Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1994. / Typescript. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 279-296).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2005. / Supervisor: Janet Swaffar and Katherine Arens. Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Boston University. University Professors Program Senior theses. / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / 2031-01-02

No description available.

No description available.

This study gives an account of village politics and social relations during the Russian Revolution and Civil War. It uses local archival materials and government publications from the middle Volga region (Samara, Saratov and Simbirsk provinces), which allows it to describe the events of these years from the viewpoint of the village and the <i>volost</i> (rural district). Section I examines the agrarian revolution of 1917 and, in particular, its peasant organisations, which, it is argued, emerged (in the form of peasant soviets) as the central political authorities in the countryside, once the old state structure had been destroyed. Left to themselves by the Bolshevik government in its first months of rule, the peasant soviets carried out the smallholding and egalitarian social ideals of the peasantry through vernacular forms of village democracy. Section II looks at these forms and their activities in the fields of trade control, property redistribution and land reform. The section also examines the relationship between the farming peasantry and other rural classes (eg. craftsmen, priests, immigrants).

The teachings of St. Feofan (1815-1894), together with his celebrated Russian translation of the Philokalia, played a major role in the spiritual revival of nineteenth century Russia, earning him the reputation of one of the greatest Russian theoreticians of Orthodox mysticism. Yet Feofan also provoked fierce criticism of such eminent Russian thinkers as Nicolas Berdyaev. This study focuses on one of the most significant elements of Feofan's legacy: the notion of legitimacy of spiritual diversity. This idea permeates Feofan's discussions of the striking dissimilarities demonstrated by persons engaged in ascetic and spiritual pursuits. It is highlighted by the fact that Feofan derives his positive attitude to diversity from within the tradition generally perceived as intolerant of dissent and non-conformity. Based within a wider context of Orthodox mystical tradition, this study examines Feofan's major writings, his work with the texts of the Philokalia, and his public and private correspondence. Attention is given to such pivotal concepts as his notions of the spirit and the heart; intimate communion with God; and the cardinal importance of spiritual self-consciousness. The study reveals Feofan's indebtedness to Byzantine ascetic spirituality, as well as his unusual openness to Western thought - reflected in his innovative synthesis of patristic asceticism and German romantic psychology. This study also addresses the ambivalence of Feofan's inner conflicts: namely, between his passionate belief in spiritual self-determination and his authoritarian teaching on 'silent submissiveness'; and between his defence of the legitimacy of spiritual diversity within the realm of ascetic experience and his unwillingness to extend that same principle beyond the limits of his own tradition. The thesis is not only the first critical account in English of Feofan's spiritual teaching, but is also an ecumenical exercise in which attitudes toward religious diversity within the Russian monastic tradition are examined by a Russian evangelical.

No abstract available. / Dissertation (MSc)--University of Pretoria, 2010. / Genetics / unrestricted

In this thesis, I conduct a detailed case study of expressive suffixes in Russian. I show that although the suffixes under investigation have the same function (“expressive”), they differ significantly in their formal properties. I identify two major semantic types of expressive suffixes: attitude and size suffixes. Attitude suffixes convey an attitude of the speaker toward the referent. Size suffixes both convey an attitude and refer to the size of the referent. I argue that the two different semantic types map onto different syntactic types. Attitude suffixes are syntactic heads, while size suffixes are syntactic modifiers. As heads, attitude suffixes determine the formal properties (syntactic category, grammatical gender and inflectional class) of the derived form. As modifiers, size suffixes do not determine the formal properties of the derived form. Attitude suffixes can attach both to category-free √Roots and to categories (n/a/v), while size suffixes can only attach to a noun category. I investigate the functional and formal properties of Russian expressive suffixes in a systematic way, which has not been done before. In doing so, I analyze how expressive suffixes pattern along several kinds of criteria (gender/class change, category change, subcategorization). An important byproduct of this analysis is that I show how grammatical gender of an expressive form can be predicted from its inflectional class (combined with animacy and natural gender of the base). One implication of this analysis is that I show that the formal properties of expressives are no different from those of non-expressives (descriptives), as both expressives and descriptives can attach as heads or modifiers either to √Roots or categories. Another implication is that the formal criteria which I develop for a small set of expressive suffixes in Russian can be extended to set up a cross-linguistic typology of expressives. / Arts, Faculty of / Linguistics, Department of / Graduate

No description available.