| 四部分类是学术分类而非图书分类--兼与黄晏妤先生商榷 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 张全晓.四部分类是学术分类而非图书分类--兼与黄晏妤先生商榷[J].新余高专学报,2006,11(3):35-38. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 张全晓 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 华中师范大学,历史文献研究所,湖北,武汉,430079 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 针对四部分类是图书分类而非学术分类的说法，从四部分类的演变历史、社会功能、学术价值和式微结局等四个方面，论证了四部分类的实质是学术分类而非图书分类的观点。
|
| 关 键 词： | 四部分类 学术分类 图书分类 |
| 文章编号： | 1008-6765(2006)03-0035-04 |
| 收稿时间： | 04 3 2006 12:00AM |
| 修稿时间： | 2006年4月3日 |
The classification of four bibliographic categories is academic classification rather than library classification |
| |
| ZHANG Quan-xiao.The classification of four bibliographic categories is academic classification rather than library classification[J].Journal of XinYu College,2006,11(3):35-38. |
| |
| Authors: | ZHANG Quan-xiao |
| |
| Institution: | Huazhong Normal University, Wuhan 430079, china |
| |
| Abstract: | Opposing the view that the classification of four bibliographic categories is library classification rather than academic classification, this paper demonstrates, from the perspectives of evolution history, social function, academic value and declining end of classification of four bibliographical categories, that the classification of four bibliographic categories is academic classification rather than library classification. |
| |
| Keywords: | classification of four bibliographic categories academic classification library classification |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
