I. Look through the words and expressions and learn them:

Unit II

I. Look through the words and expressions and learn them:

Ø to emphasize the importance – підкреслити важливість;

Ø to be available – бути доступним;

Ø to encompass subfields and ancillary fields – охоплювати підрозділи та допоміжні галузі;

Ø to be mutually exclusive – бути взаємовиключним;

Ø to concern oneself with – цікавитися/займатися чимось;

Ø to challenge notion – оспорювати, піддавати сумніву поняття;

Ø to be limited to the written word – бути обмеженим письмовим словом;

Ø to coin – вигадувати/створювати/викарбовувати;

Ø to yield information – надавати інформацію;

Ø to rely on various sources of evidence – покладатися на різноманітні джерела доказів;

Ø cuneiform writing – клинопис;

Ø clay tablets – глиняні дощечки;

Ø a blunt reed – зрізаний очерет;

Ø wedge shaped – клиновидний;

Ø within the region in question – в межах галузі/питання, що розглядають;

Ø to generate – породжувати, викликати

II. Read and translate the text:

HISTORY AND PREHISTORY

History is the study of past human events and activities. Although this broad discipline has often been classified under either the humanities or the social sciences, it can be seen to be a bridge between them, incorporating methodologies from both fields of study.

The term history entered the English language with the meaning of "relation of incidents, story" from the Latin historia "narrative, account." This itself was derived from the Ancient Greek historía, meaning "a learning or knowing by inquiry, history, record, narrative," from the verb historeîn, "to inquire".

Traditionally, historians have attempted to answer historical questions through the study of written documents, although historical research is not limited merely to these sources. In general, the sources of historical knowledge can be separated into three categories: what is written, what is said, and what is physically preserved, and historians often consult all three. Historians frequently emphasize the importance of written records, which universally date to the development of writing. This emphasis has led to the term prehistory, referring to a time before written sources are available. Since writing emerged at different times throughout the world, the distinction between prehistory and history often depends on the topic.

As a field of study, history encompasses many subfields and ancillary fields. These include chronology, historiography, archaeology, genealogy, palaeography among many others.

The scope of the human past has naturally led scholars to divide that time into manageable pieces for study. There are a variety of ways in which the past can be divided, including chronologically, culturally, and topically. These three divisions are not mutually exclusive, and significant overlap is often present. It is possible for historians to concern themselves with both very specific and very general locations, times, and topics, although the trend has been toward specialization.

History and Prehistory. Traditionally, the study of history was limited to the written and spoken word. However, the rise of academic professionalism and the creation of new scientific fields in the 19th and 20th centuries brought a flood of new information that challenged this notion. Archaeology, anthropology and other social sciences were providing new information and even theories about human history. Some traditional historians questioned whether these new studies were really history, since they were not limited to the written word. A new term, prehistory, was coined, to encompass the results of these new fields where they yielded information about times before the existence of written records.

In the 20th century, the division between history and prehistory became problematic. Prehistorians began using archaeology to explain important events in areas that were traditionally in the field of history. Historians began looking beyond traditional political history narratives with new approaches such as economic, social and cultural history, all of which relied on various sources of evidence. In recent decades, strict barriers between history and prehistory may be decreasing.

There are different views for the definition of when history begins. Some believe history began in the 34th century BC, with cuneiform writing. Cuneiforms were written on clay tablets, on which symbols were drawn with a blunt reed called a stylus. The impressions left by the stylus were wedge shaped, thus giving rise to the name cuneiform ("wedge shaped"). The Sumerian script was adapted for the writing of the Akkadian, Elamite, Hittite (and Luwian), Hurrian (and Urartian) languages, and it inspired the Old Persian and Ugaritic national alphabets.

For others history has become a "general" term meaning the study of "everything" that is known about the human past (but even this barrier is being challenged by new fields such as Big History).

Sources that can give light on the past, such as oral tradition, linguistics, and genetics, have become accepted by many mainstream historians. Nevertheless, archaeologists distinguish between history and prehistory based on the appearance of written documents within the region in question. This distinction remains critical for archaeologists because the availability of a written record generates very different interpretative problems and potentials.

III. Particular studies and fields

Do you know the meanings of the words that indicate the various studies? Which of the definitions most nearly describe each of the following subfield of history?

	Archaeology	a	the study of culture in the past.
	Archontology	b	the study of prehistoric and historic human cultures through the recovery, documentation and analysis of material remains and environmental data.
	Art History	c	the study of international relations in the past.
	Economic History	d	the study of the future: researches the medium to long-term future of societies and of the physical world.
	Maritime History	e	the study of warfare and wars in history and what is sometimes considered to be a sub-branch of military history, Naval History.
	Psychohistory	f	the study of politics in the past.
	Chronology	g	the study of societies in the past.
	Big History	h	the study of economies in the past.
	Cultural History	i	the study of changes in art and social context of art.
	Diplomatic History	g	the study of ideas in the context of the cultures that produced them.
	Social History	k	science of localizing historical events in time.
	Political History	l	the study of the psychological motivations of historical events.
	World History	m	the study of ancient texts.
	Historiography of Science	n	the study of history on a large scale across long time frames (since the Big Bang and up to the future) through a multi-disciplinary approach.
	Military History	o	the study of history from a global perspective.
	Palaeography	p	the study of the structure and development of science.
	Intellectual History	q	the study of historical offices and important positions in state, international, political, religious and other organizations and societies.
	History painting	r	the study of maritime transport and all the connected subjects.
	Futurology	s	painters of historical motifs and particularly the great events.

IV. Study the given below lexical units and provide their Ukrainian variants:

to incorporate methodologists from both fields of study
to be limited merely
to separate into categories
to preserve physically
to date to the development of writing
to encompass the results
significant overlap
the creation of new scientific fields
the rise of academic professionalism
interpretive problems and potentials

V. Interpret the following in English:

§ humanities and social sciences;

§ to be a bridge between sciences;

§ to divide into manageable pieces for study;

§ to provide new information;

§ strict barriers;

§ to give light on the past;

§ mainstream historians;

§ to generate problems

VI. Find English equivalents for the following:

· намагатися відповісти на історичні питання;

· джерела історичного знання;

· масштаб/широта людського минулого;

· посилаючись на;

· з появою письма;

· залежить від теми;

· різноманітність способів;

· спричинити потік інформації;

· пояснити важливі події;

· дивитися далеко за традиційні історичні галузі;

· залишатися критичним

VII. Give synonyms to the underlined words:

§ to inquire;

§ to attempt to answer;

§ to be limited merely;

§ to separate into three categories;

§ to emphasize the importance;

§ since writing emerged;

§ to encompass subfields and ancillary fields;

§ significant overlap;

§ to concern oneself with;

§ the creation of new scientific fields;

§ to coin;

§ to generate different interpretive problems and potentials

VIII. Look through the text and write out the key historical terms.

IX. Answer the following questions:

1. How can the discipline of history be seen?

2. With what meaning did the term “history” enter the English language?

3. What have traditionally historians attempted to do?

4. What categories can the sources of historical knowledge be separated into?

5. What has led to the term “history”?

6. What subfields does history encompass?

7. Why do scholars divide human past into manageable pieces for study?

8. Why was a new term “prehistory” coined?

9. What is the difference between history and prehistory?

X. Make up a plan of the text in the form of statements.

XI. Give the summary of the text.

XII. Render the text close to its original variant.

XIII. Make a written translation of the text:

Protohistory refers to a period between prehistory and history, during which a culture or civilization has not yet developed writing, but other cultures have already noted its existence in their own writings. For example, in Europe, the Celts and the Germanic tribes may be considered to have been protohistoric when they began appearing in Greek and Roman texts.

Protohistoric may also refer to the transition period between the advent of literacy in a society and the writings of the first historians. The preservation of oral traditions may complicate matters as these can provide a secondary historical source for even earlier events. Colonial sites involving a literate group and a non-literate group are also studied as protohistoric situations.

In The Oxford Illustrated History of Prehistoric Europe an article by Timothy Taylor says,

"Because of the existence in some but not all societies of historical writing during the first millennium BC, the period has often been termed 'protohistoric' instead of prehistoric. Of course, the understanding of the past gained through archaeology is broadly different in nature to understanding derived from historical texts. Having both sorts of evidence is a boon and a challenge."

In the abstract of a later paper on "slavery in the first millennium Aegean, Carpatho-Balkan and Pontic regions", Taylor, who is primarily an archaeologist, says,

"I have taken the rather unusual step of trusting what the classical authors tell us they knew."

As with prehistory, determining when a culture may be considered prehistoric or protohistoric is sometimes difficult for the archaeologist. Data vary considerably from culture to culture, region to region, and even from one system of reckoning dates to another.

In its simplest form, protohistory follows the same chronology as prehistory, based on the technological advancement of a particular people with regard to metallurgy:

§ The Copper Age or Chalcolithic

§ The Bronze Age

§ The Iron Age

The best known protohistoric civilizations and ethnic groups are those for whom the term was originally coined: the European barbarian tribes. Many of these peoples of course also experienced periods of prehistory and history.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-04