A Rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge Organization, 31(3), 199-201.
| dc.contributor.author | Nicolaisen, Jeppe | |
| dc.contributor.author | Hjørland, Birger | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2008-03-10T00:00:01Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2010-06-18T23:24:54Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2004 | en_US |
| dc.date.submitted | 2008-03-10 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | A Rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge Organization, 31(3), 199-201. 2004, 31(3):199-201 Knowledge Organization | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105404 | |
| dc.description.abstract | In our comment (Hjørland & Nicolaisen, 2004) to Beghtol (2003) we were reacting to the fact that Beghtol describes the classifications developed by scholars as â naïveâ while she describes the classifications developed by librarians and information scientists as â professionalâ . We explained that we feared this unfortunate terminology is rooted in misjudgments about the relationships between scientific and scholarly classification on the one hand and LIS classifications on the other. We stated that only a correction of this misjudgment might give us in the field of KO a chance to do a job that is not totally disrespected and disregarded by the rest of the intellectual world. Beghtol (2004), in her reply to us, claims that the term â naïveâ as she defines it, is not a pejorative term. But she fails to explain why. This paper examines and responds to the views put forwards in Beghtol (2004). | |
| dc.format.mimetype | doc | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | ERGON-Verlag | en_US |
| dc.subject | Knowledge Organization | en_US |
| dc.title | A Rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge Organization, 31(3), 199-201. | en_US |
| dc.type | Journal Article (Paginated) | en_US |
| dc.identifier.journal | Knowledge Organization | en_US |
| html.description.abstract | In our comment (Hjørland & Nicolaisen, 2004) to Beghtol (2003) we were reacting to the fact that Beghtol describes the classifications developed by scholars as â naïveâ while she describes the classifications developed by librarians and information scientists as â professionalâ . We explained that we feared this unfortunate terminology is rooted in misjudgments about the relationships between scientific and scholarly classification on the one hand and LIS classifications on the other. We stated that only a correction of this misjudgment might give us in the field of KO a chance to do a job that is not totally disrespected and disregarded by the rest of the intellectual world. Beghtol (2004), in her reply to us, claims that the term â naïveâ as she defines it, is not a pejorative term. But she fails to explain why. This paper examines and responds to the views put forwards in Beghtol (2004). |
