Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × author_ss:"Dahlberg, I."
  1. Dahlberg, I.: Ontische Strukturen und Wissensmuster in der Wissensorganisation (2004) 0.02
    0.020339092 = product of:
      0.061017275 = sum of:
        0.016063616 = weight(_text_:in in 3155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016063616 = score(doc=3155,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.27051896 = fieldWeight in 3155, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3155)
        0.04495366 = weight(_text_:und in 3155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04495366 = score(doc=3155,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.46462005 = fieldWeight in 3155, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3155)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Ein jeder Mensch ist mit seinem Dasein eingebettet in kosmische Gesetzmäßigkeiten und findet sich individualisiert und begrenzt durch die Bedingungen von Raum und Zeit; seine jeweilige "Mitgift" in vorgefundener Umgebung verlangt nach menschlicher Sinn Erfüllung. Diese ontischen Gegebenheiten können als Strukturvorgabe angesehen werden, die sich durch die kategorialen und logischen Strukturen menschlichen Denkens und Sprechens - z.B. in artikulierten Sätzen menschlichen Wissens - ergänzen lässt. Dabei bilden sich Wissensmuster, die sich in einem ontologisch fundierten Gesamtschema aller Wissensgebiete zur Darstellung bringen lassen können. Der Vortrag erläutert die hier angedeuteten kategorialen und systemtheoretischen Grundlagen mit Bezug auf die Konstruktion eines neuen, universalen Ordnungssystems aller Wissensgebiete, das vor 30 Jahren konzipiert wurde und sich bereits in vielfacher Hinsicht bewährt hat. Seine Rasterdarstellung ermöglicht eine übersichtliche, fokussierbare und unkomplizierte Handhabung in elektronischen Medien.
    Series
    Fortschritte in der Wissensorganisation; Bd.8
    Source
    Wissensorganisation in kooperativen Lern- und Arbeitsumgebungen: Proceedings der 8. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Regensburg, 9.-11. Oktober 2002. Hrsg.: G. Budin u. H.P. Ohly
  2. Dahlberg, I.: Zur Begriffskultur in den Sozialwissenschaften : Evaluation einer Herausforderung (2006) 0.02
    0.01618128 = product of:
      0.04854384 = sum of:
        0.01183933 = weight(_text_:in in 3128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01183933 = score(doc=3128,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.19937998 = fieldWeight in 3128, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3128)
        0.03670451 = weight(_text_:und in 3128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03670451 = score(doc=3128,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.3793607 = fieldWeight in 3128, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3128)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Aufgrund eines Vortrags über Begriffs- und Definitionstheorie, den ich bei der Tagung über Begriffsanalyse in Darmstadt 1986 gehalten hatte (Dahlberg 1987), wandte sich der damalige Mitherausgeber der Zeitschrift Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften, Dr. Rainer Greshoff, 1990 an mich mit der Bitte, einen ähnlichen Beitrag als Hauptartikel für seine Zeitschrift zu schreiben. Ich sagte zu mit der Absicht im Hinterkopf, dabei auch meine Erfahrungen mit der sozial-wissenschaftlichen Terminologie, die ich bei COCTA, dem Committee for Conceptual and Terminological Analysis (Vorsitz Prof. Dr. Fred Riggs, Hawaii) (Riggs 1982) gemacht hatte, einzubringen. Hinzu kam, dass mir gerade zu diesem Zeitpunkt das Werk von Stefan Andreski in die Hände gefallen war, betitelt: "Die Hexenmeister der Sozialwissenschaften. Missbrauch, Mode und Manipulation einer Wissenschaft", (Andreski 1974) der sozusagen "kein Blatt vor den Mund nimmt" und überaus mutig und an vielen Beispielen die Misere der sozialwissenschaftlichen Terminologie offenbar macht. Ich hoffte daher, in einem entsprechenden Beitrag mehr Bewusstsein für eine begriffsorientierte, systematische Terminologie der Sozialwissenschaften zu wecken. In gewisser Weise war für mich dabei die Lösung von Prof. Riggs mit seiner "Onomantik" (Riggs 1985) vorbildlich. Er ging nämlich davon aus, dass der sog. semasiologische Ansatz, bei dem nach der Bedeutung eines Wortes gefragt wird, unbrauchbar für sein Verständnis sei (und das nicht nur in den Sozialwissenschaften), man müsse vielmehr umgekehrt onomasiologisch vorgehen und sich zunächst über einen Begriff klar werden, der mit einem Wort (oder einem Wort in einem Kontext) verbunden ist und seine mögliche Definition finden und dann erst dafür eine Benennung suchen. Aus Zeitmangel entstand mein Beitrag erst 1995. Herr Dr. Greshoff konnte - entsprechend der Methode seiner Zeitschrift - zu meinem Beitrag eine größere Anzahl von Kritikern finden und diese dann auch noch durch eine Replik der Autorin erwidern lassen und mit einer Metakritik eines Nichtinvolvierten das Ganze beenden. In meinem Fall waren es 27 Persönlichkeiten aus 10 verschiedenen Disziplinen und Herr Prof. Dr. Endruweit als Metakritiker. Der Beitrag umfasste die Seiten 3-91 (DIN A4 Format) in Heft 1-1996 unter dem Titel "Zur Begriffskultur in den Sozialwissenschaften. Lassen sich ihre Probleme lösen?" (Dahlberg 1996). Ich war überzeugt, dass sich ihre Probleme mit meiner vorgeschlagenen Methode lösen lassen. Doch meine Kritiker waren es leider nicht. Und über das Warum - davon wird mein Vortrag heute handeln.
    Series
    Fortschritte in der Wissensorganisation; Bd.9
    Source
    Wissensorganisation und Verantwortung: Gesellschaftliche, ökonomische und technische Aspekte. Proceedings der 9. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Duisburg, 5.-7. November 2004. Hrsg. von H.P. Ohly u.a
  3. Dahlberg, I.: Kompatibilität und Integration : Probleme und Lösungen in der Wissensorganisation (2008) 0.01
    0.011542965 = product of:
      0.034628894 = sum of:
        0.014110449 = weight(_text_:in in 1677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014110449 = score(doc=1677,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 1677, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1677)
        0.020518444 = weight(_text_:und in 1677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020518444 = score(doc=1677,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.21206908 = fieldWeight in 1677, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1677)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    The trend in the fifties and sixties of the past century away from the use of universal classification systems such as the UDC towards establishing thesauri in special subject fields for the description of the conceptual contents of documents lead documentalists soon to realize that the necessary common tool for a collaboration among centers of similar subject fields was lacking. Therefore compatibility and integration studies began between the different thesauri of such fields, leading often to more comprehensive thesauri, such as macrothesauri. The paper describes this historic development and also the solutions found at the 1995 ISKO-Conference in Warsaw/Poland on Compatibility and Integration as given in its papers, its recommendations and also in the conceptual frame of its comprehensive bibliography on this topic. In conclusion a new solution is presented oriented toward combining the use of a universal classification system with the new developments of ontologies and their problem of interoperability and heterogeneity.
    Series
    Fortschritte in der Wissensorganisation; Bd.10
    Source
    Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch
  4. Dahlberg, I.: ¬The Information Coding Classification (ICC) : a modern, theory-based fully-faceted, universal system of knowledge fields (2008) 0.00
    0.0019676082 = product of:
      0.011805649 = sum of:
        0.011805649 = weight(_text_:in in 1854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011805649 = score(doc=1854,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 1854, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1854)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Introduction into the structure, contents and specifications (especially the Systematifier) of the Information Coding Classification, developed in the seventies and used in many ways by the author and a few others following its publication in 1982. Its theoretical basis is explained consisting in (1) the Integrative Level Theory, following an evolutionary approach of ontical areas, and integrating also on each level the aspects contained in the sequence of the levels, (2) the distinction between categories of form and categories of being, (3) the application of a feature of Systems Theory (namely the element position plan) and (4) the inclusion of a concept theory, distinguishing four kinds of relationships, originated by the kinds of characteristics (which are the elements of concepts to be derived from the statements on the properties of referents of concepts). Its special Subject Groups on each of its nine levels are outlined and the combinatory facilities at certain positions of the Systematifier are shown. Further elaboration and use have been suggested, be it only as a switching language between the six existing universal classification systems at present in use internationally.
    Content
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Facets: a fruitful notion in many domains".
  5. Dahlberg, I.: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) (2009) 0.00
    0.0016629322 = product of:
      0.009977593 = sum of:
        0.009977593 = weight(_text_:in in 4693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009977593 = score(doc=4693,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.16802745 = fieldWeight in 4693, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4693)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    The aims, tasks, activities, and achievements of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (1989-) are presented. ISKO is that group of scholars and practitioners who feel responsible for questions pertaining to the conceptual organization and processing of knowledge, the scientific bases of which lie in knowledge drawn from the fields of logic, organization science, psychology, science theory, informatics, semiotics, linguistics, and philosophy. It aims at giving advice in the construction, perfection, and application of such organizational tools as classification systems, taxonomies, thesauri, terminologies, as well as their use for indexing purposes and thereby for the retrieval of information. Events leading up to the founding of ISKO in 1989 are described. The aims and objectives of ISKO according to its statutes are mentioned, as well as its organization, its biennial international conferences with their proceedings volumes, and the establishment of a further conference series and a textbook series. The drive and success of coordinators in establishing chapters in many countries is reviewed as well. The activities of the chapters (mainly by their own meetings and conferences) and subsequently their publications during the past years are also included. The idea and structure of ISKO's official journal-Knowledge Organization-is explained, and ISKO's Web site is given. Finally, the need for the Society is discussed, and its possible future is considered.
  6. Dahlberg, I.: Knowledge organization : a new science? (2006) 0.00
    0.0014724231 = product of:
      0.008834538 = sum of:
        0.008834538 = weight(_text_:in in 3375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008834538 = score(doc=3375,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 3375, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3375)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    In ISKO's name, the term "Knowledge Organization" (KO) denotes already the object and the activity area significant for the existence of any science. Both areas are outlined and their specific contents shown. Also a survey of its special subfields is given. The sciencetheoretical foundation of Knowledge Organization as a new scientific discipline is based on the propositional concept of science. Within a universal system of the sciences, KO has been regarded as a subfield of Science of Science. Concludingly it is proposed to find the necessary institution for work in concerted effort of scientists, knowledge organizers and terminologists on the collection, definition, and systematization of concepts of all subject fields, utilizing the Information Coding Classification (ICC) as the necessary categorizing structure.
  7. Dahlberg, I.: Concepts and terms : ISKO's major challenge (2009) 0.00
    0.0014724231 = product of:
      0.008834538 = sum of:
        0.008834538 = weight(_text_:in in 3273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008834538 = score(doc=3273,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 3273, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3273)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Starting from the premise that extant knowledge of the discipline of Knowledge Organization ought to be made accessible by its knowledge units (concepts) this article includes short descriptions of the work of E.Wuester (Austria) and F. Riggs (USA) who both had laid foundations in this field. A noematic concept of knowledge (Diemer 1962, 474) is used for the necessary work to be done. It is shown how a concept-theoretical approach (relying on the characteristics of concepts and their system-building capacity) can be applied for pertinent terminological work. Earlier work in this regard by standardization bodies is mentioned. Seven necessary steps towards accomplishment are outlined.