Mesto Rossii v Evrope: Materialy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii by Gyula s> Szv�k (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
REVIEWS 347 indeed the use of romanilor moldoveni 'Moldavian Romanians' in the very title invites the question 'Why not moldovenilor roma'ni'Romanian Moldavians'? since many of the people Ghimpu is talkingabout now live in the Republic of Moldova (I will not confuse mattersby repeating the debate about the use in Englishof Moldavia and Moldova). The issue of a distinctMoldovan identity is raisedbut then dismissedon linguisticgrounds,while the cleavage between Moldovanswho considerthemselvesRomanian and those -including native speakersof Romanian who do not is ignored. In spiteof theselacunae Ghimpu'sbook deservesaplace in thebibliography of studies of Romanian national consciousness. It is well-documented, introduces evidence from sources in Russian and other Slavonic languages, and in this respect offersadditional perspectivesto the history of Romanian national identity. School ofSlavonic andEastEuropean Studies DENNIS DELETANT Urniversity College London Szvak, Gyula (ed.). MestoRossiiv Evrope. Materialy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii. Magyar Ruszisztikai Intezet, Budapest,I999. 271 pp. Notes. Price unknown. JFworksof collective authorshipare often difficultto review, proceedings of internationalconferences areyet more challenging, and the presentvolume is in this respect perfectly characteristic. Here are the papers of thirty-six scholars presented at a conference organized and sponsored by the new Centre for Russian Studies at Lorand Eotvos University in Budapestin May of I998. Though the title of the volume does not indicate it, in fact the coverage extends from the early Kievan era to the end of the eighteenth century. Approximatelyhalf the contributingscholarsare Hungarian, eleven are Russian, five are Anglo-American, and one is German. About three quarters of the papers are published in Russian, the remainder in English. The contributorsthemselvesrangefrom internationallyrenowned scholarsto newcomersjust making their professional debut (judging by works represented in large American university library catalogues). Naturally, there are problems of coherence and pertinence and problems of adherence to the announced theme, generically defined though it is. Not suirprisingly, an occasional paper exhibits no apparent relationship to the general subject matter or concentrates exclusively on a single country, thus avoiding the comparative spirit of the conference (all such papers will be ignored here). The first two pages of the paper of Philip Longworth (McGill University), 'Muscovy and the "Antemurale Christianitatis"', are blank (the only such example), which is a shame, as the remainder suggests an interesting commenit on the Polish, papal, and Muscovite conceptions of the role of Russia as a bridge and/or barrier betwveen Europe and Asia. MAIrtaFont (Janus Pannonius University) compares the different sources of influence in the evolution of Russian and Hungarian medieval law. Mikhail Iurasov (Russian State Humanities University) examines the role of the Magyars in the formation of the Kievan state. N. M. Rogozhin (Russian Academy of 348 SEER, 79, 2, 200I Sciences) exploits the documentation of Russian embassies to the West to emphasize the extent and degree of Russian diplomatic involvement in Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Istvan VAsalry (Lorand Eotvos University)considersthe question why Muscovite Russia was considered barbarian by early modern Europe. Ann M. Kleimola (University of Nebraska) focuses on Evfrosin'ia Staritskaia in order to juxtapose the involvement of Russian and European women in the arts.Ludwig Steindorff (WVestfalische Wilhelms-Universitat)points out the manner in which monastic discipline in Russia and Europe enhanced the regimentation of modern life, especially as evidenced in Russia in the Domostroi. A. P. Pavlov (Russian Academy of Sciences) has anotherlook, an interestingone, at the significance of the zemskie soborg and their differencesfrom analogous European popular assemblies. Sergei Filippov (Lorand Eotvos University) concentrates on the Grecophile tendencies of the seventeenth-century Russian church Peter MIogila,PatriarchNikon, the Kievan Slaviano-Greko-LatinAcademy and compares the Russian experience with Henry VIII's English Reformation. Andras Zoltan (LorandEotvos University)is concerned with the influence of West Slavicand Latinchanceryvocabularyin East Slavicdocuments (hedoes not address the controversy over the Kurbskii-Groznyi apocrypha). Antal Bartha(LorandEotvosUniversity)examinesthe common democraticfeatures of the Finnish communes of Scandinavia and those of the East Finnish peoples, the Mari and Udmurts. Klara Radn6ti (Hungarian National Museum) maintains that the Italianswere more conversantwith Muscovy in the sixteenth century than any other European people; she cites multiple accounts that preceded that of Herberstein.N. V. Riasanovsky(Universityof California)presents a precis of his book on the image of Peter I in Russian thought. Sandor Gebei...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».