Suchergebnisse

L'absent a toujours tort. A fortiori s'il rate la révolution qui chante dans son pays, quitté pour le Nouveau Monde. Abdallah Benadouda tente, avec un brin de mauvaise foi, de faire mentir l'adage en livrant une ode à son pays et à son peuple et rétablit ainsi la voix de l'absent qui n'en croit pas ses yeux face au surgissement du monde nouveau.

The article discusses the discourse on the methodological foundations of political science research and the need to outline the existing paradigms of political science research, both in the temporal-retrospective dimension and in the dimension of the subject area. It is emphasized that the determinants of defining the value of paradigm in modern political science research is the prospect of acquiring scientific novelty at the stage of determining the research topic. The focus is on the need for a more thorough consideration of specific paradigmatic means of determining the methodological design of contemporary political science research. It is noted that on the basis of linguistic analysis of subject aspects of political science, one can easily see the multivariate interpretation of many essential concepts of the modern political sphere. It is argued that one can also see expansive interpretations of particular concepts and processes from a non-professional perspective. The importance of interdisciplinary natural science paradigms has been established. Attention is paid to identifying the possibility of forming a new conceptual apparatus, taking into account the concepts that have become widespread in the scientific environment. The role of the concept of "paradigm approach in modern political science" is revealed, which is aimed at understanding the peculiarities of considering political science subject within other scientific disciplines. It is proved that the leading task of paradigm as a discipline of political science is the formation of paradigmatic choice of young researcher. The peculiarities of searching for a scientist's own «paradigm face» have been found. The ability to use the task of defining scientific novelty is emphasized to some extent. The specificity of choosing a paradigm vector of a researcher-political scientist with consideration of the requirements of interdisciplinarity is considered. The purpose of the article is to identify paradigm in political studies as a factor in the formation of authorial conceptualism against the backdrop of interdisciplinary imperatives. The purpose of the article is to highlight the main directions of paradigm and their correlation with modern political theories. It is proved that the choice of the paradigm vector of the researcher-political scientist is confronted with interdisciplinary, first of all philosophical meanings of cognition as a form of social activity. The idea that choosing one's own paraligmal vector for a specialist political scientist is presented is important because of the need to overcome the Soviet and post-Soviet paradigmatic provinces. It turned out that the formation of the national paradigm of political science, which should be carried out only on condition that the fullest representation of all paradigm directions. The situation of paradigm choices and orientation of political scientist researcher in the world paradigm mainstream is revealed. The necessity of finding a researcher in the environment of those paradigms that give the most significant scientific result is proved. The article establishes that the combination of the universality of interdisciplinary paradigms and the optionality of paradigms for a particular political science study is carried out on the basis of a conceptual and categorical apparatus of political epistemology. It is argued that on the basis of the notion of "scientific truth (episteme)", the formation of the author's own attitude to the subject of research and the prospect of solving his problem is carried out.

This article argues that Michel Houellebecq is an écrivain médiatique, and it examines how and why he engages in an authorial strategy that relies on more than the text and presents the author as a visible, multimedia, and culturally relevant figure. From an epistemological need to reassess authorship in the digital age, this article defines media authorship before analysing Houellebecq through a critical framework including Meizoz's concept of posturing (2007), Saint-Gelais's transmediality (2011) and Angenot's social discourse (1989). It addresses how Houellebecq attempts to situate and justify his media-focused and author-centric strategy, showing how this reflects the challenges of the cultural domination of mass media and new technologies of the digital age, and indicates that the autonomy of the literary field is diminishing. This article shows how a superficially transgressive engagement with the media and multimedia in fact reflects consent to the dynamics of the contemporary socio-cultural context.

The article discusses the issues of conducting authorship diagnostic studies in order to identify the gender of the anonymous text author. The concept of gender is considered as a conventional social construct, comprising the ideas about culturally conditioned model of masculinity or femininity, which are currently accepted by Russian society. The corpus of more than 1 000 written texts of mainly political discourse, written by people with different gender affiliations, serves as the material that enables to justify the possibility of application quantitative analysis method, based on frequency characteristics of semantically independent words, belonging to lexical-and-grammatical classes of words: pronouns, particles, prepositions, conjunctions and parenthesis. The method under consideration is aimed at identification and analyzing unevident implied signs, which can't be revealed whilst superficial analysis. Frequent, persistent occurrence of these signs in the texts of political discourse enables to regard them as highly informative quantitative characteristics of written speech of the authors belonging to different gender groups. It is stated, the results of application the quantitative model of author's gender identification,
represented in the paper, are more reliable if they are used in combination with traditional linguistic model, which presupposes the analysis of linguistic, speech, textual, semantic, psycholinguistic and social characteristics of texts. The article outlines the prospects of speech diagnostics of a person on the basis of gender for the development of author's forensic examination.

This article is a record of a discussion concerning Dominika Macocha's video-sculptural installation 50°31'29.7"N 22°46'39.1"E, 50°30'56.2"N 22°46'01.0"E, 50°30'41.0"N 22°45'49.5"E. The work deals with the uses of discourse and landscapes in mechanisms of camouflaging the crimes perpetrated on Jews by Poles during the Holocaust. The author lays bare and deconstructs these mechanisms – above all the mechanisms of narrative fetishism of production of artificial landscape – drawing on examples from Biłgoraj county. In the course of the discussion, the work inspired a critical reassessment of the categories dominating the ways in which the Holocaust is currently described: (1) Martin Pollack's category of contaminated landscapes, rooted in the ideology of two totalitarianisms; (2) the category of the witness / bystander, which conceals the observers' participation in the scenario of the crime; and (3) the category of taboo, which is ambivalent considering the universal knowledge on the part of local communities about what happened to Jews from their localities. Reflection on the production of taboo leads the discussants to deliberate on the status of Jewish sources in the field of Holocaust studies. Collected since as early as the 1940s, and containing ample and detailed information about Polish crimes perpetrated on Jews, they are nevertheless not recognised as sources by Polish historians. The conversation is concluded by an attempt at recapitulating the present condition of Polish historiography in the light of the postulated new approach to sources.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The name of the 2nd author was incorrectly presented. The correct name of the 2nd author is "Oranuch Pruetipibultham."