A Rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge Organization, 31(3), 199-201.

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105404
Title:
A Rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge Organization, 31(3), 199-201.
Author:
Nicolaisen, Jeppe; Hjørland, Birger
Citation:
A Rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge Organization, 31(3), 199-201. 2004, 31(3):199-201 Knowledge Organization
Publisher:
ERGON-Verlag
Journal:
Knowledge Organization
Issue Date:
2004
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105404
Submitted date:
2008-03-10
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).
Type:
Journal Article (Paginated)
Language:
en
Keywords:
Knowledge Organization

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorNicolaisen, Jeppeen_US
dc.contributor.authorHjørland, Birgeren_US
dc.date.accessioned2008-03-10T00:00:01Z-
dc.date.available2010-06-18T23:24:54Z-
dc.date.issued2004en_US
dc.date.submitted2008-03-10en_US
dc.identifier.citationA Rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge Organization, 31(3), 199-201. 2004, 31(3):199-201 Knowledge Organizationen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/105404-
dc.description.abstractIn 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).en_US
dc.format.mimetypedocen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherERGON-Verlagen_US
dc.subjectKnowledge Organizationen_US
dc.titleA Rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge Organization, 31(3), 199-201.en_US
dc.typeJournal Article (Paginated)en_US
dc.identifier.journalKnowledge Organizationen_US
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.