Россия реформирующаяся: Ежегодник - 2003
In the year of 2018, the Internet is no more a wholesome phenomenon, but when recognised as a subject of studies, becomes similar to a teenager having already gained a certain independence. It understands its communication with other people but still wants to change the whole interaction system in order to nd its own place. At least, this is exactly the impression we receive: the impres sion of an ambitious object of study, of a misunderstood one. In this issue we offer you an occasion to think about different scenarios of the relationship between studies on the Internet and classic social sciences approaches. We do not focus on methodological issues, but on the Internet in its being an object of studies and a scienti c problem. We focus on studies on the Internet that accumulate knowlege about the Internet as a social phenomenon, being also an internation al and indisciplinar area of research. So cial sciences are represented in this case by sociology and anthropology, as well as other ones such as mediastudies, stud ies on sciences and technologies (STS), social geography etc.
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.
The results of cross-cultural research of implicit theories of innovativeness among students and teachers, representatives of three ethnocultural groups: Russians, the people of the North Caucasus (Chechens and Ingushs) and Tuvinians (N=804) are presented. Intergroup differences in implicit theories of innovativeness are revealed: the ‘individual’ theories of innovativeness prevail among Russians and among the students, the ‘social’ theories of innovativeness are more expressed among respondents from the North Caucasus, Tuva and among the teachers. Using the structural equations modeling the universal model of values impact on implicit theories of innovativeness and attitudes towards innovations is constructed. Values of the Openness to changes and individual theories of innovativeness promote the positive relation to innovations. Results of research have shown that implicit theories of innovativeness differ in different cultures, and values make different impact on the attitudes towards innovations and innovative experience in different cultures.