Застосування Acquis Communautaire у процесі реалізації державної мовної політики України щодо національних меншин (на прикладі угорської національної меншини)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Problem-solving in general. Over the last decade, the global community has been characterized by a change in the relationship between cultural and linguistic minorities and the citizens that make up the majority of the state. Obviously, this is due to changes in the political and social situation. Such processes take place in EU countries, post-Soviet countries, USA, Canada, etc. The main causes of change are the increase in the number of nations living in a certain territory, migration processes, the increasing role of culture and language at the international level. Contradictions in policymaking at the national, supranational and international levels in many countries have led to tendencies towards interethnic clashes. To improve the legal support of minorities in different countries, international organizations are developing and implementing special documents regulating this area. At the same time, domestic legal instruments play an important role in regulating the relations of different language groups.The purpose of the article is to analyze the state of legal support and realization of linguistic rights of national minorities in Ukraine in the context of the principles of the acquis communautaire and to formulate proposals for their improvement.The main European legal act that enshrines the acquis communautaire in the field of linguistic relations protects languages - regional, minority, extinct, minority languages - is the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Its preamble states that the aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve greater unity between its members, in particular to preserve and implement the ideals and principles that are their common property.The study found that the main factors to be considered in determining the status of a national minority are: 1) the number of ethnic groups; 2) stay in the territory of Ukraine (rootedness of ethnic group, excluding migrants and refugees); 3) territorial location (compact type of settlement and, as a consequence, mono-ethnic marriages, linguistic and cultural identity). In addition, it is necessary to conduct a census of the population of Ukraine.With regard to the measures envisaged by the Charter ratification law, in particular in the field of education, culture, cross-border cooperation, Ukraine fulfills its obligations, as evidenced by the draft report for 2018, prepared in accordance with the requirements of Art. 15 of the Charter. However, given the Hungarian side's activity and the requirements of the educational law on the language of education, Ukraine needs to strengthen its training on the Hungarian language population of Ukrainian. It should be noted that with regard to ensuring that Hungary fulfills the Charter obligations for the Ukrainian minority, the situation seems to be asymmetrical: they are practically not fulfilled.It is established that the optimal legal instrument of cooperation between the two states in securing the linguistic rights of their national minorities is the conclusion of bilateral agreements, which allow to determine the specific conditions of cooperation and to establish control over their observance of each party, to prevent violation of the domestic legislation of each country.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".