Český lid/The Czech Folk - Journal of Ethnological studies is the oldest ethnographic magazine in the Czech Republic. It was founded in 1891, and today it serves for various streams of ethnographic studies - i.e. cultural or social anthropology, classic ethnography and borderline disciplines. The magazine is published as a quarterly in 500 copies by Etnologický ústav AV ČR/The Institute of Ethnology of the Czech Academy of Sciences in Prague. Its supplement is published irregularly since 1990 (4 volumes). The editor is Z. Hanzl. The quarterly Národopisné aktuality/Ethnographic News was published by Ústav lidového umění/The Institute of Folk Arts in Strážnice since 1964. The magazine acquired many stable associates and was well established in Czech as well as Slovak professional quarters. Sometimes it published even articles from abroad. Since 1990 the magazine changed thoroughly. I was renamed as Národopisná revue/Journal of Ethnography, and the magazine had difficulties to find a new face., When the independent Czech Republic came into being it tried to keep in touch with the Slovak ethnographers. It publishes professional articles (currently mostly thematic), reviews, personal datas, photographs by professional and amateur photographers.The editor-in-chief is J. Krist, the editors M. Pavlicová and L. Uhlíková. A bibliography of dead and living ethnographers and folklorists is published as the supplement (up to now 11 volumes). Národopisná společnost českoslovanská/The Czechoslavonic Ethnographical Society started to publish its own magazine in 1897. The original name Národopisný sborník českoslovanský/The Czechoslavonic Ethnographical Miscellany was changed to Národopisný věstník českoslovanský/ The Czechoslavonic Ethnographical Bulletin in 1906. Thanks to the editors (J. Polívka et al.) the magazine reached the European standard, especially because of the articles on comparative folklore studies. The bulletin did not exist after the WWII till 1966, when a new editorial board with V. Frolec in the head was created. They tried to reach again the high standard, but the regime after 1968 led to the end of it. As late as in 1984 the Ethnographical Society enforced its publishment but only in a modest form. The publishing continues after 1989., The ethnographic bibliography of Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia
Autonomous ethnographic bibliographies came into being together with the gradual forming of ethnography as an independent discipline - in 1880s and 1890s. Before this time, ethnography had been included in linguistic, literary, historic and other surveys. Ethnographic materials were included also in the oldest scientific magazine - The Magazine of the Czech Museum - since 1830, as well as in The History of Czech Literature by J. Jungmann (1825), works of P. J. Šafařík, J. V. Michl, A. V. Šembera, F. Doucha, J. Jireček and others. Since 1880s ethnographic surveys were published in the magazine Wisla (J. Polívka). In the Czechoslavonic Ethnographic Bulletin. Ethnographic materials were published by J. Polívka, V. Tille, J. Zubatý. E. Kovář, L. Niederle and others. The bibliiography of Czech and Slovak ethnography was published also in some German and Austrian magazines. The bibliography was regularly published in the Czech Folk led by Č. Zíbrt. Zíbrt himself is the author of the Bibliography of Czech History. In 1930s the bibliographies were processed by D. Stránská and J. Horák. In 1954, a bibliography documenting the years 1945-1952 was published by L. Kunz. This bibliography is continued by bibliographies by H. Mülerová (1953-1970), V. Trkovská and Z. Mišurec. In 1960 an important bibliography (1891-1932) was published by L. Kunz. Bibliography of years 1971-1982 by V. Trkovská was published in 1983, years 1983-1989 were documented in 1991 (H. Müllerová). At present, the bibliography is being continued by J. Hrdá; partial bibliographies are by M. Válka, M. Nádvorníková, J. and T. Kubíček, and others., and Anglické abstrakty s šifrou (lv) - abstrakt 1 a (št) - abstrakt 2 jsou uvedeny na str. 198-199.
Stať se snaží analyzovat myšlenky málo známého rukopisu Sigmunda Freuda z roku 1895, v němž usiloval o nalezení biologických základů lidské psychiky. Tato práce je pozoruhodná ze dvou důvodů. Jednak představuje úvahy, které se výrazně odlišují od toho, co je pro Freuda v oblasti psychologie tak typické. Freud se zde, až na výjimky, nezabývá psychoanalýzou či studiemi o hysterii, nýbrž popisuje, co by mohlo být základem těchto psychologických jevů na neurofyziologické úrovni. Druhým pozoruhodným faktem je, že tento manuskript byl pozapomenut až do poloviny 20. století, kdy byl vytištěn pod názvem Projekt vědecké psychologie. A jak je známo, neurofyziologická studia lidské mysli spojená s analýzou kognitivních funkcí se v rigorózní podobě objevují až na počátku 60. let. Stať se proto pokouší ukázat základní principy Projektu a naznačit, v čem byl Freud inspirativním průkopníkem moderních neurofyziologických přístupů k lidské mysli., This paper focuses on Sigmund Freud’s manuscript that he wrote in 1895 as a series of letters seeking for biological foundations of human mind. Th is work significantly differs from what is so typical for Freud as a psychologist. With few exceptions, Freud is not engaged here with psychoanalysis and studies on hysteria, but describes what could be the basis of psychological phenomena at neurophysiological level. Another remarkable fact is that this manuscript was forgotten until the mid-twentieth century when it was published under the title Project for Scientific Psychology. And as we know, neurophysiological studies as rigorous studies of the human mind associated with the analysis of cognitive functions appeared first at the beginning of 60’s. The article therefore attempts to show the basic principles of the Project as well as to outline some of the issues that connect Freud to contemporary ideas in neurophysiology of human mind., and Michal Polák.
Activities of German-Moravian ethnographic museums in the field of folk culture have undergone a number of transformations and reversions in the course of their development. There was a connection with not only from the interference of ethnographic and museological trends with their activities but also with political and nationalist factors. German groups started to realize the need to preserve materials from the rural environment. In some Moravian regions (Kravaře, Hřebeč, Jihlava areas), groups of ethnographic workers dedicated to folk culture were formed and their activities led to the foundation of several ethnographic museum collections. the influence of the central Viennese institution was, however, evident also in the further development of these institutions (e.g. as a model of classification of national collections, methods of presentation). In the First Republic period, German-Moravian museum workers were with increasing intensity coming closer to their counterparts in the German-language environment in Bohemia as well as in Germany from where numerous stimuli (Pessler, Blau, Jungbauer, Lehmann, Hönigschmid) came, bringing along not only new methodical elements into museum work but some of them also certain shifts in understanding the importance of ethnography in museums, in many aspects foreshadowing the subsequent totalitarian period. and The post-Munich period divided Moravian museums intro three administrative units. In addition to common problems (museum network centralization), certain Nazi elements penetrated their presentation activities. Understanding of ethnographic issue often remained in old, fiercely nationalistic attitudes. During the protectorate, a special status was assumed by German museums that through the Association of Moravian Museums sought to encourage ethnographic efforts of Czech museums in Moravia with a goal to create tendencies centrifugal from the Czech national environment. The takeover of German-Moravian museums by the Czechoslovak administration in 1945 did not mean the end of the activities of Moravian Germans in the area. They were transferred to the area of the Federal Republic of Germany and to Austria where they not only played an important role in the integration of this group into local society but also as a strong evidence of the past life they recalled and still recall the lost homeland.
In the article the essence of phonetic and phonematic principles is expounded and the author comes to the conclusion that the principles differ. On several examples from the history of the Proto-Slavic phonematic system their different functioning is shown.
The article presents a first part of an interpretation of the intention of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus. The intention itself used to be considered a rather marginal topic until so called new-Wittgensteinian interpretations. The present article considers main sources to show what kind of content we can ascribe to the book. Its aim is to prove that Tractatus is not purely practical exercise, however without stripping the book of its therapeutic side. The first part considers the preface and the motto of the book., Článek představuje první část interpretace záměru Wittgensteinova Tractatus . Samotný záměr byl doposud považován za poněkud okrajové téma až do tzv. Nových-wittgensteinovských interpretací. Tento článek se zabývá hlavními zdroji, které ukazují, jaký obsah můžeme knize přiřadit. Jejím cílem je dokázat, že Tractatus není čistě praktickým cvičením, ale bez odstranění jeho terapeutické stránky. První část se zabývá předmluvou a mottem knihy., and Petr Glombíček