possible without the infatuation for the object of analysis, without imagination. So the answer to the question "What should any research work and scientific research in particular start with?" is obvious. It should start with interest, passion, desire to learn the unknown, to penetrate into hidden, deep and even secret causes of social phenomena. Only a passionate teacher is able to reveal and develop this interest in a student.The article provides methodological guidelines for the organization of the research work of the students of political science faculties. Emphasis is made on the disclosure of problem zones (hypothesis formulation, disclosure of the object and subject, concepts selection and so on) in writing a research paper, whether it is a term, graduation or master's paper. ; Исследовательская работа является одной из фундаментальных основ вузовского преподавания. Современный университет действует как учебно-научно-практический комплекс, соединяя и гармонизируя учебную (передача знаний), научную (систематизация и выработка новых знаний) и практическую (применение знаний) функции. Подвигнуть студента к открытию новых вершин в своей профессии, научить его оптимально и организационно верно выстраивать исследовательскую работу и тем самым не только подготовить нужного стране и обществу специалиста, но и воспитать гармоничную личность — задача преподавателя.Исследовательская работа в широком смысле есть система мероприятий, приобщающая к творческой деятельности, способствующая развитию профессиональных навыков и формирующая высокий уровень интеллектуальной, эмоциональной и социальной среды. Конкретные формы исследовательской работы можно разделить на два неравных блока. Первый — исследовательская работа, встроенная в учебный процесс (семинар, доклад, реферат и т. д.). Второй — внеучебная активность (олимпиады, конкурсы, работа в студенческих клубах и т. д.). В узком понимании исследовательский процесс — деятельность, предполагающая построение и доказательство гипотез, формирование новых подходов и концепций.Принципиальным отличием научного исследования от всех иных видов и форм исследовательской деятельности видится его способность и даже обязанность проникать глубже поверхностного понимания явлений, что невозможно без увлеченности предметом анализа, без воображения. Поэтому ответ на вопрос «С чего должна начинаться любая исследовательская работа, и научное исследование в частности?» — очевиден. Она должна начинаться с интереса, с увлеченности, с желания узнать неизведанное, проникнуть в скрытые, глубинные и даже тайные причины общественных явлений. Выявить и развить этот интерес у студента способен только увлеченный педагог.Статья содержит методические рекомендации по организации научно-исследовательской работы студентов-политологов. Акцент сделан на раскрытии проблемных зон (формулировка гипотезы, выявление объекта, предмета, выбор понятий и др.) написания научного исследования, будь то курсовая, диплом или магистерская работа.
Scientiic collaboration continues to increase in frequency and importance. It has the potential to solve complex scientiic problems. The relevance of the research is caused by the role of scientiic collaboration in scientiic and technological sphere. Scientiic collaboration can be deined as a science infrastructure and as a process of intellectual cooperation. The aim of the research is to construct the model of scientiic collaboration in Russian science and technology. This has been gained by solving the following research objectives: deinition of the term «scientiic collaboration», types of collaborations consideration, analysis of intellectual and research infrastructure cooperation methods which take place in Russian scientiic organizations. The main feature of this research is the particular methodology which is based on scientometrics, comparative analysis and scientiic modeling. Scientometrics was used for deining productive scientiic collaboration in Russia. Open sources of information about international and Russian scientiic collaboration, oficial websites of Russian Ministry of Education and Science and Russian Academy of Science, such databases as Russian Statistics Committee and Web of Science can be mentioned as main information resources of the research. Main results of theoretical and practical part of the research are the original authors` vision of the base of scientiic collaborations in formation Russia which meansan effective cooperation of three components: intellectual resources (scientists and research teams), infrastructure (which can provide scientists with regular access to research equipment) and government (as a main regulator). Moreover, it should be mentioned that the main productive development option for Russian scientiic collaboration is territory integration of intellectual resources and research infrastructure.
The paper focuses on structural analysis as a method of political research. The author attempts to demonstrate some features of this method distinguishing it from the American structural functionalism. At the same time, the use of discourse analysis method is explored, as well as the application of structuralist methodologies to the study of the phenomenon of political power. The author comes to the conclusion that using this method to investigate the the current political situation extends the methodological potential of political science as a branch of knowledge. ; Статья посвящена использованию структурного анализа применительно к исследованию политической проблематики. Автор пытается продемонстрировать отличительные характеристики данного метода от американского структурного функционализма. Вместе с тем, в данном исследовании происходит рассмотрение использования метода дискурс-анализа, а также применение структуралистской методологии к исследованию феномена политической власти. Автор приходит к выводам, что использование данного метода в исследовании современной политической ситуации расширяет методологический потенциал политологии как отрасли знания.
Цель данного исследования – сравнительный анализ мировых научных школ исследования феномена социального предпринимательства. Для достижения данной цели был проведен обзор англоязычных и отечественных научных статей, представленных в международных и российском индексах научного цитирования, в частности Scopus, WoS, eLIBRARY, а также отчетов международных и российских организации?, занимающихся исследованием и развитием данного вида деятельности. Методической базой исследования выступили методы анализа и синтеза, категоризации и систематизации. В результате проведенного анализа в статье описаны две основные традиции исследования социального предпринимательства – американская и европейская. Различия данных подходов связаны с особенностями исторического развития и, как следствие, сложившейся институциональной средой в европейских странах и США. В рамках данной традиции выявлено четыре научных школы, проведен их сравнительный анализ по следующим критериям: объект исследования, юридическая форма объектов социального предпринимательства, их инновационность, получение и распределение прибыли, а также форма управления. Представлены результаты исследования развития социального предпринимательства в России в рамках фонда «Наше будущее», специализирующегося на поддержке социального предпринимательства, российского законодательства и Центра социального предпринимательства и социальных инноваций НИУ «Высшая школа экономики». Данный анализ продемонстрировал существенное влияние американского подхода к определению сущности социального предпринимательства в российской практике. При этом отмечена перспективность развития данного вида деятельности при активной государственной поддержке, что соответствует европейской традиции. ; This study compares world research schools of social entrepreneurship. To achieve this goal, the authors analyzed papers presented in the Scopus and WoS databases; they also reviewed reports of international and Russian organizations engaged in social entrepreneurship, comparing foreign experience and the practice of social entrepreneurship development in the Russian economy. In the course of the study, the authors used a systematization method, which allowed identifying the main schools and centers for the study of social entrepreneurship, their features, and characteristics. This paper describes two main traditions of social entrepreneurship research: American and European. The differences in these approaches are associated with the peculiarities of historical development and, as a result, the prevailing institutional environment in European countries and the USA. Within the framework of this tradition, four research schools were identified. Their comparative analysis was carried out according to the following criteria: the object of study, the legal form of social entrepreneurship objects, their innovativeness, the receipt and distribution of profits, and the form of management. The results show the social entrepreneurship development in Russia within the framework of the Foundation «Our Future», specializing in supporting social entrepreneurship, Russian legislation, and the Center for Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovations of the Higher School of Economics. This analysis demonstrates the significant influence of the American approach to the definition of the essence of social entrepreneurship in Russian practice. At the same time, the outlook for the development of this type of activity was noted with active state support, which corresponds to the European tradition.
The paper reviews the monograph "Theory and Methods of Linguistic Analysis of Political Text" (execu-tive editor A.P. Chudinov, Ekaterinburg, 2016). The aim of the book under review is to determine the object, subject, theory and methodology of political linguistics, and its place among the interconnected disciplines. ; В статье представлена рецензия на монографию "Теория и методика лингвистического анализа политического текста", целью которой является определение методологии политической лингвистики и ее статуса в ряду смежных дисциплин.
The article is devoted to the peculiarities of the formal research methods in political science and the use of such methods in Russian comparative political and international studies, in particular at MGIMO-University. The author calls not to run to extremes when dealing with these methods, analyzing their advantages and limitations. ; Статья посвящена особенностям использования формализованных методов, а также их применения в российской политологической школе, в частности в МГИМО-Университете в сравнительных политических и международных исследованиях. Автор призывает к отказу от крайностей в отношении к данным методам, анализируя возможности и ограничения их использования.
Междисциплинарная научная конференция SGEM проводящийся с 2001 г. является одним из престижных научных международных мероприятий. В своей деятельности конференция SGEM охватывает 27 направлений различных сфер наук о земле. Организаторами и партнерами конференции является Болгарская академия наук. В прошлом году конференция SGEM существенно расширила научный диапазон, включив 15 направлений социальных наук и искусств: психологию, психиатрию, социологию, здравоохранение, образование, политические науки, право, финансы, экономика, туризм, антропологию, археологию, историю, философию, историю искусств, архитектуру и дизайн. Археологическая секция включала в себя рассмотрение целого комплекса проблем и направлений, включая методы полевых и камеральных исследований, виртуальную археологию, методы анализа древних технологий, археологическую теорию, интерпретацию, реконструкцию, классификацию и экспериментальную археологию. ; SGEM Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences were established in 2001 year with the main idea of focusing on the World's Scientific Elite in the most recent and innovative areas of Science. SGEM Conferences are well known and recognized as one of the most prestigious and with big impact factor events in the International Scientific World.SGEM Conferences. Until now it has been covering all areas of the Geosciences, with a total of 27 scientific fields. The Organizer of the conference is the Bulgarian academy of sciences. Last year SGEM Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences expanded its presence in the International Scientific World through the new Scientific Events - SGEM Conferences on Social Sciences, covering 15 scientific fields of Social Sciences and Arts - Psychology, Psychiatry, Sociology, Healthcare, Education, Political Sciences, Law, Finance, Economics, Tourism, Anthropology, Archaeology, History, Philosophy, History of Arts, Contemporary Arts, Performing & Visual Arts, Architecture, and Design. Archaeology includes resources on the study of material remains (such as fossils, relics, artifacts, and monuments) of past human life and activities. This section covers resources concerned with all aspects of archaeology including methods of detection and analysis: Methods and Theory in Archaeology (Remote Sensing, Field Survey, Excavation, Analysis, Virtual Archaeology etc.), Asia's Ancient Cultures and Civilizations, Ancient Technology (Methods, Techniques, Analyses and Approaches etc.), Archaeological Survey and Excavation (Buried Along with a Body, Domestic Setting, Votive Offerings, Hoards etc.), Archaeological Classification and Analysis, Archaeological Interpretation and Reconstruction (Theories, Global Scope, development, Experimental Archeology etc.).
