Search (35 results, page 2 of 2)

0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Type

a

0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 4525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=4525,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 4525, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4525)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Type

a

0.0021322283 = product of:
  0.010661141 = sum of:
    0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 4466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010661141 = score(doc=4466,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 4466, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4466)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper examines Parmenides's 'Fragments', Plato's 'The sophist', and Aristotle's 'Prior analytics, parts of animals', and 'Generation of animals' to identify 3 underlying presumptions of classical logic using the method of Foucauldian discourse analysis. These 3 presumptions are the notion of mutually exclusive categories, teleology in the sense of linear progression toward a goal, and hierarchy both through logical division and through the dominance of some classes over others. These 3 presumptions are linked to classificatory thought in the western tradition. The purpose of making the connections is to investigate the cultural specifity to western culture of widespread classificatory practice. It is a step in a larger study to examine classification as a cultural construction that may be systematically incompatible with other cultures and with marginalized elements of western culture

Type

a

0.0021322283 = product of:
  0.010661141 = sum of:
    0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 70) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010661141 = score(doc=70,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 70, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=70)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper addresses problems of representing marginalized knowledge domains in general and feminist or women's studies in particular in the Dewey Decimal Classification. The authors develop and apply a theoretical framework that makes the classification's limits permeable. A variety of approaches are proposed to create paradoxical spaces, places that accommodate the margins and the mainstream simultaneously. The resulting changes, expansions and options proposed for DDC are accessible through a user interface designed for the purpose

Type

a

0.002002062 = product of:
  0.0100103095 = sum of:
    0.0100103095 = weight(_text_:a in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0100103095 = score(doc=3510,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 3510, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3510)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

A major characteristic of classification is teleology interpreted as a linear progression toward knowledge. G.W.F. Hegel's three stages of knowledge development: Being (Sein), Essence (Wesen), and Idea (Begriff), explicated in his Science of logic form such a progression. Feminist postcolonial critic Gayatri Spivak calls this kind of progression as an "epistemograph". Classification is a manifestation of Western logic and the sequence of main classes is illustrative of the progression that reflects Hegel's epistemograph. DDC and UDC between them represent library classification globally and use a sequence of main classes derived from Hegel and indirectly from Bacon. The lingering consequences of this heritage still create dilemmas in our organization of knowledge.

Type

a

0.0019071229 = product of:
  0.009535614 = sum of:
    0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 6212) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009535614 = score(doc=6212,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 6212, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6212)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Type

a

0.0018276243 = product of:
  0.009138121 = sum of:
    0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009138121 = score(doc=2270,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Classifications of natural phenomena demonstrate the applicability of discourse analysis in finding the importance of concepts such as warrant for categorization and classification. Temperature scales provide a body of official literature for close consideration. Official documents of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) reveal the reasoning behind choices affecting these standards. A more cursory scrutiny of the Saffir-Simpson Scale through scholarly publications and documentation from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (KIST) indicates the potential of this form of analysis. The same holds true for an examination of the definition of what is a planet as determined by the International Astronomical Union. As Sayers, Richardson, and Bliss have indicated, there seem to be principles and a reliance on context that bridge the differences between natural and artificial, scientific and bibliographic classifications.

Type

a

0.001651617 = product of:
  0.008258085 = sum of:
    0.008258085 = weight(_text_:a in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008258085 = score(doc=664,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Cataloguing education has been the focus of definition and ebate for over a century. Moving beyond cataloguing theory and the creation of records, to the management and process of producing catalogues, increases the complexity of demands placed on professionals and educators. Graduates need to understand their catalogues and integrated systems holistically. This requires a knowledge of each element, of standards governing the creation and maintenance of records, and of the relationship between the record and the catalogue and/or its constituent network. Moreover, the professional must know these things critically, and beyond mere acceptance of standards, so that the catalogue can effectively perform its mediating function between the collection and users

Type

a

0.0016346768 = product of:
  0.008173384 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 3479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=3479,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3479, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3479)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Hugh of St. Victor's Didascalicon is a twelfth-century classification of knowledge, or as Hugh would put it, of Wisdom, written in the context of medieval, Christian mysticism. This study reads the text through its cultural and intellectual context, including medieval themes of the problem of universals and the importance of numerology. The study addresses the question of whether or not Hugh's classification is part of the Aristotelian tradition of classificatory structure characterized by mutually exclusive categories, teleological progress toward a goal, and hierarchy, which is still with us today. It also examines the role of the liberal arts in Hugh's pedagogy and philosophy as exhibited in the Didascalicon.

Content

Beitrag in einem Special issue: A Festschrift for Clare Beghtol

Type

a

0.0014156717 = product of:
  0.007078358 = sum of:
    0.007078358 = weight(_text_:a in 5428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007078358 = score(doc=5428,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 5428, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5428)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Critiques of subject access standards in LIS literature have addressed biases of gender, sexuality, race, age, ability, ethnicity, language and religion as limits to the representation of diversity and to effective library service for diverse populations. The current study identifies and analyzes this literature as a basis for ameliorating systemic bias and to gather the existing literature for wider accessibility. The study analyzes five quantitative variables: standards discussed, categories of problems, marginalized groups and topics discussed, date, and basis of conclusions (research or experience). Textual analysis reveals that basic tenets of subject access-user-focused cataloguing, objectivity, and standardization-are problematized in the literature and may be the best starting point for future research. In practice, librarians can work to counteract systemic problems in the careful and equitable application of standards and their adaptation to local contexts.

Type

a

0.0013622305 = product of:
  0.0068111527 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 3551) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=3551,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3551, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3551)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Type

a

0.0013622305 = product of:
  0.0068111527 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 4137) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=4137,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4137, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4137)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

1. Aufl. unter: Aluri, R.D., A. Kemp u. J.J. Boll: Subject analysis in online catalogs. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited 1991. XII,303 S. ISBN 0-87287-670-5

0.0013622305 = product of:
  0.0068111527 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=858,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 858, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=858)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Classifications are bounded systems that marginalize some groups and topics by locating them in ghettoes, diasporized across the system. Other marginalized groups and topics are totally excluded from these systems, being outside of their territorial limits. Because classifications are locational systems, spatial analyses borrowed from various disciplines have potential to identify and address their problems. The philosophical basis for the analysis in this article is Lorraine Code's (1995) conception of "rhetorical spaces" as sites where topics can be taken seriously as legitimate subjects for open discussion. In existing classifications, there is rhetorical space for most mainstream social and scholarly knowledge domains but not for marginalized knowledge domains. Geography offers concepts for building a theoretical framework to ameliorate the biases of classification. This article describes such a framework and how it is applied using techniques such as Gillian Rose's (1993) "paradoxical spaces," which are simultaneously or alternately in the center and at the margin, same and other, inside and outside to develop a more complex and meaningful classification for women and other marginalized groups. The project described here operationalizes these theoretical openings by applying them to the Dewey Decimal Classification as both critique and as techniques for change.

Type

a

0.0013485396 = product of:
  0.0067426977 = sum of:
    0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 6113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067426977 = score(doc=6113,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 6113, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6113)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 28(2001) no.4, S.206-208 (C. Arsenault):"Overall, this is an excellent work, on an ever increasingly pertinent topic. This long-awaited second edition provides a thorough and comprehensive update of an already important text. I very highly recommend it to professionals and academics alike ; both neophytes and veterans will find it valuable. It is a fundamental work that cannot be ignored in the field of subject analysis and retrieval for all bibliographic systems, including online catalogs."

0.0013485396 = product of:
  0.0067426977 = sum of:
    0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 1973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067426977 = score(doc=1973,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1973, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1973)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In the recent years, several libraries in the United States have been experimenting with Book Industry Standards and Communications (BISAC), the classification system of the book industry, as an alternative to the Dewey Decimal Classification. Although rarely discussed, these cases of implementation of BISAC arguably resemble other past cases of replacement of traditional classifications that received the name of reader-interest classifications. In this article, a comparison of the BISAC cases to the previous cases of reader-interest classifications is taken in order to determine if the current application of BISAC to libraries is susceptible to the same problems, dangers, and ends as occurred in the past.

Type

a