论文部分内容阅读
学习《普通图书著录规则图例手册》一书,发现书中“正书名”这一概念的定义不确切。不确切的定义能造成人们对概念理解的差异。这不仅有碍于以概念为基础的学科理论的科学性,更为重要的是,对于概念的不同理解往往正是人们在实际工作中对有关问题产生分歧和差异的主要原因,因此我认为有必要对“正书名”的定义提出商榷。原书对“正书名”这一概念的定义是这样叙述的:“正书名:图书的主要名称,包括单纯书名、交替书名、合订书名。”原定义看起来很完善,它既有对“正书名”本质的表述,也有对“正书名”具体表现形式的描述。它既可以使人们从本质上理解“正书名”。也可以使人们通过“正书名”的具体表现形式理解“正书名”。但是
Learn the “General Book Bibliographic Rules and Regulations Manual” a book and found that the book “is the title of” the definition of the concept is not precise. Inaccurate definitions can lead to differences in conceptual understanding. This not only hindered the scientificity of the concept-based discipline theory, but more importantly, the different understanding of the concept is often the main reason for people’s disagreements and differences in the actual work, so I think there is It is necessary to discuss the definition of “genuine title”. The original book defines the notion of “genuine title” as follows: “The title of the book: the main name of the book, including the simple title, the alternate title, the combined title.” The original definition looks perfect, It not only has the essence of “the title of the book,” but also has a description of the specific manifestations of the “title of the book.” It can make people essentially understand the “title of the book.” It also enables people to understand “the title of the book” through the concrete manifestation of the “genuine title.” but