We consider a linear model of a rotating Timoshenko beam. We show that for some initial conditions, the solutions of the minimization problem for the deviation of the beam from the equilibrium state have Fuller singularities.
The research reports on the history of teaching Thai as a foreign language under a bachelor's degree program (Soviet-style master's degree) at universities throughout the Russian Federation. The purposes of the research article are to study the development of teaching Thai as a foreign language in Russian from the second half of the 20th century (when the teaching of Thai language began in the Soviet Union) to the present day and to find out which universities are currently teaching the Thai language in Russia (as of Academic Year 2020/21). Data were collected from the articles in scientific journals, bulletins, websites of the universities and institutes that offer degree programs with the study of the Thai language, an interview with Russian teachers, researchers, heads of the departments and faculties where the Thai language is taught. The results attained by this study are the following. Thai as a foreign language began to be taught in Moscow in 1954. There is a slight tendency towards an increase in interest in teaching and learning the Thai language in Russian Higher Educational Institutions. Although the number of universities teaching the Thai language is unstable, after 2014 the interest of students wishing to study Thai as a foreign language at universities was the highest compared to previous years and compared to other Southeast Asian languages. However, regardless of the increasing interest in learning the Thai language, it is not able to compete with the Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Arabic languages, which remain more attractive for university applicants. From 1999 until recently, only three cities had departments for Thai Studies – Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Vladivostok. They are considered to be centers for the Thai language. However, as of 2020, the Thai language is taught only in St. Petersburg (Faculty of Asian and African Studies of St. Petersburg University), and in Moscow (ISAA Moscow State University, MGIMO University, Institute for Oriental and Classical Studies of HSE University).
At the beginning of the article, the author explains its idea—to explicate the conceptual approach to war as the most important structural element and mechanism for maintaining social order. The author claims the existence of a stable tradition of theorizing based on the argument about the social functionality of the structural violence, which allows interpreting war as a special type of sociality. The representatives of this conventional line of argumentation mentioned in the article are such key figures in the history of ideas, as Thomas Hobbes, Carl von Clausewitz, Carl Schmitt and Michel Foucault. The author formulates ten theses, which problematize the heuristic aspects of war in relation to the theory of social order and are accompanied by short comments explaining the ambivalent status of war topics in the philosophical tradition and sociological classics, because neither of them developed a complete theory of war relevant from the social theory perspective. The key theses state that war experience is constitutive for human societies, and reconstruct the line of argumentation that emphasizes the constitutive function of war for social institutions and political order and the role of war as a major factor of social transformations in the modernity for this role is often underestimated in sociological theory. In conclusion, the author states the need for analytical explication of the organized violence functionality in relation to the structures of social action typical for the modern era. He also claims that within the proposed social-theoretical perspective the war can become a heuristic key to understanding the nature of the social, because this approach allows not only to consider war as a cultural-universal phenomenon, but to analyze more realistically the structural role of violence in the processes of production, reproduction and transformation of social orders.
This paper is an attempt to clarify a few puzzling contexts of 12 Pyth., taking into account some specific features of auletic techniques
In 2010th protest publics became an important driver of political change both in authoritarian and democratic states. “Indignados”, “Arab spring”, #Occupy movement” in USA (and worldwide), protests in Russia, Brazil, Turkey, Thailand, Venezuela, Ukraine – all these events has been happening from December, 2010, till today – in Bangkok, Caracas, Kiev. The main goal of the research is to evaluate the protest publics’ impact as drivers of political changes in Brazil (time period is from June 2013 till March 2014). So, as the focus of the research is what protest publics have changed in political process during these periods of time and what status quo of different drivers (factors and actors) we had had before them (especially socio-economic ones); to show both the reasons and the results of the protest publics activities. Empirical base of research consist of information of two types: socio-economic and political statistics (World Bank, OECD, IMF; Freedom House and Transparency international rankings; World Values Survey Data); expert interviews with the specialists and scholars that study the protest movements in Br