In our paper we present a corpus of transcribed Lithuanian parliamentary speeches. The corpus is prepared in a specific format, appropriate for different authorship identification tasks. The corpus consists of approximately 111 thousand texts (24 million words). Each text matches one parliamentary speech produced during an ordinary session from the period of 7 parliamentary terms starting on March 10, 1990 and ending on December 23, 2013. The texts are grouped into 147 categories corresponding to individual authors, therefore they can be used for authorship attribution tasks; besides, these texts are also grouped according to age, gender and political views, therefore they are also suitable for author profiling tasks. Whereas short texts complicate recognition of author speaking style and are ambiguous in relation to the style of other authors, we incorporated only texts containing not less than 100 words into the corpus. In order to make each category as comprehensive and representative as possible, we included only those authors, who produced speeches at least 200 times. All the texts are lemmatized, morphologically and syntactically annotated, tokenized into the character n-grams. The statistical information of the corpus is also available. We have also demonstrated that the created corpus can be effectively used in authorship attribution and author profiling tasks with supervised machine learning methods. The corpus structure also allows using it with unsupervised machine learning methods and can be used for creation of rule-based methods, as well as in different linguistic analyses.
In our paper we present a corpus of transcribed Lithuanian parliamentary speeches. The corpus is prepared in a specific format, appropriate for different authorship identification tasks. The corpus consists of approximately 111 thousand texts (24 million words). Each text matches one parliamentary speech produced during an ordinary session from the period of 7 parliamentary terms starting on March 10, 1990 and ending on December 23, 2013. The texts are grouped into 147 categories corresponding to individual authors, therefore they can be used for authorship attribution tasks; besides, these texts are also grouped according to age, gender and political views, therefore they are also suitable for author profiling tasks. Whereas short texts complicate recognition of author speaking style and are ambiguous in relation to the style of other authors, we incorporated only texts containing not less than 100 words into the corpus. In order to make each category as comprehensive and representative as possible, we included only those authors, who produced speeches at least 200 times. All the texts are lemmatized, morphologically and syntactically annotated, tokenized into the character n-grams. The statistical information of the corpus is also available. We have also demonstrated that the created corpus can be effectively used in authorship attribution and author profiling tasks with supervised machine learning methods. The corpus structure also allows using it with unsupervised machine learning methods and can be used for creation of rule-based methods, as well as in different linguistic analyses.
In our paper we present a corpus of transcribed Lithuanian parliamentary speeches. The corpus is prepared in a specific format, appropriate for different authorship identification tasks. The corpus consists of approximately 111 thousand texts (24 million words). Each text matches one parliamentary speech produced during an ordinary session from the period of 7 parliamentary terms starting on March 10, 1990 and ending on December 23, 2013. The texts are grouped into 147 categories corresponding to individual authors, therefore they can be used for authorship attribution tasks; besides, these texts are also grouped according to age, gender and political views, therefore they are also suitable for author profiling tasks. Whereas short texts complicate recognition of author speaking style and are ambiguous in relation to the style of other authors, we incorporated only texts containing not less than 100 words into the corpus. In order to make each category as comprehensive and representative as possible, we included only those authors, who produced speeches at least 200 times. All the texts are lemmatized, morphologically and syntactically annotated, tokenized into the character n-grams. The statistical information of the corpus is also available. We have also demonstrated that the created corpus can be effectively used in authorship attribution and author profiling tasks with supervised machine learning methods. The corpus structure also allows using it with unsupervised machine learning methods and can be used for creation of rule-based methods, as well as in different linguistic analyses.
In our paper we present a corpus of transcribed Lithuanian parliamentary speeches. The corpus is prepared in a specific format, appropriate for different authorship identification tasks. The corpus consists of approximately 111 thousand texts (24 million words). Each text matches one parliamentary speech produced during an ordinary session from the period of 7 parliamentary terms starting on March 10, 1990 and ending on December 23, 2013. The texts are grouped into 147 categories corresponding to individual authors, therefore they can be used for authorship attribution tasks; besides, these texts are also grouped according to age, gender and political views, therefore they are also suitable for author profiling tasks. Whereas short texts complicate recognition of author speaking style and are ambiguous in relation to the style of other authors, we incorporated only texts containing not less than 100 words into the corpus. In order to make each category as comprehensive and representative as possible, we included only those authors, who produced speeches at least 200 times. All the texts are lemmatized, morphologically and syntactically annotated, tokenized into the character n-grams. The statistical information of the corpus is also available. We have also demonstrated that the created corpus can be effectively used in authorship attribution and author profiling tasks with supervised machine learning methods. The corpus structure also allows using it with unsupervised machine learning methods and can be used for creation of rule-based methods, as well as in different linguistic analyses.
In our paper we present a corpus of transcribed Lithuanian parliamentary speeches. The corpus is prepared in a specific format, appropriate for different authorship identification tasks. The corpus consists of approximately 111 thousand texts (24 million words). Each text matches one parliamentary speech produced during an ordinary session from the period of 7 parliamentary terms starting on March 10, 1990 and ending on December 23, 2013. The texts are grouped into 147 categories corresponding to individual authors, therefore they can be used for authorship attribution tasks; besides, these texts are also grouped according to age, gender and political views, therefore they are also suitable for author profiling tasks. Whereas short texts complicate recognition of author speaking style and are ambiguous in relation to the style of other authors, we incorporated only texts containing not less than 100 words into the corpus. In order to make each category as comprehensive and representative as possible, we included only those authors, who produced speeches at least 200 times. All the texts are lemmatized, morphologically and syntactically annotated, tokenized into the character n-grams. The statistical information of the corpus is also available. We have also demonstrated that the created corpus can be effectively used in authorship attribution and author profiling tasks with supervised machine learning methods. The corpus structure also allows using it with unsupervised machine learning methods and can be used for creation of rule-based methods, as well as in different linguistic analyses.
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.
Summary The object of the master thesis paper is the political attitudes and activities of Bronys Raila who was a famous Lithuanian intellectual, former third front line solder who joined the left–wing campus after the World War II, during the 4th decade of the 20th century. This theme has not received any attention from the researchers of historiography yet. The research has been conducted on the basis of vast historical resources. After it has been conducted, it emerged that Bronys Raila was a controversial personality of Lithuanian history of the 20th century who had not any clear ideological attitudes and who was distinguished by his radical views and activities, especially during the 4th decade of the mentioned century. Early in life, Bronys Raila was influenced by the leftist ideas and, for some time, he collaborated in the social–democratic press; further, during the period of 1930 and 1931, he worked in the journal "Trečiasis frontas" (The Third Front) of the leftist procommunist Lithuanian writers. He was one of its ideological leaders, which he himself never fancied to admit. After the Lithuanian government prohibited its printing, the third front line solders dispersed. However, Bronys Raila's retreat was influenced not by his ideological motives but by the external factors. The most influential ones were the severe critic of the Lithuanian communist party towards the third front line solders, constant attacks (even curses) of Bronys Raila in the communist press, which influenced Bronys Raila's backslide from the "left–wing" and presumably from the evolution to the communist regime. It is fairly important to note that Bronys Raila could no longer publish after "Trečiasis frontas" was closed. After he joined the nationalists, Bronys Raila became a severe opponent of his former congenial, the leftists. He constantly criticized his former friends in the nationalist press. A true critical action took place in 1936 when Bronys Raila openly and ruthlessly criticized the leftist journal "Literatūra" (Literature), the very core of which consisted of the third front line solders. At the age of twenty seven, in several articles, Bronys Raila openly criticized its editor Vincas Krėvė and accused its employees of the propaganda of cultural bolshevist ideas in Lithuania. In this case, he was unerring. As he was in the Lithuanian Nationalist League, he was perpetually publishing, collaborated in several periodical nationalist publications simultaneously, and worked in the state radio. During the short period in the 4th decade, Bronys Raila became one of the ideological leaders of nationalists. The future minister of pro–German LAF propaganda, in the middle of the 4th decade, Bronys Raila was incredulous at the social, economical achievements of Nazi Germany and the very ideology of National Socialism due to the openly demonstrated expansionism of Germany. However, at the end of the mentioned decade, the Nazi state order became appropriate for him due to the implementation of the "stepped–up nationalism" in Lithuania. In the middle of the 4th decade and during its second half, the reflections of Bronys Raila on the political order disclosed his sympathies solely to the national state that was ruled by a strong, dynamic and strict power. According to him, the power of the authoritarian regime of Antanas Smetona was a "mild one". Bronys Raila's sympathies to the cult of a leader and the total execution of opposition were enhanced by the establishment of total regimes in Europe at the end of the decade. At this time, his articles reflected the ideal of the "Lithuanian Lithuania" that excluded Poles, Germans and Jews as its full citizens.
Summary The object of the master thesis paper is the political attitudes and activities of Bronys Raila who was a famous Lithuanian intellectual, former third front line solder who joined the left–wing campus after the World War II, during the 4th decade of the 20th century. This theme has not received any attention from the researchers of historiography yet. The research has been conducted on the basis of vast historical resources. After it has been conducted, it emerged that Bronys Raila was a controversial personality of Lithuanian history of the 20th century who had not any clear ideological attitudes and who was distinguished by his radical views and activities, especially during the 4th decade of the mentioned century. Early in life, Bronys Raila was influenced by the leftist ideas and, for some time, he collaborated in the social–democratic press; further, during the period of 1930 and 1931, he worked in the journal "Trečiasis frontas" (The Third Front) of the leftist procommunist Lithuanian writers. He was one of its ideological leaders, which he himself never fancied to admit. After the Lithuanian government prohibited its printing, the third front line solders dispersed. However, Bronys Raila's retreat was influenced not by his ideological motives but by the external factors. The most influential ones were the severe critic of the Lithuanian communist party towards the third front line solders, constant attacks (even curses) of Bronys Raila in the communist press, which influenced Bronys Raila's backslide from the "left–wing" and presumably from the evolution to the communist regime. It is fairly important to note that Bronys Raila could no longer publish after "Trečiasis frontas" was closed. After he joined the nationalists, Bronys Raila became a severe opponent of his former congenial, the leftists. He constantly criticized his former friends in the nationalist press. A true critical action took place in 1936 when Bronys Raila openly and ruthlessly criticized the leftist journal "Literatūra" (Literature), the very core of which consisted of the third front line solders. At the age of twenty seven, in several articles, Bronys Raila openly criticized its editor Vincas Krėvė and accused its employees of the propaganda of cultural bolshevist ideas in Lithuania. In this case, he was unerring. As he was in the Lithuanian Nationalist League, he was perpetually publishing, collaborated in several periodical nationalist publications simultaneously, and worked in the state radio. During the short period in the 4th decade, Bronys Raila became one of the ideological leaders of nationalists. The future minister of pro–German LAF propaganda, in the middle of the 4th decade, Bronys Raila was incredulous at the social, economical achievements of Nazi Germany and the very ideology of National Socialism due to the openly demonstrated expansionism of Germany. However, at the end of the mentioned decade, the Nazi state order became appropriate for him due to the implementation of the "stepped–up nationalism" in Lithuania. In the middle of the 4th decade and during its second half, the reflections of Bronys Raila on the political order disclosed his sympathies solely to the national state that was ruled by a strong, dynamic and strict power. According to him, the power of the authoritarian regime of Antanas Smetona was a "mild one". Bronys Raila's sympathies to the cult of a leader and the total execution of opposition were enhanced by the establishment of total regimes in Europe at the end of the decade. At this time, his articles reflected the ideal of the "Lithuanian Lithuania" that excluded Poles, Germans and Jews as its full citizens.
This article analyses one element of corpus delicti of misappropriation of authorship, criminalised in Lithuanian Criminal Code Article 191 – the object (or the protected good) of a crime. The quality of Lithuanian national regulation and the scope of object of misappropriation of authorship, which affects the qualification of the crime, is evaluated by comparing it with other European Union countries' criminal legal regulation of intellectual property.
This article analyses one element of corpus delicti of misappropriation of authorship, criminalised in Lithuanian Criminal Code Article 191 – the object (or the protected good) of a crime. The quality of Lithuanian national regulation and the scope of object of misappropriation of authorship, which affects the qualification of the crime, is evaluated by comparing it with other European Union countries' criminal legal regulation of intellectual property.
This article analyses one element of corpus delicti of misappropriation of authorship, criminalised in Lithuanian Criminal Code Article 191 – the object (or the protected good) of a crime. The quality of Lithuanian national regulation and the scope of object of misappropriation of authorship, which affects the qualification of the crime, is evaluated by comparing it with other European Union countries' criminal legal regulation of intellectual property.
This article analyses one element of corpus delicti of misappropriation of authorship, criminalised in Lithuanian Criminal Code Article 191 – the object (or the protected good) of a crime. The quality of Lithuanian national regulation and the scope of object of misappropriation of authorship, which affects the qualification of the crime, is evaluated by comparing it with other European Union countries' criminal legal regulation of intellectual property.
