Программа первая международная студенческая Интернет-конференция «Разнообразие культур в полиэтничном регионе», 24 Марта 2009 Организационный комитет конференции
| Вид материала | Программа |
- Организационный комитет международная научно-практическая конференция, 122.29kb.
- Организационный комитет международная научно-практическая конференция, 162.39kb.
- Международная студенческая научно-практическая Интернет-конференция «Актуальные проблемы, 172.34kb.
- Программа конференции, список приглашенных докладчиков по мере формирования будут отображаться, 99.25kb.
- Ii международная конференция Актуальные проблемы биохимии и бионанотехнологий, 11.13kb.
- Программа ιΙ Международной научно-практической конференции Минск, 19-20 мая 2009 года, 361.36kb.
- 5-я Международная научно-практическая конференция «Геопространственные технологии, 119.45kb.
- Конференция состоится 22-25 марта 2011 года в фгоу впо ижевская гсха по адресу:, 19.96kb.
- Программа первой международной конференции/выставки «megatech-2009», 93.49kb.
- Международная научно-практическая конференция «Межкультурная коммуникация: вопросы, 64.79kb.
Материалы Первой международной студенческой Интернет-конференции «Разнообразие культур
в полиэтничном регионе»
23–25 марта 2009 г.
П
РОГРАММАПервая международная студенческая Интернет-конференция «Разнообразие культур в полиэтничном регионе», 24 Марта 2009
Организационный комитет конференции:
Романова А.П., д-р филос. наук, профессор, директор гуманитарного института - председатель;
Якушенков С.Н., д-р ист. наук, доцент, завкафедрой истории зарубежных стран;
Баева Е.В., д-р филос. наук, доцент, декан факультета социальных коммуникаций;
Краева С.В., канд. пед. наук, доцент, декан факультета иностранных языков;
Саракаева Э.А., канд. филол. наук, завкафедрой английского языка для ФСК и ЮФ;
Смирнова Л.Б., ст. преподаватель кафедры англ. языка для ФСК и ЮФ;
Заичкина Н.В., ассистент кафедры англ. языка для ФСК и ЮФ
РАБОЧИЙ ЯЗЫК КОНФЕРЕНЦИИ – АНГЛИЙСКИЙ, РУССКИЙ
12-30 – 13-00 - Регистрация участников.
13-00 – 14-00 – Торжественное открытие первой международной студенческой Интернет конференции «Разнообразие культур в полиэтничном регионе».
График работы секций.
Секция: Феномен мультикультурализма в современном обществе.
Руководитель секции: Хлыщева Е.В.
Ученый секретарь: Смирнова Л.Б.
График работы секции (время и место проведения): 24 марта 2009 г. 14:00 ул. Ахматовская,11, Факультет Иностранных языков АГУ
Старков Денис Юрьевич
Астраханский государственный университет
Multiculturalism: social stability of polytechnic societies
Тюрина Александра
Астраханский государственный университет
On multiculturalism
Скрипникова Мария Дмитриевна
Выпускница Астраханского государственного технического университета
Development of multiculturalism in potyethnic region as a source of the profit from ethnographic tourism.
Манцерова Ольга Владимировна
аспирант Астраханского государственного университета
The Programme of Cultural Exchange as a Factor Contributing to the Support of Polyculturalism in the World.
Фисенко Дмитрий Сергеевич
Астраханский государственный университет
Historical view on the problem of immigration in Western Europe
Халед Абдельдаейм Абделазиз Абделаал
Астраханский государственный университет
Аспирант кафедры биологии и экологии растений
Tolerance among peoples is the only way to peace
Иванова Марина
Астраханский государственный университет
The problem of national conflicts in a multinational region
Цепляева Тамара Эльхановна
старший преподаватель кафедры ОГСЭД филиал ГОУ ВПО «Саратовская государственная академия права» в г. Астрахань
1) The culture of conduct and communication
2) Conflicts and culture
Дахин Сергей
Астраханский государственный университет
Multiculturalism as a historical form of ethnic’s co-existence and as modern consequences globalism
Секция: Проблема межэтнических отношений в поликультурном регионе.
Руководитель секции: Саракаева Э.А.
Ученый секретарь: Заичкина Н.В.
График работы секции (время и место проведения): 24 марта 2009 г. 14:00 ул. Ахматовская,11 Факультет Иностранных языков АГУ
Стебкова Анна, Шапиро Екатерина
Астраханский государственный университет
To be or not to be… British?
Федосенко Роман
Астраханский государственный университет
Astrakhan region – southern outpost of Russia. A reality or just illusion?
Григорьев Александр Владимирович
Астраханский государственный университет
An insufficient level of interethnic tolerance as the factor of instability in a polyethnic regionhe example of the Ukraine.
Храмова Екатерина
Астраханский государственный университет
The Letts and the Russians: friends or foes?
Айсаева Люция
Астраханский государственный университет
Youth and intolerance
Джакслыкова Рузанна
Астраханский государственный университет
Religious leader and religious conflict
Мараховская Екатерина Геннадьевна
Астраханский государственный университет
Conflicts in sphere of interethnic relations
Романцова Екатерина Сергеевна
Астраханский государственный университет
Multiple cultures in polyethnic regions
Сагалиева Сания Зульбухаровна
Астраханский государственный университет
The Interaction process of eastern and western cultures.
Круглова Виктория Викторовна
Астраханский государственный университет
The problem of tolerance in Astrakhan region.
Ткачёва Наталия, Соколова Екатерина
Астраханский государственный университет
Discrimination of ethnic groups in USA
Домбровская Кристина Владимировна
Астраханский государственный университет
Interethnic problems in the Astrakhan region
Секция: Социокультурные аспекты в полиэтничном регионе.
Руководитель секции: Лебедева И.В., к.с.н., доцент кафедры социологии АГУ.
Ученый секретарь: Киселева Е.Е.
График работы секции (время и место проведения): 24 марта 2009 г. 14:00 ул. Ахматовская,11 Факультет Иностранных языков АГУ
Бобрик Дарья
Астраханский государственный университет
The Collapse of Systems
Борисова Татьяна Васильевна, к.пед.н, доцент, Минасян Мадлена Карленовна
Астраханский инженерно-строительный институт
System thought forming during foreign language’s teaching of higher technical school’s students
Вохромеева Екатерина Владимировна, аспирант кафедры английской филологии.
Астраханский государственный университет
Different views on “glossolalia”
Добрянская Ольга
Астраханский государственный университет
American nation: real or just illusion
Левченко Елена Николаевна
Астраханский государственный университет
Russian marriage migration. A marriage with a foreigner –advantages and disadvantages. The conflicts of cultures in families
Мусякаева Альфия Алямовна
Астраханский государственный университет
The role of international students’ exchange programmes in the life of young people.
Нгуманова Румия
Астраханский государственный университет
Social components of interracial marriages in multicultural society
Киселева Евгения
Астраханский государственный университет
What is multiculturalism?
Тюрина Александра
Астраханский государственный университет
Wedding ceremony: from East to West
Секция: Феномен мультикультурализма в современном обществе
Multiculturalism: social stability of polytechnic societies
Старков Денис Юрьевич, студент
Астраханский государственный университет
The problem of polyethnical societies’ stability is one of the most important in modern social sciences. Interethnical tolerance is one of the conditions to support the stability. As a result, multiculturalism and polyethnicality come forward as one of the central topics in scientific, political and social discussions in the most of industrially developed countries. Not only social events and processes are exposed to analysis, but also these terms, their essence, possibilities of theoretical and empirical usage for solution of such problems as contemporary national societies’ integration and affirmation of interethnical tolerance.
In accordance with national scientific tradition and theoretical orientation of separate investigators multiculturalism and polyethnicality sometimes understood as identical phenomena and sometimes as essentially different. In one case, the ethnical diversity of country’s population is simultaneously an aprior recognition of its cultural pluralism, in other case the phenomenon of multiculturalism is certainly completed and frequently just substituted by ethnical categories.
First-degree cultural distinctions for ethnicality are those that people use to distinguish and mark the boundaries of own collective body. It is known that every culture has its own specific mechanisms of reproduction. It accumulates in each of us and corresponds to our understanding of identity. The acknowledgement of permanent global variations in culture doesn’t afford to divide it on separate integrative parts. The last are easily applied to the conceptions of ethnicality and create an illusion of ethnocultural homogeneity, which is hard to be proved empirically, but which is often demonstrated as an important social value.
Meanwhile, history doesn’t know the examples of homogeneitive societies in ethnical and cultural aspects. Even those of them, which serve as an embodyness of national unity, possess its own national cultures, systems of government and sovereneignty under the territory. National societies are not isolated from the world substances, they compose a part of world system of national States, existence of which is possible only with a condition of collaboration, interaction and exchange of technologies, cultural dignities and migration torrents. On the regional and local levels when ethnocultural homogeneity seems to an investigator or strange observer quite evident, after more attentive acquaintance they can discover essentially distinctive local variants of culture and, on the contrary, the community of cultural complexes in polyethnical societies is so considerable, that sometimes you can only pick out individual artifacts. Such a unity of regional cultural complex became a basis for a regional approach in ethnology.
However, regional and local multicultureness which has its reflection on different levels in peculiarities of ethnical self-identification was not observed through the concept of multiculturalism specially.
Multiculturalism is a special form of integrative ideology, by the means of which polyethnic, polycultural national societies realize strategies of social consent and stability on the principles of equal in rights co-existence of different forms of cultural life.
Multicultural society can’t be harmonious. It becomes tough and full of conflicts quite rapidly if within its boundaries collide different social groups, which standing is worsen by social inequality. That’s why the ideas of national unity take central place in social politics of government, which is providing a complex of special measures, political solutions, social technologies, aimed to neutralize or partly eliminate the consequences of global integration, to reduce and regulate immigration torrents, to slow down the tempo of ethnocultural pluralisation, to construct and inculcate the programmes of support for national and cultural minorities. The security of social equality of minorities and national majority affords to define multiculturalism as a policy of recognition. It is especially actual for such countries as the United States of America and Canada. More general questions, which have significance almost for all modern democracy States, are also touched in frames of multiculturalism.
The conceptions of multiculturalism and explanations of such a concept as “polyethnicality”, having peculiarities in scientific traditions of national States, represent the attempts of search for the new integrative ideologies focused on the solution of communicative, political, social and cultural problems in relationships between national majority and minorities, between State and minorities, between cultural and ethnical communities on the horizontal level. The distinctive feature of contemporary multiculturalism is that it deals not only with ethnical and cultural minorities, but also with all kind of minorities.
Besides, the reasons of national societies’ cultural pluralisation are intercultural communication, growth of population’s social mobility, the influence of mass media, immigration processes and tourism.
Historically one of the earliest attempts to introduce multiculturalism as a State policy, directed on the integration of federative State, was undertaken in Canada, in 1960-s. There was an opinion that bilinguism can help in achievement of national consent and removal of keen contradictions between English-speaking and French-speaking communities of this country. Not like in other multinational States, the principle of national identity’s political explanation was used to solve a complex of economical, social, cultural and status contradictions between two groups of population. With the help of it ethnical parameters of population’s groups were expelled from political ritorics and practice of national building for the sake of unite State identity standing together with recognition and saving of cultural diversity.
The idea to create a Canadian political identity with simultaneous saving of country’s population cultural diversity was put in the base of Canadian multiculturalism. Instead of ethnicality as the most important foundation for group identity, the concepts of language and culture were suggested, not the concepts of ethnical differences of one or another group of population. The accent of the problem was removed on its cultural and lingual aspects. Not two nations, but two categories of citizens, distinctive, chiefly, by language – that is one of the main principles of this policy. Another principle sounds as “equal partnership”. That means not an achievement of absolute equality between two groups, but, which is more likely, an equality of possibilities for Canadians, speaking on different languages.
An aspiration to replace the ethnical parameters of group and individual identity by cultural foundations is typical, for instance, for inner policy of modern France. Introduction and security of principle of equal opportunities compose an essence of polyethnical societies’ development multicultural perspective. Equal in rights standing for different cultural groups in the boundaries of unite State emphasizes its dominant significance in the regulation of intercultural interaction’s processes. The admission of cultures’ equal status on the State level is simultaneously a manifesto for an idea of absence of more dominant cultural centre or dominant culture of majority in multicultural society. It represents the co-existence of cultures’ combination, whose carriers’ communicative strategies determined not only by State, but also by the experience of everyday communication with polyethnical and polycultural external setting.
The question of cultures’ possibility to save their explicit differences in frames of unite society is still open. There is a chance of mixing them in one global culture with small modifications.
Meanwhile, namely the State’s integrative efforts often stimulate the new manifestations of ethnical separatism. Real loss or the hazard of loss by group or a person of their ethnocultural peculiarities is a reason to consider the State as an external threat, the only way of struggle with which in this case is a revival or an actualization of ethnocality. The policy of Canadian multiculturalism could not eliminate the most important contradictions in relationships between French-speaking and English-speaking communities of the country.
The difficulties, experiencing by the Canadian nation are typical for all polyethnical States. Here are some of them. First of all, each of population’s ethnical groups has its own history, own national mythology and evaluates their role and significance for the existence of Canadian State from these positions. Mainly this circumstance determines their ambitions, focused on the redistribution of power resources. Secondly, English-speaking, French-speaking and native Indian groups of population have quite explicit territorial localization. As a result, innernational contradictions are worsen by territorial ritorics. Thirdly, interregional, innernational communications of the population are troubled by geographical position and landscape of the country.
Multiculturalism in Australia has been an official political conception since the middle of 1970-s. At least exactly at this time multiculturalism has become a determining principle in such spheres as education, social policy, electoral system and strategies, migration policy, development and regulation of labour market. Multiculturalism as a state policy is called to help with a development of a special form of liberal ideology, by the means of which polyethnical Australian society strives for realization of social consent and stability’s strategies on the foundation of political solutions, legislative and other measures undertaken by the government.
Not like the Canadian multiculturalism version, aspiring to the neutralization of ethnicality in the questions of politics and ideology, Australian multiculturalism promotes ethnical group and its culture as a dominant social value. In accordance with this already from the late 1970-s social help has been providing by government not to the migrants on the whole, but to the definite ethnical groups. In accordance with this their role in inner self-government has grown essentially as well as authority of ethnical communities’ leaders. The government actively uses them for the achievement of State’s purposes. Simultaneously there is a process of ethnical social structures’ cooptation in social structure of Australian society going on. Analogous processes take place in the other countries.
In a contrast to Australia and Canada, multiculturalism in the United States of America received development not by the government’s initiative, but was initiated from below in a result of activization of four ethnical groups’ social movement: Poles, Greeks, Italians and Slovakians, who were struggling for their rights. It was a very important unique case which allowed to reconsider the government policy not only in relation to the part of country’s white population, which is not Anglo-Saxon, but also in relation to the black State citizens, whose movement in a decisive moment was supported by small-amounted, but quite influential Jewish population and powerful student movement. The reconsideration of problem, containing contradictions between black population and State has allowed to acknowledge the presence of political and law dysfunction in relationships with those white citizens, who are not Anglo-Saxon and transfer its solution from the politics area, from the direct vertical relationships between the State and ethnical group as a subject of law in a culture area.
This transfer from formal to substantial, from law to cultural questions through the recognition of fact of American society multiculturalism has allowed to depolitize the black and white population’s movement for their citizen rights. Nowadays multiculturalism is one of the most important ingredients of national ideology in the United States of America. Different ethnical and cultural population groups are forming and acting mainly against the analogous communities, which appear to be opponents in distribution of economic and power resources. In the end we can say that multiculturalism represents quite a heterogeneous phenomenon from the containing point of view. The external attractiveness of the concept with its seeming exclusively cultural determination is mixing with ethnical contents often enough. In different countries it is understood sometimes as an ideology and policy, sometimes as a social technology. Meanwhile its progressive significance consists in the permanent search for modern national societies’ integrative mode. Their stability, the steadiness of dynamic development can be secured only when current constructions of ethnicality will be overcomed by the conscious on the level of society aspiration to the integration and will disappear as foundations for discrimination, as foundations for the State’s citizens rights and duties.
On multiculturalism
Тюрина Александра, студентка
Астраханский государственный университет
Today multiculturalism is a common occurrence in many regions. Astrakhan region is not an exception. Multiculturalism has always been the main peculiarity of Astrakhan. More than 150 nationalities and ethic groups are peacefully neighboring under Astrakhan sky.
Astrakhan was a large trade centre where Russia encountered the East: Indians, Persian and Armenian merchants erected their commercial town houses here. The town also attracted nomadic inhabitants of the steppes. One was amazed at the intricate interwoven sound ornament of different languages sounding in Astrakhan streets and markets. Emigrants from central Russia – sreltsy, craftsmen, merchants formed the basis of town population and brought to Astrakhan Orthodoxy. The descendants of Russian migrants constitute the bulk of Astrakhan population.
Needless to say, that every nation has its own customs and traditions. In my work I’d like to compare wedding ceremony of two numerous nations of our region: the Tatar and the Russians.
Wedding has always been supposed as one of the most important events in a life of every person. So that wedding traditions played a great role and were kept strongly in ancient times. Unfortunately, many traditions are forgotten nowadays. However, some elements of customs of our forefathers survive until now. All wedding customs can be divided into three groups: before wedding rites, the main wedding ceremony and after wedding customs.
Firstly, I’d like to speak about Russian wedding traditions.