Suchergebnisse

The terms patrimonialism and neo-patrimonialism designate significantly different conceptual instruments. They are used to identify and interpret a range of phenomena. Using as a point of departure Weberian types of partimonial rule the author reconstructs the prototype of patrimonial order. Its key element is an inherent insight of mutual patrimony or patrimonium. It is both instrumental and essential common good that helps to keep together not only the rulers and the ruled but the entire patrimonial order. This and other morphological pattern of order are nothing but 'blueprints' for making conflicting desires of order come actual and real. Historical achievements and current practices provide a range of patrimonial hybrids and admixtures to political setups of all kinds. All those arrangements can be interpreted as metamorphoses of the prototype patrimonial order. The author particularly highlights the tripled knot of patrimonialism, bureaucracy and modernity in the current political practices. Conceptually coherent analysis of both functions and dysfunctions of patrimonialism helps to see the potential of patrimonial patterns of order in the ongoing political process. Insufficient and blurred conceptualization of patrimonialism let its dysfunctions loose and deprive us of abilities to overcome them.

The article reports on the progress of Russian research on globalization and equity. Building on Stain Roekan's classification of social cleavages, the author identifies several schools in Russian globalization studies. He then discusses how the distinctions of authority—people, church—state, land—industry, owners—workers, metropolis—colony, and network—hierarchy find their reflection in current Russian research. The article shows that Russian scholars have recently engaged in a series of discussions of globalization's equity criteria and their application to democratic governance, utilizing the world system's approach, civilization analysis, and the theory of Kondratieff's cycles.

Anton Zimmerling's interpretation of the discursive particle TI1 is an important achievement. The article considers possibilities used by Zimmerling to interpret TI1 as a dis­cursive particle, enclitic, part of speech and semantic sign. In addition, the article discusses its interpretation as a pragmatic marker. The author comments on the interpretations of semiot­ics by Zimmerling, in particular, the question of primary and secondary semiotic systems. The author presents his own concept of semiotics as a research programme in Imre Lakatos' sense. Semiotics is also a kind of cognitive ability common to many forms of life and at the same time a system of epistemological and methodological possibilities for carrying out scien­tific research on meaning-making or semiosis built on this ability. Moreover, semiotics is not only a research programme, but a transdisciplinary integrative organon. Such universal com­plexes for integrating the capabilities of scientific knowledge are based on three basic cognitive abilities — (1) to perceive signals, to rank and to process them; (2) to recognize patterns (sig­nal configurations) and shape them into more complex formations; (3) assessing and utilizing the meaning (initially functional significance, relevance) of the forms and modes of actuality. The latter ability is precisely the basis of semiotics and semiosis. The first two are metretics or organon for computational mathematics and statistics, as well as morphetics or organon for a wide variety of morphologies, comparative studies, discrete mathematics, topology, etc.

The article discusses various options for the institutional construction of imperial structures, one way or another identified with the classical empire of Rome. The review covers the Roman tradition proper and the formation of successive versions of the imperial-republican complex. There are two ways of using institutional: direct and direct inheritance with predominantly vertical transfer of properties and indirect perception with predominantly horizontal transfer. The continuation of its modified existence of the Roman tradition in the form of the theocratic symphony of the Kingdom of the Romans (Βασιλεία Ῥωμαίων) in the eastern Mediterranean and Chrysalis (theocracy with a feudalized horizontal and hierarchical vertical) of the Christian Republic (Respublica Christiana) in Western Europe is considered. There are three attempts to restore the completeness of the imperial structure even within the framework of the Western European chrysalis: the successful Charlemagne, not quite successful in the form of the Holy Roman Empire, and the completely unsuccessful efforts of the Plantagenets to establish an empire in the west of the Christian Republic during the Hundred Years' War. Further variants of the already mediated reproduction of the classical Roman orders in the United Kingdom, and then in the United States, as well as in the First French Empire, are being analyzed. Other imperial projects focused on the Roman heritage are also touched upon. The experience of European integration and the EU's use of republican and imperial aspects of the Roman complex, the use of institutional models of the Christian Republic and the Carolingian Empire are discussed. Special attention is paid to the imperial component of the national political tradition. It is shown that in all the cases under consideration, the imperial component is combined with other orders from patrimonial and monarchical to modern (corporate, consociative, federal, etc.). The use of the Roman heritage is carried out in the form of direct reproduction, indirect restoration, partial copying, imitation and even simulation.

This article outlines major trends in the development of social semiotics during the last four decades of its existence. The starting point was the interface between functional analysis of the semiotic system of language and the structural interpretation of language as a social system. Their convergence provided the basis for further developing an interdisciplinary domain of social semiotics. Michael Halliday's book "Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning" (1978) gave an initial impetus to exploring the interface of semiotic and social. Ten years later his approach was reinterpreted by Bob Hodge and Gunther Kress in "Social Semiotics" (1988). They suggested that both the social and semiotic nature of language had a broader significance and extends to the entire domain of human activity and existence. Thus, social semiotic (in singular) of language was enhanced into all-embracing social semiotics (in plural). This article further examines linguistic as socio-semiotic, semiotic as social, semiotic as multimodal, socio-semiotic as functional, interpretative as socio-semiotic. The article outlines two frontiers of social semiotics, that of its subject matter and that of its methodological dimension. Finally, the article focuses on current challenges faced by social semiotics, particularly those relevant to sociology.