4 research outputs found
Linguistic patterns in the lexical-semantic subsystem of new public administration: typology and features
The authors analyzed the confeptosphere of public administration from the position of representation in the Rus-sian language as an area of increased interest from the controlling structures in the field of state security. The au-thors relied on the postulates of the presence of three dimensions inherent in verbal signs: due to the indirect connec-tions of words and objects of semantics, determined by the relationship of words to each other syntagmatics and due to the relationship of words and communicants of pragmatics; about the discreteness and continuity of verbal signs, about the relative simplicity and minimal variability of intersystem relations between them, about the limited motivation of verbal signs and the inverse proportion of morphemic complexity and semantic structure of the word. The focus of attention is on studying the influence of language patterns on the functioning of the βdominantβ lexi-cal-semantic subsystem of public administration in the Russian language of the recent period, associated with the ideas about the specifics of public administration focused on ensuring law and order and constitutionally estab-lished rights and freedoms of citizens. The paper concludes that lexical and semantic patterns are important in de-termining the main trends in the development of the lexical system of the Russian language in general, individual subsystems and language signs in particular
ΠΠΈΡΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³Π΅ΠΌΠ° Β«ΠΊΠΎΡΠΎΠ½Π°Π²ΠΈΡΡΡΒ» Π² ΡΠΎΠ²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π½ΡΡ Π½ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΡΡΡ ΠΌΠ°ΡΡ-ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ° ΠΠ²ΡΠΎΠΏΡ ΠΈ ΠΠ·ΠΈΠΈ
The article analyzes the impact of nominations in the media discourse on the coronavirus on the public consciousness of Europe and Asia. The authors consider the historical, sociological, and psycholinguistic aspects of the use of names in texts about the coronavirus, identify the features of the impact of such texts on the reader and determine the target orientation of such texts. Hypothesis: names in news reports about coronavirus in modern news discourse in conditions of quarantine and self-isolation act as triggers that unite different strata of society, creating a hologram of a single mental space, actualizing archetypal images of the confrontation between Good and Evil. Particular attention is paid to the connection between ethno-confessional myths and ideas about the coronavirus in the public consciousness, their involvement in information wars. The methodology for the analysis of names is standard; it includes sociolinguistic, structural, and semantic analysis, evaluative, motivational, target analysis, etc. The study helps to understand linguistic universals in the transmission of psycho-emotional moods in a stressful situation in a pandemic. The article will be of interest to specialists in the field of linguistics, sociology, political science, psychologyΠ ΡΡΠ°ΡΡΠ΅ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ Π²Π»ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΈΠ΅ Π½ΠΎΠΌΠΈΠ½Π°ΡΠΈΠΉ Π² ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ°Π΄ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ΅
Π½Π° ΠΊΠΎΡΠΎΠ½Π°Π²ΠΈΡΡΡ Π½Π° ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠ΅ ΡΠΎΠ·Π½Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΠ²ΡΠΎΠΏΡ ΠΈ ΠΠ·ΠΈΠΈ. ΠΠ²ΡΠΎΡΡ ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΌΠ°ΡΡΠΈΠ²Π°ΡΡ
ΠΈΡΡΠΎΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅, ΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΈΡ
ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ Π°ΡΠΏΠ΅ΠΊΡΡ ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ
ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½ Π² ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΡΠ°Ρ
ΠΎ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΎΠ½Π°Π²ΠΈΡΡΡΠ΅, Π²ΡΡΠ²Π»ΡΡΡ ΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ Π²ΠΎΠ·Π΄Π΅ΠΉΡΡΠ²ΠΈΡ ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΈΡ
ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΡΠΎΠ²
Π½Π° ΡΠΈΡΠ°ΡΠ΅Π»Ρ ΠΈ ΠΎΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»ΡΡΡ ΠΈΡ
ΡΠ΅Π»Π΅Π²ΡΡ Π½Π°ΠΏΡΠ°Π²Π»Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΡ. ΠΠΈΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅Π·Π°: ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π° Π² Π½ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΡΠ½ΡΡ
ΡΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ°ΠΆΠ°Ρ
ΠΎ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΎΠ½Π°Π²ΠΈΡΡΡΠ΅ Π² ΡΠΎΠ²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΌ Π½ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠΌ Π΄ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ΅ Π² ΡΡΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΡΡ
ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ°Π½ΡΠΈΠ½Π° ΠΈ ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΎΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ»ΡΡΠΈΠΈ Π²ΡΡΡΡΠΏΠ°ΡΡ Π² ΡΠΎΠ»ΠΈ ΡΡΠΈΠ³Π³Π΅ΡΠΎΠ², ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ½ΡΡΡΠΈΡ
ΡΠ°Π·Π½ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ»ΠΎΠΈ
ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π°, ΡΠΎΠ·Π΄Π°Π²Π°Ρ Π³ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΌΡ Π΅Π΄ΠΈΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΌΠ΅Π½ΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΡΡΠ°Π½ΡΡΠ²Π°, Π°ΠΊΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡΡΡ
Π°ΡΡ
Π΅ΡΠΈΠΏΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π·Ρ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΈΠ²ΠΎΡΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΈΡ ΠΠΎΠ±ΡΠ° ΠΈ ΠΠ»Π°. ΠΡΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠ΅ Π²Π½ΠΈΠΌΠ°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΡΠ΄Π΅Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ
ΡΠ²ΡΠ·ΠΈ ΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΡ
ΠΌΠΈΡΠΎΠ² ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΡΠ°Π²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ ΠΎ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΎΠ½Π°Π²ΠΈΡΡΡΠ΅ Π² ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΌ
ΡΠΎΠ·Π½Π°Π½ΠΈΠΈ, ΠΈΡ
Π²ΠΎΠ²Π»Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ Π² ΠΈΠ½ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΠ΅ Π²ΠΎΠΉΠ½Ρ.
ΠΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠΊΠ° Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Π° ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½
ΡΡΠ°Π½Π΄Π°ΡΡΠ½Π°Ρ, Π²ΠΊΠ»ΡΡΠ°Π΅Ρ ΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠΉ, ΡΡΡΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ½ΡΠΉ ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°Π½ΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠΉ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·,
ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΎΡΠ½ΡΠΉ, ΠΌΠΎΡΠΈΠ²Π°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΠΉ, ΡΠ΅Π»Π΅Π²ΠΎΠΉ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· ΠΈ Ρ. Π΄. ΠΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΠΎΠΌΠΎΠ³Π°Π΅Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠ½ΡΡΡ
ΡΠ·ΡΠΊΠΎΠ²ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ½ΠΈΠ²Π΅ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠΈ Π² ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π΄Π°ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΈΡ
ΠΎΡΠΌΠΎΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΡ
Π½Π°ΡΡΡΠΎΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ Π² ΡΡΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΉ
ΡΠΈΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π² ΡΡΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΡΡ
ΠΏΠ°Π½Π΄Π΅ΠΌΠΈΠΈ. Π‘ΡΠ°ΡΡΡ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΡΠ°Π²Π»ΡΠ΅Ρ ΠΈΠ½ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅Ρ Π΄Π»Ρ ΡΠΏΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ°Π»ΠΈΡΡΠΎΠ²
Π² ΠΎΠ±Π»Π°ΡΡΠΈ Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΠΊΠΈ, ΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΈ, ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΈ, ΠΏΡΠΈΡ
ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈ
Formation of ethnosocial identity in the matrix of media discourse
The authors analyze the linguo-information model of the country in the modern media discourse of Russia and China. Screening of Russian and Chinese sources uses the method of contextual analysis with an emphasis on the implicit content of the media image of the country, the descriptive method, the method of cultural interpretation, content analysis. Information wars use the image of a country as a starting point in the matrix of media discourse to emphasize the perception of information. The authors propose the concept of a media matrix for understanding the cognitive side of media images of geopolitical topoobjects. The authors substantiate the introduction of the terms linguoinforneme and linguoinformational step into scientific circulation from the point of view of the structure of the matrix of geopolitonyms of the media. The media image of the country in the media discourse is diverse, being realized in evaluative linguistic systems. The authors show what the mythologized / realistic perception of the image of the country is based on, how it is conditioned by the tasks of geopolitics, how it correlates with the strategies of international cooperation and how it affects intercultural communication
Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΡ ΠΊΠ°ΠΊ ΡΡΠΈΠ³Π³Π΅Ρ Π³Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ»ΠΈΠΊΡΠΎΠ³Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ°Π΄ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ°
The article reveals the influence of manipulative tactics in the media discourse on the public consciousness of the peoples of different countries regarding such a huge territory as Siberia. The authors analyze the historical, sociological, and psycholinguistic aspects of the functioning of the geopolitonym Siberia in the geopolitical conflictogenic media discourse within the framework of the linguistic-informational model of Siberia in the modern media discourse on the material of different structural languages. The selection of sources was based on the method of contextual analysis with an emphasis on the implicit content of the media image of the region, the descriptive method, the method of cultural interpretation, content analysis. Information wars use the image of Siberia as the center of the matrix of conflict-prone media discourse to increase attention to events in Russia and accentuate geopolitical manipulations in the public consciousness. The authors give the concept of a media matrix for understanding the cognitive side of media images of a geopolitical topoobject, such as Siberia. The media matrix of geopolitonyms consists of linguoinfornems, being implemented in linguoinformational steps in the media discourse. The media image of Siberia is diverse, being realized in evaluative linguistic systems of different languages, based on scalable sociostereotypes about Siberia. The authors show what the mythologized and realistic perception of the image of Siberia is based on, how it is interconnected with the tasks of geopolitics, influencing success in intercultural communication. The research is aimed at understanding linguistic universals in the perception of geopolitonyms. The article is of interest to specialists in the field of
linguistics, psychology, journalism, history, cultural studies, sociology, and political scienceΠ ΡΡΠ°ΡΡΠ΅ ΡΠ°ΡΠΊΡΡΠ²Π°Π΅ΡΡΡ Π²Π»ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΌΠ°Π½ΠΈΠΏΡΠ»ΡΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΡΡ
ΡΠ°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΊ Π² Π΄ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ΅
Π‘ΠΠ Π½Π° ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠ΅ ΡΠΎΠ·Π½Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π½Π°ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠ² ΡΠ°Π·Π½ΡΡ
ΡΡΡΠ°Π½ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎ ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΎΠΉ ΠΎΠ³ΡΠΎΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΉ
ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΈΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΈ, ΠΊΠ°ΠΊ Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΡ. ΠΠ²ΡΠΎΡΡ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡΡΡΡ ΠΈΡΡΠΎΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅, ΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅
ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΈΡ
ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ Π°ΡΠΏΠ΅ΠΊΡΡ ΡΡΠ½ΠΊΡΠΈΠΎΠ½ΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ Π³Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΡ
Π² Π³Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ»ΠΈΠΊΡΠΎΠ³Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΌ Π΄ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ΅ Π‘ΠΠ Π² ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΊΠ°Ρ
Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΎΠΈΠ½ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΠΎΠΉ
ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈ Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΠΈ Π² ΡΠΎΠ²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ°Π΄ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ΅ Π½Π° ΠΌΠ°ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ°Π»Π΅ ΡΠ°Π·Π½ΠΎΡΡΡΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ½ΡΡ
ΡΠ·ΡΠΊΠΎΠ².
ΠΡΠ±ΠΎΡ ΠΈΡΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ² ΠΏΡΠΎΠΈΡΡ
ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠ» Ρ ΠΎΠΏΠΎΡΠΎΠΉ Π½Π° ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΡΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Π° Ρ Π°ΠΊΡΠ΅Π½ΡΠΎΠΌ
Π½Π° Π½Π΅ΡΠ²Π½ΠΎΠ΅ ΡΠΎΠ΄Π΅ΡΠΆΠ°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠΉΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π·Π° ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°, ΠΎΠΏΠΈΡΠ°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠΉ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄, ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄
ΠΊΡΠ»ΡΡΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈΠ½ΡΠ΅ΡΠΏΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ, ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ΅Π½Ρ-Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·.
ΠΠ½ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΠ΅ Π²ΠΎΠΉΠ½Ρ
ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡΠ·ΡΡΡ
ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π· Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΠΈ Π² ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅ ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠ° ΠΌΠ°ΡΡΠΈΡΡ ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ»ΠΈΠΊΡΠΎΠ³Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠΉΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π΄ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ° Π΄Π»Ρ
ΡΡΠΈΠ»Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ Π²Π½ΠΈΠΌΠ°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΊ ΡΠΎΠ±ΡΡΠΈΡΠΌ Π² Π ΠΎΡΡΠΈΠΈ ΠΈ Π°ΠΊΡΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π³Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΠΌΠ°Π½ΠΈΠΏΡΠ»ΡΡΠΈΠΉ
Π² ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΌ ΡΠΎΠ·Π½Π°Π½ΠΈΠΈ. ΠΠ²ΡΠΎΡΡ Π΄Π°ΡΡ ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ΅ΠΏΡΠΈΡ ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ°ΠΌΠ°ΡΡΠΈΡΡ Π΄Π»Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΊΠΎΠ³Π½ΠΈΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΡΠΎΡΠΎΠ½Ρ ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠΉΠ½ΡΡ
ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π·ΠΎΠ² Π³Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΡΠΎΠΏΠΎΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ°, ΠΊΠ°ΠΊΠΈΠΌ
ΡΠ²Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΡ. ΠΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ°ΠΌΠ°ΡΡΠΈΡΠ° Π³Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΎΠ² ΡΠΎΡΡΠΎΠΈΡ ΠΈΠ· Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΎΠΈΠ½ΡΠΎΡΠ½Π΅ΠΌ,
ΡΠ΅Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡΡΡΡ Π² Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΎΠΈΠ½ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΡ
ΡΠ°Π³Π°Ρ
Π² Π΄ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ΅ Π‘ΠΠ. ΠΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ°ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π· Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΠΈ
ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π·Π΅Π½, ΡΠ΅Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡΡΡΡ Π² ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΎΡΠ½ΡΡ
Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°Ρ
ΡΠ°Π·Π½ΡΡ
ΡΠ·ΡΠΊΠΎΠ²,
ΠΈΡΡ
ΠΎΠ΄Ρ ΠΈΠ· ΠΌΠ°ΡΡΡΠ°Π±ΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΡΡ
ΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΎΡΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅ΠΎΡΠΈΠΏΠΎΠ² ΠΎ Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΠΈ. ΠΠ²ΡΠΎΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·ΡΠ²Π°ΡΡ,
Π½Π° ΡΠ΅ΠΌ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΎ ΠΌΠΈΡΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ΅ ΠΈ ΡΠ΅Π°Π»ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎΠ΅ Π²ΠΎΡΠΏΡΠΈΡΡΠΈΠ΅ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π·Π° Π‘ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡΠΈ,
ΠΊΠ°ΠΊ ΠΎΠ½ΠΎ Π²Π·Π°ΠΈΠΌΠΎΡΠ²ΡΠ·Π°Π½ΠΎ Ρ Π·Π°Π΄Π°ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ Π³Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠΈ, Π²Π»ΠΈΡΡ Π½Π° ΡΡΠΏΠ΅Ρ
Π² ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠΊΡΠ»ΡΡΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ
ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠΌΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ. ΠΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π½Π°ΡΠ΅Π»Π΅Π½ΠΎ Π½Π° ΠΏΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΡΠ½ΠΈΠ²Π΅ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠΉ
Π² ΠΏΠ΅ΡΡΠ΅ΠΏΡΠΈΠΈ Π³Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΎΠ². Π‘ΡΠ°ΡΡΡ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΡΠ°Π²Π»ΡΠ΅Ρ ΠΈΠ½ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅Ρ Π΄Π»Ρ ΡΠΏΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ°Π»ΠΈΡΡΠΎΠ² Π² ΠΎΠ±Π»Π°ΡΡΠΈ
Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΠΊΠΈ, ΠΏΡΠΈΡ
ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΈ, ΠΆΡΡΠ½Π°Π»ΠΈΡΡΠΈΠΊΠΈ, ΠΈΡΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΈ, ΠΊΡΠ»ΡΡΡΡΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΈ, ΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΈ
ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈ