Szemle Archive


Fe­renc Vö­rös: Név­ku­ta­tás és név­föld­rajz

One part of lin­guists still con­sid­er sci­ence of names to be an aux­il­iary sci­ence. Although the major­i­ty of sci­en­tist of sci­ence of names – as well as the study’s author – has dif­fer­ent opin­ion on it. In the first part of the study the author intro­duces its cre­ation and sub­ject as a sci­ence with its own prin­ci­ples. The sec­ond part of the study takes into con­sid­er­a­tion the ma­in con­tact points of name geog­ra­phy and name geog­ra­phy. The clos­ing chap­ter of the study sum­maris­es that expe­ri­ence that should be taken into con­sid­er­a­tion accord­ing to the author at the plan­ning of sci­ence of names research in Slo­va­ki­a.

The cur­rent sub­ject of sci­ence of names is the prop­er name itself. Although, he­re imme­di­at­ly the def­i­ni­tion of prop­er names caus­es prob­lem­s. There is still a con­flict in con­nec­tion with what we con­sid­er prop­er noun­s, in la­tin nomen pro­pri­um. Fur­ther obsta­cles of con­cep­tion def­i­ni­tion is that well-­known fact that some lan­guages dif­fer­ent­ly judge cer­tain cat­e­gories. For exam­ple, in Hun­gar­i­an lan­guage hol­i­days and cer­tain memo­ri­al days are not con­sid­ered prop­er names. On the con­trary, Russ­ian does. In Slo­vak the names of peo­ple of dif­fer­ent nations are con­sid­ered as prop­er names. And we can even con­tin­ue in it.
The def­i­ni­tion of lan­guage geog­ra­phy is to be defined in a mo­re nar­row and wider sense. Accord­ing to the wider inter­pre­ta­tion includes con­nec­tion on the level of lan­guage ter­ri­to­ries and the exam­i­na­tion of lan­guage areas as well. Accord­ing to the mo­re nar­row inter­pre­ta­tion it deals only with the clas­si­fi­ca­tion of dialect­s. Lan­guage geog­ra­phy research from the point of view of sci­ence his­to­ry orig­i­nate in dialec­tic­s. The ini­tial research­es have been changed to goal-ori­ent­ed research­es.

Lász­ló Öllös: The Party of Hungarian Coalition after the Parliamentary Elections in 2006

At the parliamentary elections in 2006 the Party of Hungarian Coalition received 269 111 votes, with which it lagged behind the number of votes received four years ago. At the same time, 54,67% participation from four years ago, the number of votes of this year resulted the highest one up to now, that was 11,68% . The MKP in order to receive better voting results in the future, had to examine what were the social groups whose support it lost and why. After this it can be considered the way how to get them back. At the same time it should also be considered whom and why it remained in its supporters.

The MKP faces double challenge in the present situation in the issue of representation. On one hand the picture becomes weak that during the last eight years was created in the majority of voters, namely that it can effectively represent (manage) many concrete cases relating to them individually or as a member of a social group, since the party found itself in opposition. Only in such regional and local self-governments remains that opportunity in which the party representatives form the majority, and/or belong to the coalition majority. Although these positions do not enable to balance the lost governmental opportunities and sources.
In the issue of equal rights of the Hungarian and Slovak language the MKP has even several action fields. One is the political representation of language rights expansion containing even demonstrative elements. The second other is the political support of the social dispute on the issue. The third one is spreading Hungarian language usage in public life. Self-governments directed by the MKP can make a lot for this due to their competence, by influencing local enterpreneurs, and together with the national leadership of the party, any eventually by launching a movement that strenghtens and supports the public usage of the Hungarian language. In our opinion the support of cultural and educational institutions and mainly the emphasising its prestige and role from the point of view of MKP is very important, since in case of campaigns they have a very important role and can be a kind of background basis for the party present in government and mainly in the opposition. We are not talking only about Cse­ma­dok, but about ci­vil organisations and educational institutions,

Jó­zsef Lisz­ka: Between two Coasts … The Posi­tion and Role of the Folk­lore Cul­ture in one of the Impact Zones of Europe

The study deals with three top­ic­s: first­ly what is the Hun­gar­i­an folk­lore cul­ture in the Hun­gar­i­an com­mon knowl­edge; sec­ond­ly how, due to what outer and inner influ­ence, process did this cul­ture evolved to such form that we got to know in the 20th cen­tu­ry, and/or we thought we got to know, and third­ly what role does the Hun­gar­i­an folk­lore cul­ture play in Euro­pean con­tex­t.

Folk­lore cul­ture is con­sid­ered one of the most impor­tant insti­tu­tions of nation­al exis­tance, and medi­um of ancien­t, nation­al sings, and char­ac­ter­is­tic­s. At the same time sci­ence is aware of the fact that except for the lan­guage in the Hun­gar­i­an folk­lore cul­ture there is no such phe­nom­e­non that would be known in the whole Hun­gar­i­an lan­guage field and only in the Hun­gar­i­an lan­guage field. The other extreme is rep­re­sent­ed by those view­points that com­pre­hend folk­lore cul­ture as such sub-­­cul­ture that builds from cul­ture ele­ments crum­bled away from the “high cul­ture”, and from this “waste” can show at most val­ues of local and only par­tial impor­tance, and that deal with ethnog­ra­phy as with “light ope­ra”.
Well, in fact both view­points (the enthu­si­as­ti­cal­ly affirm­ing and the rigid­ly reject­ing) can be orig­i­nat­ed from the not know­ing (or sur­face know­ing) of the essence of folk­lore cul­ture and tak­ing no account of the results of ethnog­ra­phy. Folk­lore cul­ture is a his­tor­i­cal phe­nom­e­non, that from one hand means that it is form­ing and chang­ing con­stant­ly, enrichen­ing with new ele­ments (form­ing them to its own pic­ture), while oth­ers sim­ply reject­s. Over­es­ti­mat­ing or ignor­ing its role is not right.
We can­not under­stand the folk­lore cul­ture and the ethno­graph­ic phe­nom­e­na of a given nation with­out know­ing the cul­ture of neigh­bour­ing nations and com­par­ing exam­i­na­tion. Besides all this is one of the mis­sions of Euro­pean eth­nol­o­gy.
It can be explained from the point of view of sci­en­tif­ic his­to­ry, but it can­not be rea­soned that our ethno­graph­ic expe­ri­ence (and in fact not just our) iden­ti­fies spread­ing ter­ri­to­ry of „our folk­lore cul­ture” with the Hun­gar­i­an lan­guage ter­ri­to­ry (and in fact the „na­tion­al” folk­lore cul­ture with the lan­guage expan­sion of the given eth­ni­cal-­na­tion­al group). From one hand it is evi­dent that the folk­lore cul­ture of a par­tic­u­lar eth­nic group is gen­er­al­ly not uni­fied, it con­sists of mo­re small­er and big­ger basic units – that dif­fer from each other – and at the same time con­nect to each other like mosaic­s. On the other hand cer­tain cul­tur­al phe­nom­e­na (we have to admit that the most!) strech over lan­guage bor­der­s, and depend­ing on the etnic group, cre­ate cul­tures and cul­ture cir­cles that are con­nect­ed to each oth­er. Thus, in our case it would be bet­ter to talk for exam­ple about the folk­lore cul­ture of the Carpathi­an bas­in, that has cer­tain region­al, smal­l-­­coun­try – but no or by all means eth­ni­cal (lan­guage!) – defined sub-­­groups (for exam­ple Pan­non reg­ion, Upper Land, Low Land, etc.).

Zsu­zsan­na Lampl: Polit­i­cal Iden­ti­ty of Hun­gar­i­ans Liv­ing in Slo­va­kia

The ma­in topic of the study is the polit­i­cal iden­ti­ty of Hun­gar­i­ans liv­ing in Slo­va­ki­a. In the first part the author short­ly sum­maris­es what kind of iden­ti­ty types char­ac­terised the 90s, than in the sec­ond part of the study he analy­ses the state of polit­i­cal iden­ti­ty in 2001 and the changes com­par­ing with the 90s. The author also analy­ses the char­ac­ter­is­tics of polit­i­cal iden­ti­ty type­s. In the third part, on the basis of the newest research, he intro­duces what fac­tors influ­ence in­te­rest towards pol­i­tics and who are those who con­scious­ly refuse pol­i­tic­s.

Éva Matus – Be­á­ta Se­bő – An­na­má­ria Végh_: The Doc­u­men­tary Activ­i­ties of the Bib­lio­the­ca Hun­gar­i­ca

The ma­in goal of the Bib­lio­the­ca Hun­gar­i­ca, that was estab­lished in 1990, is to col­lect and to reserve the mem­o­ries, book­s, pub­li­ca­tions of Hun­gar­i­ans in Slo­va­ki­a. Its mis­sion is to pro­vide an insti­tu­tion­al frame­work for the col­lec­tion of Hun­gar­i­an issues relat­ing Hun­gar­i­ans liv­ing in Slo­va­ki­a, for its sci­en­tif­ic process, and for the cre­ation of a mo­dern doc­u­men­tary ser­vi­ce. The library con­sists of the fol­low­ing part­s: col­lec­tion of books and peri­od­i­cal­s, post-­card­s, voice archive, inher­i­tance, col­lec­tion of let­ters and man­u­script­s.

Its col­lec­tions of books and peri­od­i­cals is mo­re and mo­re used by researcher­s, uni­ver­stiy teach­ers and uni­ver­si­ty teach­er­s, and work­ers of insti­tu­tions deal­ing with the issues of Hun­gar­i­ans liv­ing in Slo­va­ki­a. Impor­tant goal of the Bib­lio­the­ca Hun­gar­ic is to pub­lish bib­li­ogra­phies, this is why it launched a book series titled Mis­cel­lanea Bib­lio­the­cae Hun­gar­i­cae.

Ár­pád Popé­ly: Role of the Hun­gar­i­an Com­mit­tee in the cre­ation of the Új Szó and the Cse­ma­dok

The study dis­cuss­es the his­to­ry of the Hun­gar­i­an Com­mitte at the Slo­vak com­mu­nis­tic party lead­er­ship, and with­in this main­ly the role of Új Szó party peri­od­i­cal and the Hun­gar­i­an cul­tur­al organ­i­sa­tion in the estab­lish­ment of the Cse­ma­dok. The role of the com­mit­tee set up in No­vem­ber 1948 was to help party lead­er­ship to re-in­te­grate Hun­gar­i­ans liv­ing in Slo­va­kia and that lost their rights into the polit­i­cal, social, and eco­nom­ic life of the coun­try, to pre­pare and imple­ment deci­sions of the party relat­ing the Hun­gar­i­an minor­i­ty. Although the Hun­gar­i­an mem­bers of the com­m­mit­tee (Ma­jor Ist­ván, Lőrincz Gyu­la, Fábry Ist­ván, Kugler Já­nos, and Rabay Fe­renc) were all old party work­ers who had the con­fi­dence of the par­ty, the dis­closed archive doc­u­ments evi­dence that they opposed to the Slo­vak party lead­er­ship in many issues, and/or to the Slo­vak mem­bers of the com­mit­tee (Daniel Okáli, Ondrej Pavlík, and Ladislav Novomeský), that after its less than one year of its exis­tance, in Octo­ber of 1949 led to the can­cel­la­tion of the Hun­gar­i­an Com­mit­tee.

Gá­bor Lel­kes: Region­al dis­par­i­ties in South­ern Slo­va­kia in rela­tion to the EU mem­ber­ship

The study deals with the devel­op­ment of the large scale region­al dis­par­i­ties in Slo­va­kia in rela­tion to the coun­try’s EU mem­ber­ship, focus­ing on South­ern Slo­va­ki­a, pop­u­lat­ed by the Hun­gar­i­an minor­i­ty. Before 2004 for al­most 8 decades this reg­ion had been han­dled as periph­er­al by the suc­ces­sive gov­ern­ments of Czecho­slo­va­kia and Slo­va­ki­a.

With the EU mem­ber­ship of the coun­try, a new area-struc­ture appeared, which shows the signs of a new eco­nom­ic and social area-struc­ture and also a trans­formed region­al set­tle­ment dis­tri­b­u­tion. Slo­va­kia’s entry to the Euro­pean Union is a huge, per­haps one in a life­time chal­lenge and oppor­tu­ni­ty for the inhab­i­tants of South­ern Slo­va­ki­a, which must be cap­i­tal­ized. How­ev­er, we can­not expec­t, that the EU mem­ber­ship auto­mat­i­cal­ly means eco­nom­ic and social rise for the reg­ion. The EU mem­ber­ship pro­vides only an oppor­tu­ni­ty to reduce the dif­fer­ences in the level of devel­op­ment of cer­tain region­s, an oppor­tu­ni­ty for a change of struc­ture and an oppor­tu­ni­ty to catch up. The actu­al eco­nom­ic and social rise itself depends on the regions them­selves, whether they live with the oppor­tu­ni­ty or not. Nat­u­ral­ly if we want to end South­ern Slo­va­kia’s periph­er­al char­ac­ter, we need a favourable cen­tral gov­ern­men­tal and region­al gov­ern­men­tal polit­i­cal atmos­phere (the peri­od between 2002 and 2006 is the best exam­ple for such cen­tral gov­ern­men­tal lev­el), since dur­ing the divi­sion of resources (EU or nation­al) and devel­op­men­tal invest­ments, the regions inhab­it­ed by Hun­gar­i­ans often fall vic­tim to the Slo­vak nation­al­is­tic polit­i­cal deci­sions (re­gions and town­ships inhab­it­ed by Slo­vak­s, which are already mo­re devel­ope­d, are the ma­jor ben­e­fi­cia­ries).
Two years after Slo­va­kia became a mem­ber of the EU, the in­de­xes of under­de­vel­op­ment and iso­la­tion in South­ern Slo­va­kia are still mo­re unfavourable, then the sim­i­lar in­de­xes in other regions – how­ev­er, there is a sig­nif­i­cant change in the process­es influ­enc­ing the ten­den­cies. The region­al dis­crep­an­cies in South­ern Slo­va­kia are caused by the struc­ture of the region­s’ econ­o­my (sec­tors pro­duc­ing lit­tle added value are dom­i­nan­t), by the lack of good qual­i­ty traf­fic infra­struc­ture and high­ly edu­cat­ed human resources, and by the restric­tive char­ac­ter of the Slovak-Hungarian rela­tion­s. There­fore the pol­i­cy of region­al devel­op­ment has to approach the prob­lem in it’s com­plex­i­ty in the fol­low­ing years, and the sup­port must come in a con­cen­trat­ed form, and it must be struc­tural­ly and region­al­ly tar­get­ed. The finan­cial back­ground of the eco­nom­i­cal-­so­cial rise of the regions inhab­it­ed by Hun­gar­i­ans may be based on their own resources, on the budg­et of the town­ship­s, the regions and of the coun­try, but most sig­nif­i­cant­ly on the resources of the EU. Draw­ing from the­se, how­ev­er requires active sys­tems of infor­ma­tion and train­ing/­con­sult­ing for those involved in the region­s. It is also nec­es­sary to tame the nation­al­is­tic feel­ings, which flared up on the Slo­vak and Hun­gar­i­an side in the sum­mer of 2006 and to restore the mutu­al trust between the major­i­ty nation and the Hun­gar­i­an minor­i­ty.

At­ti­la Si­mon: With Pipe, Drum, Dou­ble Bass – or Exper­i­ment on „the Re-oc­cu­pa­tion of the Upper Land” on 5th Octo­ber 1938

Due to the strained for­eign and home pol­i­cy sit­u­a­tion in Czecho­slo­va­ki­a, Sep­tem­ber and Octo­ber 1938 was rich in armed inci­dents, street demon­stra­tions, eth­nic con­flict­s. These were first­ly char­ac­ter­is­tic for the Czech-German bor­der sec­tion, where they began even soon­er before the deci­sion in Munich, but they con­tin­ued even after the bor­der changes.

Despite of this, on the Slovak-Hungarian bor­der sec­tion there was silence and peace­ful­ness, although in the first days of Octo­ber, the sit­u­a­tion in South Slo­va­kia sharp­ened. In many places – main­ly in the ter­ri­to­ry of Sub-Carpathia – there were minor bor­der col­lis­sions that were made most­ly by free groups gath­er­ing in Hun­ga­ry. Although in the ter­ri­to­ry of the Slovak-Hungarian bor­der sec­tion the num­ber of such con­flicts was min­i­mal. On 5th Octo­ber by Kacagó­pusz­ta belong­ing to the dis­trict of Fe­le­di, on 7th Octo­ber by Pár­kány, and on 13th Octo­ber in Per­benyik belong­ing to the Kirá­ly­helmec dis­tric there were bor­der inci­dents. In this study from the three inci­dents we intend to intro­duce the one that hap­pened in Kacagó­pusz­ta on 5th Octo­ber that before the first Vien­na deci­sion can be con­sid­ered not only the most impor­tant indi­ci­den­t, but also the most doc­u­ment­ed one.
The most impor­tant bor­der inci­dent of fall 1938 was in the Fe­le­di dis­trict on 5th Octo­ber, dur­ing which the units of the Hun­gar­i­an bor­der insur­ing com­pa­ny in Hang­ony broke to the ter­ri­to­ry of Czecho­slo­va­ki­a. Con­se­quent­ly they broke the first line of the Czechoslo­vak bor­der guard and occu­pied some ter­ri­to­ries lived by Hun­gar­i­an­s. Although the Czechoslo­vak bor­der defence – that were acti­vat­ed and put into action even armoured troops – stopped them. After the attack was defeat­ed, and their supe­ri­or units mo­re strong­ly insist­ed on their with­drawal, the attack­ers after 1 day of fight, on 5th Octo­ber in evening hours drew back behind the state bor­der­s.
The set­tling down of the diplo­mat­ic storm that was caused by the evening inci­dent took place at the meet­ing in Ko­má­rom. After the com­mence­ment of the ple­na­ry meet­ing on 10th Octo­ber the leader of the Slo­vak del­e­ga­tion, Jozef Tiso required expla­na­tion from the Hun­gar­i­an party con­cern­ing the attack on 5th Octo­ber. Con­se­quent­ly Ká­nya explained that there was indi­vid­ual ini­tia­tive behind the attack and that the exam­i­na­tion of the case is in process. Te­le­ki indi­cat­ed that the sol­dier in cus­tody would be bring to mil­i­tary jus­tice.

Ilo­na L. Ju­hász: Research and Doc­u­men­ta­tion of Ceme­ter­ies in Hun­gar­i­an Ter­ri­to­ries in Slo­va­kia

The author in her study sum­maris­es the results of ceme­tery research that have been made in ter­ri­to­ries lived by Hun­gar­i­ans in Slo­va­ki­a, pro­vid­ing a pro­found overview of lit­er­a­ture relat­ed to Hun­gar­i­an and Slo­vak lan­guage top­ic­s. Dur­ing the research of ceme­ter­ies and their tomb sign­s, in the past the pro­fes­sion­als con­cen­trat­ed on the doc­u­men­ta­tion of exclu­sive­ly one type of tomb sign, that is on Protes­tant tomb signs carved from wood. Con­cern­ing the Catholic tomb sign­s, the dealt also with the “old” tomb sings, main­ly those made from wood. A com­plex ethno­graph­ic research and com­plete doc­u­men­ta­tion of a ceme­tery of a Slo­vak ter­ri­to­ry lived by Hun­gar­i­ans was the goal of the Ethno­graph­ic Cen­ter of the Fo­rum Insti­tute in Ko­má­rom for the first time. The first result of the research was a com­plex exam­i­na­tion and com­plete doc­u­men­ta­tion of such char­ac­ter of the ceme­tery of a min­ing ter­ri­to­ry in Gemer. The sum­ma­ry of this research was pub­lished in a pub­li­ca­tion in 2002. The author pro­vides a thor­ough sur­vey on the ceme­tery research pro­vid­ed in the men­tioned insti­tu­tion, but it also intro­duces the pos­i­tive results of other research made in other insti­tu­tions in the last one or two years.

Pé­ter Hunčík: Inter-eth­nic train­ing with psy­chodra­ma method

After ten years of work we can state, in ret­ro­spec­t, that the method of self-­­knowl­edge-­com­mu­ni­ca­tion-­con­flict res­o­lu­tion works well even in eth­ni­cal­ly and reli­gious­ly mixed group­s. There is a detail descrip­tion in the arti­cle about the using of the psy­chodra­ma in such train­ing work.

Dur­ing this peri­od mo­re than 1200 cit­i­zens of Slo­vak and Hun­gar­i­an nation­al­i­ty par­tic­i­pat­ed in these train­ings in Slo­va­ki­a. Anoth­er 500 par­tic­i­pants were Ro­ma ori­gin both from Slo­va­kia and Hun­ga­ry. In the arti­cle there is brief eval­u­a­tion about our train­ing activ­i­ties in Israel, Belorus and Uzbe­gis­tan. The major­i­ty of par­tic­i­pants in the train­ing were local opin­ion lead­er­s. Teach­ers and stu­dents com­prised the major­i­ty of par­tic­i­pants.
A year later most of the par­tic­i­pants report­ed pos­i­tive out­come as a result
of the train­ing. We believe that this kind of train­ing could have a domi­no effect and would con­tribute to reduc­ing con­flicts and poten­tial con­flicts between indi­vid­u­al­s, eth­nic groups and nations.

Ár­pád Bagin: A New Ethno­graph­ic Phe­nom­e­non in East-Central Europe? The Hal­loween and the Prepa­ra­tion of Pump­kin Dum­mies at a Ter­ri­to­ry of the Low­lands in Ógyal­la

The author, join­ing the research pro­ject of the Fo­rum Insti­tute – that pro­vides research of minor­i­ty – titled Pop­u­lar Cul­ture 1990–2005 delt with Hal­loween and main­ly with the cus­tom of pump­kin dummy prepa­ra­tion.

The author observed sev­er­al influ­ence at the exam­ined ter­ri­to­ry: between insti­tu­tion-in­sti­tu­tion (vis­it­ing exhi­bi­tion­s), insti­tu­tion-­fam­i­ly (for exam­ple a fam­i­ly influ­enced by a kinder­garten prog­ram pre­pares a pump­kin dummy in its home­), fam­i­ly-­fam­i­ly (no­tice the exhib­it­ed work­s), there can be even influ­ence of difer­ent inten­si­ty with­in the fam­i­ly. The pump­kin can be from own gar­den (there are some who grow pump­kins espe­cial­ly for this pur­pose), from grand­par­ents’, rel­a­tives’, friend­s’, and neigh­bours’ gar­den. They illus­trate, de­sign dif­fer­ent things, form­s, even expe­ri­ence of many years can help in it. When pre­pa­ring, they draw a pat­tern (with a knife, pen­cil, etc.) on the pump­kin. Pump­king prepa­ra­tion is a form of enter­tain­ment that can last for approx. half an hour, but even longer. The seed of the pump­kin can be used, eat­en, at the insti­tu­tion they are glued on sheets of draw­ing paper. The pump­kin dummy can then be displa­yed (gen­er­al­ly in case of insti­tu­tion­s) for months (for exam­ple to Jan­u­ary of the next year!).
In insti­tu­tions (but also in house­hold­s) sev­er­al dec­o­rat­ing ele­ments can be used (hat, yarn, etc.), and it is also pos­si­ble to paint on the pump­kin dum­my. It is also pres­ent and main­ly in the case of insti­tu­tions that the size of the pump­kin is com­pared with the one from the pre­vi­ous year, it is then stat­ed in which year grew big­ger pump­kin­s. The eyes and the noses are gen­er­al­ly of tri­an­gu­lar form, but they also vary, the eye holes can be cir­cu­lar and square, too. In the insi­tu­tions pic­tures are made from the sev­er­al stages of the process of hol­low­ing out the pump­kind­s. In the cir­cles of the Slo­vaks even the expres­sion of spook (but also jack-­o-lantern) is pre­sen­t, Hun­gar­i­ans gen­er­al­ly call the pump­kin dummy pump­kin lantern. But anoth­er names also appeared, that are in some fam­i­lies became set­tled, that are grin­ning pump­kin, dumb, etc.). Hal­loween can be called dif­fer­ent­ly, respon­dents state (for exam­ple Halo­gene, Helovei). In 2003–2004 dec­o­ra­tive pump­kin­s, and/or sim­ple pump­kins appeared at the research areas (on stairs, entrence doors, but in the exam­ined edu­ca­tion­al insti­tu­tion­s, shop­s, exhi­bi­tion­s, too).
On 31st Oct. 2003 at a place of enter­tain­ment in Ógyal­la a Hal­loween party was organ­ised with mo­re or less suc­cess. He­re only the organ­is­ers were in cos­tumes (witch, nun, etc.), who offered sweets from a bas­ket to the guest­s.