I course “International Relations” Variant I

Task 1. Find the translation and write down the transcription to the following words or phrases:

Scope, body of knowledge, subject matter, nonstate actors, coercive, scholar, occurrence, to blur, robust, assumption, definable, essence, to bear in mind, to perform analysis, the advent, to highlight, bold departure, hence, to avoid war, to emerge, problem-solving level, transnational basis, to guide, use of force, currently, meaningful difference, to create, multiple issues, .ad hoc conference, turbulence, domestic conditions.

Task 2. Read and translate the text:

WHAT IS THE STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS?

Every academic discipline tries to develop its literature and history, scope and methods, and theoretical way of thinking to produce and organize a body of knowledge. Understanding how specialists in the field of international relations think and work will provide additional conceptual tools to deal with the subject matter of international relations. Thus, offering a profile of the international relations discipline will be useful.

International relations is the study of who gets what, when, and how in matters external to states or in matters crossing national boundary lines.

The who of international relations are primarily states or the countries of the world. In addition, nonstate actors, including terrorists, churches, international organizations, and associations representing ethnic groups, are increasingly being recognized as important in international relations. The goals of actors are the what of international relations, and these goals can be of a political, economic, social, or cultural kind. The when of international relations can range from continuous activity by states providing for the security of their populations to the episodic activity of a private international organization. The how of international relations refers to the instruments actors use to achieve goals. A wide range of instruments is available, including military force, propaganda, foreign aid, diplomacy, and numerous others.

Diplomacy, as a traditional tool in changing times, is helping to move the world from the model of international anarchy to the model of international society.

Today's diplomacy generally supports respect for the authority behind international law and international organizations and is the chief instrument for providing many more rules and norms to guide conduct in international society. Nonstate actors now join in diplomacy, often facilitating cooperation among the more primary state actors.

The orientation of diplomacy is clearly toward cooperation and the avoidance of conflict, especially the use of force. The interaction of the world is now one of interdependence created through the sharing of multiple issues that requires regularly engaging the problem-solving level of multilateralism. Multilateralism is simply diplomacy in which many actors meet in the same place, either in ad hoc conferences or in the more structured international organizations. Today there is a consensus on the diplomatic process and, to a lesser degree, on issues for which diplomacy is appropriate. Most actors today much prefer diplomacy over force, though they still have meaningful differences over issues.

Conditions supporting the international anarchy model of the realists definitely have faded; yet overstressing the positive effects of the diplomatic process can lead to exaggeration. Diplomacy is currently shaping an international society, but has not completed this task. In addition, the shared world culture, essential for an international community, is nowhere in sight. Differences in national cultures, national interests, and diplomatic styles can still occur and create turbulence in diplomatic relations.

Traditionally, the distinctive character of international relations has been the condition or anarchy—that is, the absence of a government, a legal and coercive center that can control the actors in a given political arena. Without the presence of government, some scholars view the use of force and the occurrence of war as normal outcomes. In fact, some scholars in the international relations field have treated the problem of war as the central concern of their discipline. These scholars often contrast international relations with the domestic politics of states. They see the central government of a country as regulating domestic politics and producing more stable and peaceful conditions than are possible in international politics.

In modern reality, lines between domestic and international politics have blurred, bringing the two kinds of politics closer together. Some scholars question whether a specialized international relations field, one within the broader discipline of political science, is even necessary. However, the continuation of many specialized courses and journals under the rubric international relations demonstrates that this field is alive and robust. Although the distinction between international and domestic politics is not always sharp, international specialists operate on the assumption that they have a definable field of study.

Actually, international relations are not nearly as anarchic as some might suppose. World anarchy, in essence the absence of world government, does not necessarily lead to disorder and violence Countries frequently choose to avoid war and follow the norms and rules of international law. Also, the many civil wars and revolutions taking place within countries prove that the presence of governments inside states is no guarantee of stable and peaceful domestic conditions. Sometimes the internal affairs of states turn into anarchy involving both the collapse of central government and chaotic violence. Ironically, it is the United Nations that must come to the rescue of internally disturbed states. The international level, supposedly without order, sends help down to the state level, presumably where order and peace reign almost by definition.

The History of the Study of International Relations

The study of international relations as a discipline is ancient if we bear in mind that writers centuries ago performed analyses of the wars of Greek city-states, the relations of Italian city-states, and the ties of tribute states to the Chinese empire. The modern study of international relations began in the early twentieth century as an interest of diplomatic historians and a specialty of international lawyers.

While American political science began in the 1880s, political scientists specializing in the subject of international relations appeared in the United States with the advent of the World War (1914-1918) and the formation of the League of Nations (1919-1939). These events heightened attention on international affairs in the English-speaking countries. The First World War involved American troops in Europe for the first time, and the League, in a bold departure from historical practice, became an institutional effort to prevent war. New scholarly fields come into being in response to either a social or a technical need. Hence, after the First World War, the desire to avoid war in the future determined the initial direction of the international relations field.

European immigrant scholars helped to emerge in the United States, and some of the early, important American scholars also studied in Europe. Today associations of international specialists continue to communicate and influence one another on a transnational basis.

Although many political scientists view international relations as a subfield of political science, the study of international relations took clearer form with the development of specialized journals. Some of the primary journals that focus on international relations are Foreign Affairs (1922), International Organization (1947), World Politics (1948), the Journal of Conflict Resolution (1956), Orbis (1957), International Studies Quarterly (1963), and the Journal of Peace Research (1964)

Task 3. Answer the following questions.

1. Who are nonstate actors? What is their role in political affairs?

2. What are the main targets in the study of International Relations?

3. What instruments are available for actors?

4. Scholars often don’t contract international relations with domestic politics of states, do they?

5. What are the main distinctive features between domestic & international politics?

6. What can lead to disorder & violence? What way can it be avoided?

7. Do sometimes the internal affairs turn to anarchy or democracy?

8. When did the American political science begin?

9. After the First World War the desire to avoid war in future determined the initial direction of the international relations field, didn’t it?

10. What model is diplomacy helping to move the world from?

11. Today associations of international specialists continue to communicate and influence one another on a transnational basis, don’t they?

12. Is the orientation of diplomacy towards cooperation & avoidance of conflict cleared or blurred nowadays?

13. What is the interaction of the world? How can you understand this notion?

Task 4. Form the Singular or Plural form of the following nouns and give the translation of each:

History, methods, countries, churches, activity, force, propaganda, aid, diplomacy, politics, outcomes, science, anarchy, collapse, definition, lawyers, troops, authority, consensus, issues, community, turbulence, culture, tool, level.

Task 5. Here you have got five sentences. You have to put as many questions as possible. They must be of various types.

1. The orientation of diplomacy is clearly towards cooperation and the avoidance of conflict.

2. Most actors today much prefer diplomacy over force.

3. Differences in national cultures, interests and diplomatic styles can still occur and create turbulence in diplomatic relations.

4. Lines between domestic and international politics have blurred recently.

5. Countries frequently choose to avoid war and follow the norms and rules of international law.

Task 6. Translate the following phrases and words into English using the texts and learn them by heart:

Развивать литературу и историю, заниматься предметом изучения дипломатических отношений, в дополнение, ассоциации, представляющий этнические группы, продолжительная активность, широкий ряд средств, отличительный характер международных отношений, условие анархии, случай войны как позитивный исход, урегулирование внутренней политики, более стабильные и мирные условия, тем не менее, живой и ясный, различие, в сущности, приводить к беспорядку и насилию, избежать войны, определить поле изучения, закончить задание, международное сообщество, создавать турбулентность.

Task 7. Complete the following sentences according to the text:

1. International relations……………………..crossing national boundary lines.

2. Differences in national cultures, national interests, and diplomatic styles can…………………………………….relations.

3. A wide range of instruments is available,……………………………………….

4. …………, often facilitating cooperation among the more primary state actors.

5. The interaction of the world is now one of interdependence created through the sharing of multiple………………………………….level of multilateralism.

6. Traditionally, the distinctive character of international relations……………….., a legal and coercive centre that can control the actors in a given political arena.

7. They see the central government of a country as regulating domestic politics and producing ………………………………………..in international politics.

8. …………………………………., and the League, in a bold departure from historical practice, became an institutional effort to prevent war.

9. European…………………………………, and some of the early, important American scholars also studied in Europe.

10. Although many ………………………………………form with the development of specialized journals.

Task 8. Translate last two passages in writing from the text titled “What is the study of International Relations?”

Task.9.Find synonyms and antonyms to the following words or phrases:

Body of knowledge, field of study, to offer, discipline, to provide, goal, to achieve, alive, robust, to response, to avoid, to determine, collapse, join in, take place, war, state, distinctive, numerous, sharp, to operate, order, violence, anarchy, domestic, active, understanding, to appear, primary.

Task 10. Prepare an informative summary of the given material.

Grammar Reference

Части речи в английском языке. Parts of speech.

Слова в любом языке делятся на части речи - классы, отличающиеся друг от друга по значению, форме и функциям, которые они выполняют в предложении. В английском языке обычно различают следующие части речи: глаголы (verbs), существительные (nouns), артикли (articles), прилагательные (adjectives), местоимения (pronouns),числительные (numerals), наречия (adverbs), предлоги (prepositions), союзы (conjunctions). Рассмотрение частей речи начинается с глагола, который является важнейшей частью речи в английском языке и составляет ядро предложения, а с По своему обобщенному лексическому значению глаголы могут быть охарактеризованы как слова, обозначающие процессы (в широком смысле этого слова), и отвечающие на вопросы "что делать, что сделать?", например: to live (жить), to speak (говорить), to do (делать). Глаголы имеют грамматические категории времени (настоящее, прошедшее, будущее ), лица и числа, вида, залога, наклонения и выполняют в предложении функцию сказуемого. Неопределённую форму глагола принято называть инфинитивом. В английском языке инфинитив всегда употребляется с частицей "to", которая не переводится, например: to know - знать, to work - работать.

Глаголы в английском языке. Verbs.

По своему значению и роли, которую глаголы выполняют в предложении, они делятся на полнозначные или смысловые и служебные. Служебные глаголы частично или полностью утрачивают свое значение. Частичная утрата значения, например, наблюдается у модальных глаголов (саn, mау, и т.д.), что не позволяет им выполнять самостоятельную роль в предложении - они всегда употребляются в сочетании с другими смысловыми глаголами. Полностью утрачивают свое значение глаголы, которые участвуют в образовании сложных форм времени, вида, наклонения и залога. Такие глаголы называют вспомогательными. Вспомогательными глаголами могут быть такие глаголы, как will, have , do и т.д.

Система времен английского глагола достаточно сложна. Так существует группа простых или неопределенных времен (simple или indefinite), передающих обычно происходящее действие, группа длительных времен (progressive или continuous), представляющих действие в его развитии в указанный момент времени и группа совершенных времен (perfect), передающих действие в завершенном виде.

В английском языке имеется два залога: активный или действительный залог ( the Active Voice ) и пассивный или страдательный залог ( the Passive Voice ). Активный залог устанавливает, что лицо или предмет, обозначенные подлежащим, являются производителями действия, выраженного сказуемым, например: I made a mistake. - Я совершил ошибку. Пассивный же залог устанавливает, что лицо или предмет, обозначенные подлежащим, являются объектами действия, выраженного сказуемым. В силу своего значения пассивный залог может употребляться только с переходными глаголами - глаголами, в значении которых заложена необходимость сочетаться с дополнением: A mistake was made. Ошибка была совершена.