Speech clichés - these are ready-made examples of phrases. With their help, it is easier to structure the final essay without losing the main thread of the judgment.
Clichés for the final essay:
For entry
- Of course, each person will answer this question differently. I will try to give my definition of these concepts.
- Of course, each person will answer this question differently. In my opinion, ...
- It seems that different answers can be given to this question. I suppose that...
- Probably every person has thought at least once about what ... (a certain concept) means. I believe that …
- Reflecting on these questions, one cannot help but come to the answer: ...
To go to the main part
- Fiction convinces me of the correctness of this point of view.
- Let's remember the works fiction, in which the topic is revealed...
- I can prove the correctness of my point of view by turning to...
- Let's turn to works of fiction
- For examples, let's turn to works of fiction
- Thinking about..., I can’t help but turn to the work Full Name, in which...
- Reflecting on these questions, one cannot help but come to the answer: ... (answer to the question asked in the introduction)
For abstracts
- Today we understand that...(main idea of the essay)
- Of course, each person will answer this question differently. In my opinion, ... (the main idea of the essay).
- It seems that different answers can be given to this question, but I believe that... (the main idea of the essay)
For arguments
Access to the work
- So, in a lyric poem (title), the poet (name) addresses the topic...
- The theme (….) is touched upon in the novel…(author, title).
- The theme (...) is revealed in the work... (author, title).
- The problem (barbaric attitude towards nature, etc.) worried many writers. He addresses her and...(name of the writer) in...(title of the work).
- The idea (of the unity of human nature, etc.) is expressed in the poem... (author, title).
- The idea of the need (to protect nature, etc.) is also expressed in the novel... (author, title).
- Let's remember the hero of the story... (author, title).
- Let's turn to the novel... (author, title).
- Lyrical hero poems... (author, title) also reflects on this.
Interpretation of a work or its fragment:
- The author talks about...
- The author describes...
- The poet shows...
- The writer reflects on...
- The writer draws our attention...
- The writer draws our attention to...
- He focuses the reader's attention on...
- This act of the hero speaks of...
- We see that the hero did this because...
- The author shows what consequences led...
- The author contrasts this hero/action...
- The writer condemns...
- He sets an example for us...
- The author emphasizes...
- The author claims...
Intermediate output:
- The writer believes that...
- Thus, the author wants to convey to us the idea of...
- We can come to the conclusion...
To conclude
- Summarizing what has been said, we can conclude...
- The conclusion involuntarily suggests itself...
- Thus, we come to the conclusion: ...
- So, we can conclude that...
- In conclusion, I would like to encourage people to... So let's not forget about...! Let's remember...!
- So let's not forget about...! Let's remember...!
- In conclusion, I would like to express my hope that...
- I would like to believe that...
- To summarize what has been said, I would like to express the hope that...
- To summarize what has been said, I would like to say that...
- All the arguments I have given, based on the reader's experience, convince us that...
- Concluding the discussion on the topic “...”, one cannot help but say that people should...
- (Quote) “...,” - wrote.... These words express the idea of.... The author of the text also believes that...
- What conclusion did I come to when reflecting on the topic “...”? I think we should...
Page 5
“Thus we came to the formulation of the following two points:
1. In order to determine and establish the cordial consent that unites them, and desiring jointly to contribute to the maintenance of peace, which is the object of their most sincere desires, the two Governments declare that they will consult among themselves on every question capable of threatening the general peace.
2. In the event that the world were really in danger, and especially in the event that one of the two parties were under threat of attack, both parties agree to agree on measures, the immediate and simultaneous implementation of which will be, in the event of the occurrence of the said events, urgent for both governments" (6, p. 176).
Morenheim, yielding to Freycinet's insistence, decided to overstep his authority and included in covering letter to the French government the following lines: “Further interpretations on the two points thus agreed upon not only may be necessary, but constitute a necessary addition to them and may become the subject of confidential, confidential negotiations at the moment that one or another government deems appropriate, and where they will consider it possible to carry them out within the required time frame." Ribot tried to raise the issue of allocating delegates to continue the negotiations. In St. Petersburg there was no agreement on any delegates. The Russian government has not yet been inclined to look beyond the points of agreement accepted by both parties. Therefore, Ribot's proposal to allocate delegates was left without consequences, although the path to further consideration of the issue was not closed.
The agreement of August 27, 1891 marked the establishment of a mutually agreed upon, defined form of cooperation between the two states. It represented one of the essential foundations of the Russian-French alliance (26, pp. 84-85).
In this work, we do not consider it necessary to cover in detail the reaction of the European powers to the Kronstadt visit of the French squadron and their proposed conclusion of a Franco-Russian alliance. Let's just say that the authority of France and the attention of other European powers began to grow quite quickly.
The logical conclusion of the 1891 agreement was to be a military convention.
With everything of great importance, which the 1891 agreement meant for France, it seemed insufficient to French government leaders from the very beginning. France was most concerned about the lack of commitment to simultaneous mobilization, coordinated military action, that is, it lacked a military agreement between the two powers. As you know, France considered it necessary to start with a military agreement and considered it the most significant. However, Alexander III, with his practical mindset, understood the need for a military agreement, but he was in no hurry.
The French decided not to retreat and made an attempt to convince the king that the situation in Europe was unstable, and that it was necessary to urgently begin negotiations between military specialists of both countries in order to prepare a military convention. This was done through the adviser to the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jules Hansen, a Dane by birth. But Alexander III replied that he would take up this proposal only upon returning to St. Petersburg from a vacation in Denmark (21, p. 216)
In November 1891, Giers arrived in Paris on a diplomatic tour of Europe. On November 20-21, he met with French politicians.
On the need to coordinate the activities of Russians and French representatives in the Middle East the agreement was easy. Traces of rivalry between countries regarding Turkey were completely erased, and its existence was recognized as necessary to maintain a “peaceful general balance.” As for Egypt, France received Russian support in the fight against the British occupation. Thus, it was noted that the Russian-French rapprochement had the most beneficial effect on general policy. "The situation has changed. There is no longer a question of German hegemony."
However, when Freycinet raised the question of the need to urgently agree on a military agreement, Giers avoided resolving the issue, declaring his incompetence and the desire of the king personally, together with the Minister of War, to resolve this issue (24, p. 195).
The next attempt to force a resolution to the issue of a military convention was made in early December 1891 by the new ambassador of the French Republic, Montebello, during an audience with Alexandra III. But even here a somewhat cold reception awaited him. This is what he wrote about this to Ribot: “And although I allowed myself a slight hint, ... he did not mention the events that took place in recent months, and I was a little surprised, to say the least."
Nevertheless, Alexander approved the idea of a convention in principle, although he did not show haste. The Tsar expressed his wishes that one of the senior officers (Miribel or Boisdeffre) be sent to Russia, with whom everything could be discussed special questions. In Paris they got to work.
Gorchakov. Diplomatic preparation for war.
Gorchakov. Gorchakov, Alexander Mikhailovich, prince - famous diplomat, state chancellor since 1867, born July 4, 1798; He was educated at the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, where he was a friend of Pushkin. In his youth, "a pet of fashion, a big...
Settlement and unification of the Eastern Slavs on the territory of Ancient Rus'
First of all, East Slavs arose as a result of the merger of the so-called Proto-Slavs, speakers of Slavic speech, with various other ethnic groups of Eastern Europe. This explains the fact that, despite all the similarities of language and cultural elements, ...
Brussels Conference 1889 - 1890
In the second half of the 19th century. along the entire coast of Africa continued their open activity large traditional slave trading centers. The exception was the Gold Coast, where there were English forts (the Dutch ones were bought up by the British...
Thus, we came to a contradiction in that the light pulse appeared simultaneously at two rather distant points in space. This paradox is unsolvable within the framework of SRT and refutes our assumptions about the possibility of time dilation and the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial frames of reference. To eliminate unnecessary objections to this paradox, I immediately propose to consider this option: let observers 2 and 3 give a signal about this to observer 1 at the moment of receiving a light pulse. So, if observer 1 receives these signals simultaneously, then the light pulse was in two different places(which is generally absurd), and if not simultaneously, then either the speed of light in the observers’ reference systems was different, or clocks 2 and 3 for observer 1 were not running the same - both of these contradict the theory of relativity.
So, we can point to the first mistake of A. Einstein, who postulated the following somewhat strange statement: "The speed of light in a vacuum is constant and equal to c".
This postulate contradicts logic and common sense in the sense that it does not indicate in which actual reference system the propagation of light occurs, attributing absoluteness to the movement of light, while, according to natural concepts, all movement is relative.
Time dilation.
It would seem that if we have proven the relativity of the speed of light, then there is no need to talk about “time dilation”, especially since we have already considered an example where such an assumption led to a paradox.
On the other hand, if for someone the arguments presented were not convincing enough, then the analysis of time in relatively moving reference systems may turn out to be an additional argument.
Let's start with general thoughts about the very concept of "time". When do we use this concept? In the general case, when we want to correlate the duration of any processes or the duration of intervals between events, which is generally the same thing, since a process includes at least two events: the beginning of the process and its end. By observing the events taking place, we can always say which of them occurred earlier, which - later, and which at the same time. But this is completely insufficient when we want to plan events or identify patterns in ongoing processes. We need to agree on the same unit of time for everyone. Historically, this unit became the day, which in turn is divided into 24 hours, etc. It follows that when we talk about the simultaneity of two events, we mean that they occurred at the same moment when the Earth was in the same position in relation to the Sun.
STR states that two events that are simultaneous in one frame of reference are non-simultaneous in another frame moving relative to the first. For an observer moving relative to the Earth, this means that if two events in the Earth reference frame occurred simultaneously, then for him these events occurred in different positions of the Earth relative to the Sun. This statement is already absurd enough to draw conclusions from it.
For those who believe that it is unacceptable to judge time by the position of the Sun, I will give another example. Let's say a long rod is hit from opposite sides simultaneously with equal force. Thanks to the simultaneity of the blows, the rod remained in place. If you stand at the SRT positions, then for an observer moving along the rod, the impacts were not simultaneous, and the rod began to move after the first impact and stopped after the second impact. Is it necessary to comment on such statements?
Additionally
The spread of diphyllobothriasis in the Kostroma region and the fight against it
Diphyllobothriasis of carnivores is an anthropozoonosis with a focal distribution, caused by various species of tapeworms from the genus Diphyllobothrium, among which the most common is the wide tapeworm - Diphyllobothrium latum. Dogs, cats, foxes, arctic foxes, martens, and also humans are affected. The disease is often...
Evolution of energy processes in eubacteria
Chapters 11 and 12 discussed the emergence of the primordial cell from a hypothetical protocell and the subsequent path of progressive evolution of the primordial cell. As was discovered in the 70s, at an early stage of this path, three main branches could have emerged, each of which was independent...
Thus, we came to the conclusion that the state did not arise immediately, but as a result of the evolution of man and his thinking, based on the influence of not only objective, but also subjective reasons. The emergence of the state was an objective law, a consequence of the entire previous development of the primitive communal system: the separation of man from the animal world, social division labor, the growth of its productivity, the emergence of a family, private ownership of tools and means of production, exploitation of fellow tribesmen and slaves, property stratification of members of a tribe, clan, etc. However, all these factors would not have such significance now if behind this whole series historical events there was no split of society into antagonistic classes. The latter were not just in large groups people occupying an independent place in the system of social production.
The main thing was that, having irreconcilable interests in those conditions, waging a fierce struggle among themselves, they thereby called into question the very existence of civilization. Therefore, the emergence of the state as effective means the settlement of class clashes was a kind of salvation of humanity. After all, any internal or external dangers cause harm to society and endanger human life, undermine the fundamental basis of the state - its integrity, i.e. a certain political, economic, ideological, spiritual, social and geographical sovereign state. The punitive approach to resolving social disputes between classes of society as a universal means of their state legal regulation could not solve the problem because the subject of the dispute was deeper than the capabilities of the state. It was not so much legal as social, cultural, moral character; was constantly reproduced by subsequent generations, analyzed in various scientific theories, reflected in the programs political parties. Society had to grow to other methods of solving its problems, including between classes. The same legislative, executive, judicial bodies, which arose along with the state as part of its mechanism, could not immediately be the means of a non-forceful solution social conflicts. A lot of time will pass before people think about the principles of separation of powers, the independence of the court as the main arbiter of resolving social contradictions, etc. The attitude towards law and the law in the life of society will also change. Recognition of the primacy of law destroys any personal, class principles for regulating social contradictions.
LIST OF REFERENCES USED
1. Alekseev, S. S. et al. Theory of state and law. / S. S. Alekseev. - M.: Norma, 2007. – 482 p.
2. Vengerov, A. B. Theory of State and Law: Textbook for Law Schools. Ed. 6th/ A. B. Vengerov. - M.: Omega-L, 2009. - 608 p.
3. Kashanina, T. V. Origin of state and law: tutorial by specialty: 021100 (030501) "Jurisprudence", 032700 (050402) "Jurisprudence" (teacher of law), 030505 (023100) "Law enforcement", 030500 (521400) "Jurisprudence (bachelor)"./ T. V. Kashanina. - M., 2012. – 357 p.
4. Komarov, S. A. General theory of state and law. / S. A. Komarov. – M.-SPb.: Publishing House of the Legal Institute, 2011. – 345 p.
5. Malko, A. V. Theory of state and law. Elementary course. Ed. 3rd, stereotype./ A. V. Malko, V. V. Nyrkov, K. V. Shundikov. - M.: KnoRus, 2013. - 240 p.
6. Marchenko, M. N. Sources of law: textbook / M. N. Marchenko. - M.: Mosk. state University named after M. V. Lomonosova, Legal. fact, 2008. - 759 p.
7. Matuzov, N. I. Theory of state and law. / N. I. Matuzov. - M.: Delo, 2009. – 450 p.
8. Marchenko, M. N. Sources Russian law. Moscow State University. Legal Faculty / M. N. Marchenko. - M.: Prospekt, 2005. – 335 p.
9. Morozova, L. A. Theory of state and law./ L. A. Morozova. - M.: Eksmo, 2009. - 564 p.
10. General theory of state and law in 3 volumes. T.1, T.2, T.3 State./ ed. M. N. Marchenko. – M.: Moscow State University named after. Lomonosov. Legal Faculty, 2007. – 678 p.
11. Panov, Yu. N. Theory of state and law./ Yu. N. Panov. - Tver Institute of Ecology and Law, 2012. – 245 p.
12. Problems of the general theory of state and law./ under general. ed. V. S. Nersesyants. - M.: Norma, 2004. – 832 p.
13. Semennikova, L. I. Phenomenon of the East. Ancient world. Becoming modern European civilization./ L. I. Semennikova. – Bryansk, 1995.
14. Theory of state and law: textbook./ ed. A. S. Pigolkina, Yu. A. Dmitrieva. - M., 2012. - 613 p.
15. Frolova, E. A. Methodological basis delimitation of concepts of legal understanding / E. A. Frolova // State and law. - 2013. - No. 4. - P. 63-73.
16. Marchenko, M. N. The myth about the formation of the world state and law in the conditions of globalization / M. N. Marchenko // Education and Society. - 2008. - No. 5. - P. 82-88.
Komarov, S. A. General theory of state and law. / S. A. Komarov. – M.-SPb.: Publishing House of the Legal Institute, 2011. - P. 277.
Vengerov, A. B. Theory of State and Law: Textbook for Law Schools. Ed. 6th/ A. B. Vengerov. - M.: Omega-L. 2009. - P. 69.
Komarov, S. A. General theory of state and law. / S. A. Komarov. – M.-SPb.: Publishing House of the Legal Institute, 2011. - P. 122.
Vengerov, A. B. Theory of State and Law: Textbook for Law Schools. Ed. 6th/ A. B. Vengerov. - M.: Omega-L, 2009. - P. 67.
Problems of the general theory of state and law./ under general. ed. V. S. Nersesyants. - M.: Norma, 2004. - P. 89.
Komarov, S. A. General theory of state and law. / S. A. Komarov. – M.-SPb.: Publishing House of the Legal Institute, 2011. - P. 111.
Problems of the general theory of state and law./ under general. ed. V. S. Nersesyants. - M.: Norma, 2004. - P. 90.
Problems of the general theory of state and law./ under general. ed. V. S. Nersesyants. - M.: Norma, 2004. - P. 89.
Marchenko, M. N. Sources of law: textbook / M. N. Marchenko. – M.: Moscow. state University named after M. V. Lomonosova, legal. fact., 2008. - P. 89.
Marchenko M. N. Sources of law: textbook. / M. N. Marchenko. – M.: Moscow. state University named after M. V. Lomonosova, legal. fact., 2008. – P. 90.
Marchenko M. N. Sources of law: textbook. / M. N. Marchenko. – M.: Moscow. state University named after M. V. Lomonosova, legal. fact., 2008. – P. 76.
Page 4
simultaneously, in parallel.
Thus, we came to the following conclusions:
1. Techniques for interpreting legal norms are a set of means used to establish the content of legal norms. They include grammatical, logical, systematic, historical-political, special legal, teleological and functional interpretation.
2. Grammatical interpretation is a set of techniques aimed at understanding the morphological and syntactic structure of the text of the act, identifying the meaning of individual words and terms, and the grammatical meaning of the entire sentence.
3. Logical interpretation involves the use of laws and rules of logic to understand the true meaning of a norm, which sometimes does not coincide with its literal presentation.
4. Systematic interpretation is the study of a legal norm from the point of view of its relationship with other norms.
5. Historical and political interpretation consists of studying the historical situation of the publication of the act, the socio-economic and political factors that determined the emergence of the norm.
6. Social and legal interpretation is associated with the analysis of special terms, technical and legal means and methods of expressing the will of the legislator.
7. Teleological (target) interpretation is aimed at establishing the purposes of issuing legal acts.
8. Functional interpretation examines the factors and conditions in which the interpreted norm operates and is implemented.
Interpretive techniques should be used all together, and not each separately.
3. Results of interpretation of legal norms.
a) Complete clarity of meaning is a necessary result of interpretation.
Any legal norm, no matter how clear and clearly formulated it is, needs interpretation, since it is closely related to the constantly changing conditions of social life.
In the process of systematic interpretation, another rule regulating the same type may be discovered public relations.In this case, they talk about the presence of collisions between two or more legal acts having one object of regulation. If there is
In case of conflict between norms, the following rules should be followed.
1. If conflicting norms come from different norm-setting bodies, then the norm coming from a higher body is subject to application;
2) if conflicting norms come from the same body, then the norm issued later is subject to application.
A possible result of using all methods of interpretation may be the ambiguity of the legal norm (vagueness, insufficient precision of a particular word or expression, ambiguity of the norm, incompleteness of the legal norm, contradiction within the norm itself).
When interpreting an unclear rule, it is especially important to familiarize yourself with its official regulatory explanation. But conclusions from additional materials should not contradict the text of the norm itself, should not eliminate the ambiguities of the norm by departing from its literal meaning. The criteria for the truth and correctness of interpretation are, ultimately, universal human practice. More specific criteria include legal practice, linguistic communication practice, and logical correctness.
b). Scope of interpretation
Usage in various ways interpretation allows the interpreter to correctly and fully identify the will of the legislator contained in the text normative act. But for legal practice important has the clarification of the relationship between the true content of the topic and its textual expression, i.e. interpretation by volume. It is a logical continuation and completion of understanding the content of legal norms. The basis for raising the question of the scope of interpretation of the law is that in a number of cases, as a result of understanding this norm, it turns out that its meaning is narrower or broader than its textual expression. The unity of language and thinking, words and concepts does not mean their identity. This gives rise to the inevitability of not only literal, but also in some cases widespread and restrictive interpretation. The interpretation of legal norms by scope is not independent in nature, but is a consequence of other methods of interpreting legal norms. Thus, interpretation by scope is not a method, but a result of interpretation.
c) Literal interpretation.
Literal (adequate) interpretation means full compliance of the verbal expression of the law with its actual meaning. With an ideal system of legislation as a source of law that accurately expresses the intentions and thoughts of the legislator, the text of the law is subject to literal interpretation.
d) Restrictive and general interpretation.
With a restrictive interpretation, the content of a rule of law turns out to be narrower than its textual expression.
With a broad interpretation, the content (meaning) of the interpreted norm turns out to be broader than its textual expression. List of cases
ev, requiring a general interpretation, is often accompanied by the expressions “etc.” ,"and others". But such an interpretation is possible without any indication of this in the law. When speaking about a widespread interpretation, this concept should be distinguished from the concept of a broad interpretation of the law. A broad interpretation of the law is its extension to cases that are not covered by the meaning of the rule of law and which the legislator, when creating the law, did not have in mind. Broad interpretation is the process of creating a new legal norm. It is, strictly speaking, no longer an interpretation.
Restrictive and pervasive types of interpretation are used as an exception, when the legislator’s thought has not been adequately embodied in the text of the normative act (or the text becomes outdated due to the development of social relations). These types of interpretation may arise when the legislator uses a term or expression of a broader or narrower scope compared to the scope of the concept that he had in mind. A broad or restrictive interpretation may arise from the systematic nature of the rules of law. These types of interpretation cannot be applied if this leads to a deterioration in the legal status of the person in respect of whom the act of application of the legal norm is issued. The following is also not allowed: 1) broad interpretation of exhaustive lists;
2. restrictive interpretation of incomplete lists;
3) broad interpretation of sanctions;
3. general interpretation of provisions that constitute an exception to the general rule;
4. broad or restrictive interpretation of terms defined by legal definition.
The limit of restrictive and expansive interpretation is the text of the law in its full logical scope.
We came to the conclusion that literal, restrictive and general interpretation is the result of the application of one or another method of interpretation. Usually the law is interpreted literally
(adequate). Restrictive and broad interpretation is used when there is a discrepancy between the content (meaning) of the interpreted norm and its textual expression, which is an exception to the general rule. Often these types of interpretation are the result of imperfect legislation, the presence of gaps in it, unclear wording, etc. But sometimes the legislator deliberately allows this possibility. The correct application of restrictive and broad interpretation in these cases helps to establish the true will of the legislator.
4. Explanation of the law.
a) Explanation of the rules of law.
Explanation of the rules of law, expressed both in the form of an official act and in the form of recommendations and advice that are not formally binding, constitutes the second side of interpretation. Interpretation – component application of the norm. Since citizens, legal entities, and government bodies act as law enforcers, they are all interpreters of norms. However, the legal meaning of the results of interpretation is different. If civil or entity interprets the norm in a certain way to the best of his understanding and taking into account his own interests, such interpretation does not go beyond the boundaries of a specific legal relationship. If the interpretation of the norm is given by those specifically authorized to do so government agency, then such an interpretation acquires special authority and becomes the standard of law enforcement.