论文部分内容阅读
一对于“编辑学者化”的意见,不外赞成和反对两种。我则既不完全赞成,也不完全反对。我认为,不能笼而统之地提“编辑学者化”。某些编辑应学者化,另外一些则可以是非学者化的。这是因为,编辑群体的构成是十分复杂的。乍看大家都是编辑,其实编辑与编辑之间差异很大。工作对象不同,编辑性质各异,编辑主体呈现出极大的差异性和多层面性。且不说各类出版社和报纸的编辑,仅看期刊编辑队伍的构成就够多姿多彩,层面丰富了。就刊物性质和类
For opinions on “edifying scholarship,” there are only two types of agreement and disapproval. I neither fully agree nor totally disagree. In my opinion, we can not cite “editor-scholarly” as a whole. Some editors should be scholarly, others non-scholarly. This is because the composition of editorial groups is very complicated. At first glance we are all editors, in fact, very different between editing and editing. Different work objects and different editorial nature, the editing main body presents a great diversity and multi-level. Not to mention the editors of various types of publishing houses and newspapers, it is only enough to see that the composition of a journal editorial team is colorful and enriched. On the nature of the publication and category