-
Busch-Lauer, I.-A.: Abstracts in German medical journals : a linguistic analysis (1995)
0.00
0.0029429218 = product of:
0.041200902 = sum of:
0.041200902 = weight(_text_:representation in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041200902 = score(doc=3677,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.35583997 = fieldWeight in 3677, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3677)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Compares formats and linguistic devices of German abstracts and their English equivalents, written by German medical scholars to English native speakers. The source is 20 abstracts taken from German medical journals representing different degrees of specialism. The analysis includes: the overall length of articles/abstracts; the representation/arrangement of sections; the linguistic devices. Results show no correlation between the length of articles and the length of abstracts. In contrast to native speaking author abstracts, 'background information' predominated in the structure of the studied German non-native speaker abstracts, whereas 'purpose of study' and 'conclusions' were not clearly stated. In linguistic terms, the German abstracts frequently contained lexical hegdes, complex and enumerating sentence structure; passive voice and post tense as well as various types of linking structures
-
Rothkegel, A.: Abstracting from the perspective of text production (1995)
0.00
0.0029429218 = product of:
0.041200902 = sum of:
0.041200902 = weight(_text_:representation in 3740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041200902 = score(doc=3740,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.35583997 = fieldWeight in 3740, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3740)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- An abstract itself is a text which is subjected to general and specific conditions of text production. The goal - namely the forming of the abstract as a text - controls the whole process of abstracting. This goal oriented view contrasts to most approaches in this domain which are source text oriented. Production strategies are described in terms of text structure building processes which are reconstructed with methods of modelling in the area of text linguistics and computational linguistics. This leads to a close relationship between thr representation of the model and the resulting text. Gives examples in which authentic material of abstracts is analyzed according to the model. The model itself integrates 3 text levels which are combined and represented in terms of the writer's activities
-
Montesi, M.; Mackenzie Owen, J.: Revision of author abstracts : how it is carried out by LISA editors (2007)
0.00
0.0021020873 = product of:
0.02942922 = sum of:
0.02942922 = weight(_text_:representation in 807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02942922 = score(doc=807,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.25417143 = fieldWeight in 807, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=807)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The literature on abstracts recommends the revision of author supplied abstracts before their inclusion in database collections. However, little guidance is given on how to carry out such revision, and few studies exist on this topic. The purpose of this research paper is to first survey 187 bibliographic databases to ascertain how many did revise abstracts, and then study the practical amendments made by one of these, i.e. LISA (Library and Information Science Abstracts). Design/methodology/approach - Database policies were established by e-mail or through alternative sources, with 136 databases out of 187 exhaustively documented. Differences between 100 author-supplied abstracts and the corresponding 100 LISA amended abstracts were classified into sentence-level and beyond sentence-level categories, and then as additions, deletions and rephrasing of text. Findings - Revision of author abstracts was carried out by 66 databases, but in just 32 cases did it imply more than spelling, shortening of length and formula representation. In LISA, amendments were often non-systematic and inconsistent, but still pointed to significant aspects which were discussed. Originality/value - Amendments made by LISA editors are important in multi- and inter-disciplinary research, since they tend to clarify certain aspects such as terminology, and suggest that abstracts should not always be considered as substitutes for the original document. From this point-of-view, the revision of abstracts can be considered as an important factor in enhancing a database's quality.
-
Sauperl, A.; Klasinc, J.; Luzar, S.: Components of abstracts : logical structure of scholarly abstracts in pharmacology, sociology, and linguistics and literature (2008)
0.00
0.0021020873 = product of:
0.02942922 = sum of:
0.02942922 = weight(_text_:representation in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02942922 = score(doc=1961,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.25417143 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- The international standard ISO 214:1976 defines an abstract as "an abbreviated, accurate representation of the contents of a document" (p. 1) that should "enable readers to identify the basic content of a document quickly and accurately to determine relevance" (p. 1). It also should be useful in computerized searching. The ISO standard suggests including the following elements: purpose, methods, results, and conclusions. Researchers have often challenged this structure and found that different disciplines and cultures prefer different information content. These claims are partially supported by the findings of our research into the structure of pharmacology, sociology, and Slovenian language and literature abstracts of papers published in international and Slovenian scientific periodicals. The three disciplines have different information content. Slovenian pharmacology abstracts differ in content from those in international periodicals while the differences between international and Slovenian abstracts are small in sociology. In the field of Slovenian language and literature, only domestic abstracts were studied. The identified differences can in part be attributed to the disciplines, but also to the different role of journals and papers in the professional society and to differences in perception of the role of abstracts. The findings raise questions about the structure of abstracts required by some publishers of international journals.
-
Kuhlen, R.: Informationsaufbereitung III : Referieren (Abstracts - Abstracting - Grundlagen) (2004)
0.00
0.0016816697 = product of:
0.023543375 = sum of:
0.023543375 = weight(_text_:representation in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023543375 = score(doc=2917,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.20333713 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Was ein Abstract (im Folgenden synonym mit Referat oder Kurzreferat gebraucht) ist, legt das American National Standards Institute in einer Weise fest, die sicherlich von den meisten Fachleuten akzeptiert werden kann: "An abstract is defined as an abbreviated, accurate representation of the contents of a document"; fast genauso die deutsche Norm DIN 1426: "Das Kurzreferat gibt kurz und klar den Inhalt des Dokuments wieder." Abstracts gehören zum wissenschaftlichen Alltag. Weitgehend allen Publikationen, zumindest in den naturwissenschaftlichen, technischen, informationsbezogenen oder medizinischen Bereichen, gehen Abstracts voran, "prefe-rably prepared by its author(s) for publication with it". Es gibt wohl keinen Wissenschaftler, der nicht irgendwann einmal ein Abstract geschrieben hätte. Gehört das Erstellen von Abstracts dann überhaupt zur dokumentarischen bzw informationswissenschaftlichen Methodenlehre, wenn es jeder kann? Was macht den informationellen Mehrwert aus, der durch Expertenreferate gegenüber Laienreferaten erzeugt wird? Dies ist nicht so leicht zu beantworten, zumal geeignete Bewertungsverfahren fehlen, die Qualität von Abstracts vergleichend "objektiv" zu messen. Abstracts werden in erheblichem Umfang von Informationsspezialisten erstellt, oft unter der Annahme, dass Autoren selber dafür weniger geeignet sind. Vergegenwärtigen wir uns, was wir über Abstracts und Abstracting wissen. Ein besonders gelungenes Abstract ist zuweilen klarer als der Ursprungstext selber, darf aber nicht mehr Information als dieser enthalten: "Good abstracts are highly structured, concise, and coherent, and are the result of a thorough analysis of the content of the abstracted materials. Abstracts may be more readable than the basis documents, but because of size constraints they rarely equal and never surpass the information content of the basic document". Dies ist verständlich, denn ein "Abstract" ist zunächst nichts anderes als ein Ergebnis des Vorgangs einer Abstraktion. Ohne uns zu sehr in die philosophischen Hintergründe der Abstraktion zu verlieren, besteht diese doch "in der Vernachlässigung von bestimmten Vorstellungsbzw. Begriffsinhalten, von welchen zugunsten anderer Teilinhalte abgesehen, abstrahiert' wird. Sie ist stets verbunden mit einer Fixierung von (interessierenden) Merkmalen durch die aktive Aufmerksamkeit, die unter einem bestimmten pragmatischen Gesichtspunkt als wesentlich' für einen vorgestellten bzw für einen unter einen Begriff fallenden Gegenstand (oder eine Mehrheit von Gegenständen) betrachtet werden". Abstracts reduzieren weniger Begriffsinhalte, sondern Texte bezüglich ihres proportionalen Gehaltes. Borko/ Bernier haben dies sogar quantifiziert; sie schätzen den Reduktionsfaktor auf 1:10 bis 1:12
-
Kuhlen, R.: Volltextanalyse zum Zwecke des Abstracting (1983)
0.00
0.0011468288 = product of:
0.016055603 = sum of:
0.016055603 = product of:
0.048166804 = sum of:
0.048166804 = weight(_text_:29 in 447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048166804 = score(doc=447,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 447, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=447)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Deutscher Dokumentartag 1982, Lübeck-Travemünde, 29.-30.9.1982: Fachinformation im Zeitalter der Informationsindustrie. Bearb.: H. Strohl-Goebel
-
Gerdel, W.: Anforderungen an Referier Regeln aus Benutzersicht (1983)
0.00
0.0011468288 = product of:
0.016055603 = sum of:
0.016055603 = product of:
0.048166804 = sum of:
0.048166804 = weight(_text_:29 in 448) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048166804 = score(doc=448,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 448, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=448)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Deutscher Dokumentartag 1982, Lübeck-Travemünde, 29.-30.9.1982: Fachinformation im Zeitalter der Informationsindustrie. Bearb.: H. Strohl-Goebel
-
Eimermacher, M.: Textverstehen im Projekt KIT : kognitive Verfahren zur Informationsextraktion und Zusammenfassung aus Texten (1983)
0.00
0.0011468288 = product of:
0.016055603 = sum of:
0.016055603 = product of:
0.048166804 = sum of:
0.048166804 = weight(_text_:29 in 449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048166804 = score(doc=449,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 449, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=449)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Deutscher Dokumentartag 1982, Lübeck-Travemünde, 29.-30.9.1982: Fachinformation im Zeitalter der Informationsindustrie. Bearb.: H. Strohl-Goebel
-
Hahn, U.; Reimer, U.: Informationslinguistische Konzepte der Volltextverarbeitung in TOPIC (1983)
0.00
0.0011468288 = product of:
0.016055603 = sum of:
0.016055603 = product of:
0.048166804 = sum of:
0.048166804 = weight(_text_:29 in 450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048166804 = score(doc=450,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 450, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=450)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Deutscher Dokumentartag 1982, Lübeck-Travemünde, 29.-30.9.1982: Fachinformation im Zeitalter der Informationsindustrie. Bearb.: H. Strohl-Goebel
-
Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995)
0.00
8.1179454E-4 = product of:
0.011365123 = sum of:
0.011365123 = product of:
0.03409537 = sum of:
0.03409537 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03409537 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 27. 1.1996 18:22:06
-
Hartley, J.: Is it appropriate to use structured abstracts in social science journals? (1997)
0.00
6.553308E-4 = product of:
0.00917463 = sum of:
0.00917463 = product of:
0.027523888 = sum of:
0.027523888 = weight(_text_:29 in 2749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027523888 = score(doc=2749,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2749, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2749)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 25. 2.1997 10:29:16
-
Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988)
0.00
6.494356E-4 = product of:
0.009092098 = sum of:
0.009092098 = product of:
0.027276294 = sum of:
0.027276294 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027276294 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2832)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996)
0.00
4.8707667E-4 = product of:
0.006819073 = sum of:
0.006819073 = product of:
0.02045722 = sum of:
0.02045722 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02045722 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4411)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
-
Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996)
0.00
4.8707667E-4 = product of:
0.006819073 = sum of:
0.006819073 = product of:
0.02045722 = sum of:
0.02045722 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02045722 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7244)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
-
Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006)
0.00
4.8707667E-4 = product of:
0.006819073 = sum of:
0.006819073 = product of:
0.02045722 = sum of:
0.02045722 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02045722 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2421)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
-
Alonso, M.I.; Fernández, L.M.M.: Perspectives of studies on document abstracting : towards an integrated view of models and theoretical approaches (2010)
0.00
4.0958173E-4 = product of:
0.005734144 = sum of:
0.005734144 = product of:
0.017202431 = sum of:
0.017202431 = weight(_text_:29 in 3959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017202431 = score(doc=3959,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 3959, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3959)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 29. 8.2010 13:11:19
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996)
0.00
4.0589727E-4 = product of:
0.0056825615 = sum of:
0.0056825615 = product of:
0.017047685 = sum of:
0.017047685 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017047685 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
