Search (44 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Theorie verbaler Dokumentationssprachen"
  1. Mikacic, M.: Statistical system for subject designation (SSSD) for libraries in Croatia (1996) 0.10 
    0.097894415 = product of:
  0.19578883 = sum of:
    0.19578883 = sum of:
      0.1260337 = weight(_text_:subject in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1260337 = score(doc=2943,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04550679 = queryNorm
          0.77435577 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
      0.069755144 = weight(_text_:22 in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.069755144 = score(doc=2943,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04550679 = queryNorm
          0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Describes the developments of the Statistical System for Subject Designation (SSSD): a syntactical system for subject designation for libraries in Croatia, based on the construction of subject headings in agreement with the theory of the sentence nature of subject headings. The discussion is preceded by a brief summary of theories underlying basic principles and fundamental rules of the alphabetical subject catalogue
    Date
    31. 7.2006 14:22:21
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.1, S.77-93
  2. Hoerman, H.L.; Furniss, K.A.: Turning practice into principles : a comparison of the IFLA Principles underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the principles underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings system (2000) 0.03 
    0.028942334 = product of:
  0.057884667 = sum of:
    0.057884667 = product of:
      0.115769334 = sum of:
        0.115769334 = weight(_text_:subject in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.115769334 = score(doc=5611,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.7112912 = fieldWeight in 5611, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5611)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing's Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Headings Languages has identified a set of eleven principles for subject heading languages and excerpted the texts that match each principle from the instructions for each of eleven national subject indexing systems, including excerpts from the LC's Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings. This study compares the IFLA principles with other texts that express the principles underlying LCSH, especially Library of Congress Subject Headings: Principles of Structure and Policies for Application, prepared by Lois Mai Chan for the Library of Congress in 1990, Chan's later book on LCSH, and earlier documents by Haykin and Cutter. The principles are further elaborated for clarity and discussed
    Source
    The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone
  3. Bhattacharyya, G.: ¬A general theory of subject headings (1974) 0.03 
    0.025726518 = product of:
  0.051453035 = sum of:
    0.051453035 = product of:
      0.10290607 = sum of:
        0.10290607 = weight(_text_:subject in 1592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10290607 = score(doc=1592,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.63225883 = fieldWeight in 1592, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1592)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  4. Principles underlying subject heading languages (SHLs) (1999) 0.03 
    0.025524741 = product of:
  0.051049482 = sum of:
    0.051049482 = product of:
      0.102098964 = sum of:
        0.102098964 = weight(_text_:subject in 1659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.102098964 = score(doc=1659,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.6272999 = fieldWeight in 1659, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1659)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Principles of 11 subject heading languages from USA, Germany, Portugal, Iran, Canada, Norway, Spain, Poland, France, Russia
    Issue
    Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages; approved by the Standing Committee of the IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing.
    LCSH
    Subject headings
    Subject cataloging / Rules
    Subject
    Subject headings
    Subject cataloging / Rules
  5. Lopes, M.I.: Principles underlying subject heading languages : an international approach (1996) 0.03 
    0.025167733 = product of:
  0.050335467 = sum of:
    0.050335467 = product of:
      0.10067093 = sum of:
        0.10067093 = weight(_text_:subject in 5608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10067093 = score(doc=5608,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.61852604 = fieldWeight in 5608, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Discusses the problems in establishing commonly accepted principles for subject retrieval between different bibliographic systems. The Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages was established to devise general principles for any subject retrieval system and to review existing real systems in the light of such principles and compare them in order to evaluate the extent of their coverage and their application in current practices. Provides a background and history of the Working Group. Discusses the principles underlying subject headings and their purposes and the state of the work and major findings
  6. ¬The LCSH century : One hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system (2000) 0.02 
    0.024064954 = product of:
  0.04812991 = sum of:
    0.04812991 = product of:
      0.09625982 = sum of:
        0.09625982 = weight(_text_:subject in 1224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09625982 = score(doc=1224,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.591424 = fieldWeight in 1224, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1224)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: BACKGROUND: Alva T STONE: The LCSH Century: A Brief History of the Library of Congress Subject Headings, and Introduction to the Centennial Essays - THEORY AND PRINCIPLES: Elaine SVENONIUS: LCSH: Semantics, Syntax and Specificity; Heidi Lee HOERMAN u. Kevin A. FURNISS: Turning Practice into Principles: A Comparison of the IFLA: Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the Principles Underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings System; Hope A. OLSON: Difference, Culture and Change:The Untapped Potential of LCSH - ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: Pauline Atherton COCHRANE: Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs Revisited-What Progress Has Been Made? What Issues Still Remain?; Gregory WOOL: Filing and Precoordination: How Subject Headings Are Displayed in Online Catalogs and Why It Matters; Stephen HEARN: Machine-Assisted Validation of LC Subject Headings: Implications for Authority File Structure - SPECIFIC PERSPECTIVES: Thomas MANN: Teaching Library of Congress Subject Headings; Louisa J. KREIDER: LCSH Works! Subject Searching Effectiveness at the Cleveland Public Library and the Growth of Library of Congress Subject Headings Through Cooperation; Harriette HEMMASI u J. Bradford YOUNG: LCSH for Music: Historical and Empirical Perspectives; Joseph MILLER u. Patricia KUHR: LCSH and Periodical Indexing: Adoption vs. Adaptation; David P MILLER: Out from Under: Form/Genre Access in LCSH - WORLD VIEW: Magda HEINER-FREILING: Survey on Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies; Andrew MacEWAN: Crossing Language Barriers in Europe: Linking LCSH to Other Subject Heading Languages; Alvaro QUIJANO-SOLIS u.a.: Automated Authority Files of Spanish-Language Subject Headings - FUTURE PROSPECTS: Lois Mai CHAN u. Theodora HODGES: Entering the Millennium: a new century for LCSH
    LCSH
    Subject heading, Library of Congress
    Subject
    Subject heading, Library of Congress
  7. ¬The LCSH century : One hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system (2000) 0.02 
    0.02318957 = product of:
  0.04637914 = sum of:
    0.04637914 = product of:
      0.09275828 = sum of:
        0.09275828 = weight(_text_:subject in 5366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09275828 = score(doc=5366,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.5699104 = fieldWeight in 5366, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5366)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: BACKGROUND: Alva T STONE: The LCSH Century: A Brief History of the Library of Congress Subject Headings, and Introduction to the Centennial Essays - THEORY AND PRINCIPLES: Elaine SVENONIUS: LCSH: Semantics, Syntax and Specificity; Heidi Lee HOERMAN u. Kevin A. FURNISS: Turning Practice into Principles: A Comparison of the IFLA: Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the Principles Underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings System; Hope A. OLSON: Difference, Culture and Change:The Untapped Potential of LCSH - ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: Pauline Atherton COCHRANE: Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs Revisited-What Progress Has Been Made? What Issues Still Remain?; Gregory WOOL: Filing and Precoordination: How Subject Headings Are Displayed in Online Catalogs and Why It Matters; Stephen HEARN: Machine-Assisted Validation of LC Subject Headings: Implications for Authority File Structure - SPECIFIC PERSPECTIVES: Thomas MANN: Teaching Library of Congress Subject Headings; Louisa J. KREIDER: LCSH Works! Subject Searching Effectiveness at the Cleveland Public Library and the Growth of Library of Congress Subject Headings Through Cooperation; Harriette HEMMASI u J. Bradford YOUNG: LCSH for Music: Historical and Empirical Perspectives; Joseph MILLER u. Patricia KUHR: LCSH and Periodical Indexing: Adoption vs. Adaptation; David P MILLER: Out from Under: Form/Genre Access in LCSH - WORLD VIEW: Magda HEINER-FREILING: Survey on Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies; Andrew MacEWAN: Crossing Language Barriers in Europe: Linking LCSH to Other Subject Heading Languages; Alvaro QUIJANO-SOLIS u.a.: Automated Authority Files of Spanish-Language Subject Headings - FUTURE PROSPECTS: Lois Mai CHAN u. Theodora HODGES: Entering the Millennium: a new century for LCSH
    Footnote
    Die einzelnen Beiträge sind über die Buchversion erfasst: In: The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone. New York: Haworth Press 2000.
  8. Michel, D.: Taxonomy of Subject Relationships (1997) 0.02 
    0.022739245 = product of:
  0.04547849 = sum of:
    0.04547849 = product of:
      0.09095698 = sum of:
        0.09095698 = weight(_text_:subject in 5346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09095698 = score(doc=5346,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.55884314 = fieldWeight in 5346, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5346)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Teil von: Final Report to the ALCTS/CCS Subject Analysis Committee. June 1997 (http://web2.ala.org/ala/alctscontent/CCS/committees/subjectanalysis/subjectrelations/finalreport.cfm).
  9. ALA / Subcommittee on Subject Relationships/Reference Structures: Final Report to the ALCTS/CCS Subject Analysis Committee (1997) 0.02 
    0.022510704 = product of:
  0.045021407 = sum of:
    0.045021407 = product of:
      0.090042815 = sum of:
        0.090042815 = weight(_text_:subject in 1800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.090042815 = score(doc=1800,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.5532265 = fieldWeight in 1800, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1800)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The SAC Subcommittee on Subject Relationships/Reference Structures was authorized at the 1995 Midwinter Meeting and appointed shortly before Annual Conference. Its creation was one result of a discussion of how (and why) to promote the display and use of broader-term subject heading references, and its charge reads as follows: To investigate: (1) the kinds of relationships that exist between subjects, the display of which are likely to be useful to catalog users; (2) how these relationships are or could be recorded in authorities and classification formats; (3) options for how these relationships should be presented to users of online and print catalogs, indexes, lists, etc. By the summer 1996 Annual Conference, make some recommendations to SAC about how to disseminate the information and/or implement changes. At that time assess the need for additional time to investigate these issues. The Subcommittee's work on each of the imperatives in the charge was summarized in a report issued at the 1996 Annual Conference (Appendix A). Highlights of this work included the development of a taxonomy of 165 subject relationships; a demonstration that, using existing MARC coding, catalog systems could be programmed to generate references they do not currently support; and an examination of reference displays in several CD-ROM database products. Since that time, work has continued on identifying term relationships and display options; on tracking research, discussion, and implementation of subject relationships in information systems; and on compiling a list of further research needs.
    Content
    Enthält: Appendix A: Subcommittee on Subject Relationships/Reference Structures - REPORT TO THE ALCTS/CCS SUBJECT ANALYSIS COMMITTEE - July 1996 Appendix B (part 1): Taxonomy of Subject Relationships. Compiled by Dee Michel with the assistance of Pat Kuhr - June 1996 draft (alphabetical display) (Separat in: http://web2.ala.org/ala/alctscontent/CCS/committees/subjectanalysis/subjectrelations/msrscu2.pdf) Appendix B (part 2): Taxonomy of Subject Relationships. Compiled by Dee Michel with the assistance of Pat Kuhr - June 1996 draft (hierarchical display) Appendix C: Checklist of Candidate Subject Relationships for Information Retrieval. Compiled by Dee Michel, Pat Kuhr, and Jane Greenberg; edited by Greg Wool - June 1997 Appendix D: Review of Reference Displays in Selected CD-ROM Abstracts and Indexes by Harriette Hemmasi and Steven Riel Appendix E: Analysis of Relationships in Six LC Subject Authority Records by Harriette Hemmasi and Gary Strawn Appendix F: Report of a Preliminary Survey of Subject Referencing in OPACs by Gregory Wool Appendix G: LC Subject Referencing in OPACs--Why Bother? by Gregory Wool Appendix H: Research Needs on Subject Relationships and Reference Structures in Information Access compiled by Jane Greenberg and Steven Riel with contributions from Dee Michel and others edited by Gregory Wool Appendix I: Bibliography on Subject Relationships compiled mostly by Dee Michel with additional contributions from Jane Greenberg, Steven Riel, and Gregory Wool
  10. Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985) 0.02 
    0.02204505 = product of:
  0.0440901 = sum of:
    0.0440901 = sum of:
      0.022510704 = weight(_text_:subject in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.022510704 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04550679 = queryNorm
          0.13830662 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
      0.021579396 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021579396 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04550679 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
    Source
    Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
  11. Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991) 0.02 
    0.021579396 = product of:
  0.043158792 = sum of:
    0.043158792 = product of:
      0.086317584 = sum of:
        0.086317584 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.086317584 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    8.10.2000 11:52:22
  12. Tartaglia, S.: Authority control and subject indexing languages (2004) 0.02 
    0.021572344 = product of:
  0.043144688 = sum of:
    0.043144688 = product of:
      0.086289376 = sum of:
        0.086289376 = weight(_text_:subject in 5683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.086289376 = score(doc=5683,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.5301652 = fieldWeight in 5683, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5683)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The existence of subject indexing languages does not call for or imply a particular authority control system exclusively dedicated to subject entries. To be really effective and efficient, authority control must be concerned with all the categories of entities, and must regard not just the form but also the meaning and the semantic relations of the expressions used to identify the single entities. Thus, it satisfies the lexical needs of all cataloguing languages, including subject indexing languages. It is not correct nor opportune to extend authority control to the syntactic constructions of subject indexing languages, because this reduces the rigor and efficiency of the control process, weighing it down until it becomes unfeasible, and impeding its function as a unifying element between the different cataloguing languages.
  13. Svenonius, E.: Indexical contents (1982) 0.02 
    0.019294888 = product of:
  0.038589776 = sum of:
    0.038589776 = product of:
      0.07717955 = sum of:
        0.07717955 = weight(_text_:subject in 27) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07717955 = score(doc=27,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 27, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=27)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Universal classification I: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed.: I. Dahlberg
  14. Subject indexing systems : concepts, methods and techniques (1998) 0.02 
    0.019294888 = product of:
  0.038589776 = sum of:
    0.038589776 = product of:
      0.07717955 = sum of:
        0.07717955 = weight(_text_:subject in 6022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07717955 = score(doc=6022,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 6022, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6022)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  15. Melton, J.S.: ¬A use for the techniques of structural linguistics in documentation research (1965) 0.02 
    0.018191395 = product of:
  0.03638279 = sum of:
    0.03638279 = product of:
      0.07276558 = sum of:
        0.07276558 = weight(_text_:subject in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07276558 = score(doc=834,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 834, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=834)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Index language (the system of symbols for representing subject content after analysis) is considered as a separate component and a variable in an information retrieval system. It is suggested that for purposes of testing, comparing and evaluating index language, the techniques of structural linguistics may provide a descriptive methodology by which all such languages (hierarchical and faceted classification, analytico-synthetic indexing, traditional subject indexing, indexes and classifications based on automatic text analysis, etc.) could be described in term of a linguistic model, and compared on a common basis
  16. Relationships in the organization of knowledge (2001) 0.02 
    0.01797695 = product of:
  0.0359539 = sum of:
    0.0359539 = product of:
      0.0719078 = sum of:
        0.0719078 = weight(_text_:subject in 1139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0719078 = score(doc=1139,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.4418043 = fieldWeight in 1139, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1139)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    With fourteen contributions grouped in two sections, "Theoretical background" and "Systems", this work discusses the most common relationships used in the organization of recorded knowledge to facilitate information retrieval: the relationships between bibliographic entities, intra- and intertextual relationships, relevance relationships, and subject relationships in thesauri and other classificatory structures. The editors' goal is to "spur further interest, debate, research, and development".
    Content
    Enthält u.a. die Beiträge: GREEN, R.: Relationships in the organization of knowledge: an overview; TILLETT, B.: Bibliographic relationships; CLARKE, S.G.D.: Thesaural relationships; MILSTEAD, J.L.: Standards for relationships between subject indexing terms; HUDON, M.: Relationships in multilingual thesauri; BODENREIDER, O. u. C.A. BEAN: Relationships among knowledge structures: vocabulary integration within a subject domain; BEGHTOL, C.: Relationships in classificatory structure and meaning; BEAN, C.A. u. R. GREEN: Relevance relationships; EL-HOSHY, L.M.: Relationships in Library of Congress Subject Headings; MOLHOLT, P.: The Art and Architecture Thesaurus: controlling relationships through rules and structure; NELSON, S.J. u.a.: Relationships in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH); NEELAMEGHAN, A.: Lateral relationships in multicultural, mulrilingual databases in the spiritual and religous domains: the OM information service; SATIJA, M.P.: Relationships in Ranganathan's Colon classification; MITCHELL, J.S.: Relationships in the Dewey Decimal Classification System
  17. Szostak, R.: Facet analysis using grammar (2017) 0.02 
    0.01797695 = product of:
  0.0359539 = sum of:
    0.0359539 = product of:
      0.0719078 = sum of:
        0.0719078 = weight(_text_:subject in 3866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0719078 = score(doc=3866,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.4418043 = fieldWeight in 3866, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3866)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Basic grammar can achieve most/all of the goals of facet analysis without requiring the use of facet indicators. Facet analysis is thus rendered far simpler for classificationist, classifier, and user. We compare facet analysis and grammar, and show how various facets can be represented grammatically. We then address potential challenges in employing grammar as subject classification. A detailed review of basic grammar supports the hypothesis that it is feasible to usefully employ grammatical construction in subject classification. A manageable - and programmable - set of adjustments is required as classifiers move fairly directly from sentences in a document (or object or idea) description to formulating a subject classification. The user likewise can move fairly quickly from a query to the identification of relevant works. A review of theories in linguistics indicates that a grammatical approach should reduce ambiguity while encouraging ease of use. This paper applies the recommended approach to a small sample of recently published books. It finds that the approach is feasible and results in a more precise subject description than the subject headings assigned at present. It then explores PRECIS, an indexing system developed in the 1970s. Though our approach differs from PRECIS in many important ways, the experience of PRECIS supports our conclusions regarding both feasibility and precision.
  18. Fugmann, R.: ¬The complementarity of natural and controlled languages in indexing (1995) 0.02 
    0.016079074 = product of:
  0.032158148 = sum of:
    0.032158148 = product of:
      0.064316295 = sum of:
        0.064316295 = weight(_text_:subject in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064316295 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Subject indexing: principles and practices in the 90's. Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting Held in Lisbon, Portugal, 17-18 August 1993, and sponsored by the IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing and the Instituto da Biblioteca Nacional e do Livro, Lisbon, Portugal. Ed.: R.P. Holley et al
  19. Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Zoeken met woorden : hergebruik van onderwerpsontsluiting (1998) 0.02 
    0.016079074 = product of:
  0.032158148 = sum of:
    0.032158148 = product of:
      0.064316295 = sum of:
        0.064316295 = weight(_text_:subject in 3154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064316295 = score(doc=3154,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 3154, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3154)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Searching with words: re-use of subject indexing
  20. Bonzi, S.: Terminological consistency in abstract and concrete disciplines (1984) 0.02 
    0.01591747 = product of:
  0.03183494 = sum of:
    0.03183494 = product of:
      0.06366988 = sum of:
        0.06366988 = weight(_text_:subject in 2919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06366988 = score(doc=2919,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 2919, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2919)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This study tested the hypothesis that the vocabulary of a discipline whose major emphasis is on concrete phenomena will, on the average, have fewer synonyms per concept than will the vocabulary of a discipline whose major emphasis is on abstract phenomena. Subject terms from each of two concrete disciplines and two abstract disciplines were analysed. Results showed that there was a significant difference at the 05 level between concrete and abstract disciplines but that the significant difference was attributable to only one of the abstract disciplines. The other abstract discipline was not significantly different from the two concrete disciplines. It was concluded that although thee is some support for the hypothesis, at least one other factor has a stronger influence on terminological consistency than the phenomena with which a subject deals

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 39
  • d 2
  • f 2
  • nl 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 35
  • s 6
  • m 4
  • el 3
  • r 2
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications