Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

Did you mean:
rvk_ss%3a%2200 15860 allgemeines %2f medien- und kommunikationswissenschaften%2c kommunikationsdesign %2f formen der kommunikation und des kommunikationsdesigns %2f kommunikationsdesign in elektronischen medien%22 3
rvk_ss%3a%2200 15860 allgemeinen %2f medien- und kommunikationswissenschaften%2c kommunikationsdesign %2f formen der kommunikation und des kommunikationsdesigns %2f kommunikationsdesign in elektronischen medien%22 3
rvk_ss%3a%2200 15860 allgemeines %2f medien- und kommunikationswissenschaften%2c kommunikationsdesign %2f firmen der kommunikation und des kommunikationsdesigns %2f kommunikationsdesign in elektronischen medien%22 3
rvk_ss%3a%2200 15860 allgemeines %2f medien- und kommunikationswissenschaften%2c kommunikationsdesign %2f formen der kommunikation und des kommunikationsdesign %2f kommunikationsdesign in elektronischen medien%22 3
rvk_ss%3a%2200 15860 allgemeines %2f medien- und kommunikationswissenschaften%2c kommunikationsdesigns %2f formen der kommunikation und des kommunikationsdesigns %2f kommunikationsdesign in elektronischen medien%22 3

Haldenwanger, H.H.M.: Begriff und Sprache in der Dokumentation (1961) 0.02

0.01696434 = product of:
  0.0848217 = sum of:
    0.025003234 = weight(_text_:und in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025003234 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
    0.025397355 = weight(_text_:der in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025397355 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.3948779 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
    0.025003234 = weight(_text_:und in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025003234 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
    0.00941788 = weight(_text_:in in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00941788 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
  0.2 = coord(4/20)

Casagrande, J.B.; Hale, K.L.: Semantic relations in Papago folk definitions (1967) 0.00

6.580944E-4 = product of:
  0.013161888 = sum of:
    0.013161888 = weight(_text_:in in 1194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013161888 = score(doc=1194,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.3360549 = fieldWeight in 1194, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1194)
  0.05 = coord(1/20)

Footnote: Zitiert in: Evens, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval. In: The semantics of relationships: an interdisciplinary perspective. Eds: R. Green u.a. Dordrecht: Kluwer 2002. S.143-160.
Source: Studies in southwestern ethnolinguistics. Eds.: D. Hymes u. W.E. Bittle

Melton, J.S.: ¬A use for the techniques of structural linguistics in documentation research (1965) 0.00
```
4.0780622E-4 = product of:
  0.0081561245 = sum of:
    0.0081561245 = weight(_text_:in in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0081561245 = score(doc=834,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 834, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=834)
  0.05 = coord(1/20)
```
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

Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

Authors

Languages