图书馆学一般问题的发展:现代问题与情境话语

Y. Stolyarov
{"title":"图书馆学一般问题的发展:现代问题与情境话语","authors":"Y. Stolyarov","doi":"10.25281/0869-608x-2022-71-2-119-128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author presents the problems of general library science that need profound development. First, it is necessary to determine the relationship between the concepts of “library science” and “general library science”, as well as the content of the concepts of “partial library science”, “special library science”, “electronic library science”, etc. The author emphasizes to bring the Standard GOST 7.0—99 “Information and library activities, bibliography. Terms and definitions or coming to replace it the State Standart GOST “Library and information activities, bibliography. Terms and defenitions” into compliance with the Federal Law No. 78-FZ of 29.12.1994 “On Librarianship”, primarily in terms of the relationship between the concepts of “information and library” and “library and information”. Both of these terms are incorrect. Then, it is necessary to give the scientific definition of the concept of “library”, which differs from its normative-legal definition, as well as to abandon the terms and concepts artificially introduced into the library science thesaurus. It is required to separate the concepts of “librarianship” and “library activity”, to abandon the idea of library as a social institution for the provision of services. The existing approach leads to the steady displacement of cultural activities from the sphere of government responsibility into purely market relations, forms a false understanding of the phenomenon of cultural values, from which the spiritual component is derived. In the field of services, being a type of marketing, albeit non-commercial, as it is in librarianship, the preservation, production, transmission and dissemination of spiritual values cannot be carried out. The author proposes in place of the concept of “service” as the ultimate goal of librarianship to put the concept of “goodness” and to understand the library as a social institution providing socially significant goodness. The system approach requires the development of each of the library components as a four-element system. The author declares the need to correct almost the entire conceptual apparatus of library stock studies and catalogue science, littered with the introduction of the term “information resource” instead of the concept of “document”, which, in turn, needs considerable clarification. The author makes proposal for the implementation of the current actual tasks of general library science.","PeriodicalId":325129,"journal":{"name":"Bibliotekovedenie [Russian Journal of Library Science]","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of General Issues of Library Science: Modern Problem and Situational Discourse\",\"authors\":\"Y. Stolyarov\",\"doi\":\"10.25281/0869-608x-2022-71-2-119-128\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The author presents the problems of general library science that need profound development. First, it is necessary to determine the relationship between the concepts of “library science” and “general library science”, as well as the content of the concepts of “partial library science”, “special library science”, “electronic library science”, etc. The author emphasizes to bring the Standard GOST 7.0—99 “Information and library activities, bibliography. Terms and definitions or coming to replace it the State Standart GOST “Library and information activities, bibliography. Terms and defenitions” into compliance with the Federal Law No. 78-FZ of 29.12.1994 “On Librarianship”, primarily in terms of the relationship between the concepts of “information and library” and “library and information”. Both of these terms are incorrect. Then, it is necessary to give the scientific definition of the concept of “library”, which differs from its normative-legal definition, as well as to abandon the terms and concepts artificially introduced into the library science thesaurus. It is required to separate the concepts of “librarianship” and “library activity”, to abandon the idea of library as a social institution for the provision of services. The existing approach leads to the steady displacement of cultural activities from the sphere of government responsibility into purely market relations, forms a false understanding of the phenomenon of cultural values, from which the spiritual component is derived. In the field of services, being a type of marketing, albeit non-commercial, as it is in librarianship, the preservation, production, transmission and dissemination of spiritual values cannot be carried out. The author proposes in place of the concept of “service” as the ultimate goal of librarianship to put the concept of “goodness” and to understand the library as a social institution providing socially significant goodness. The system approach requires the development of each of the library components as a four-element system. The author declares the need to correct almost the entire conceptual apparatus of library stock studies and catalogue science, littered with the introduction of the term “information resource” instead of the concept of “document”, which, in turn, needs considerable clarification. The author makes proposal for the implementation of the current actual tasks of general library science.\",\"PeriodicalId\":325129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bibliotekovedenie [Russian Journal of Library Science]\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bibliotekovedenie [Russian Journal of Library Science]\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25281/0869-608x-2022-71-2-119-128\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bibliotekovedenie [Russian Journal of Library Science]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25281/0869-608x-2022-71-2-119-128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作者提出了一般图书馆学需要深入发展的问题。首先,要确定“图书馆学”与“一般图书馆学”概念的关系,以及“局部图书馆学”、“专业图书馆学”、“电子图书馆学”等概念的内容。作者强调引入标准GOST 7.0-99“信息与图书馆活动、书目”。术语和定义或即将取代它的国家标准GOST“图书馆和信息活动,书目。”根据1994年12月29日第78-FZ号“关于图书馆事业”的联邦法律,主要就“信息与图书馆”和“图书馆与信息”概念之间的关系进行了条款和辩护。这两个词都不正确。其次,有必要对不同于法律规范定义的“图书馆”概念进行科学界定,并摒弃人为引入图书馆学词典中的术语和概念。需要将“图书馆事业”和“图书馆活动”的概念分开,放弃图书馆作为提供服务的社会机构的观念。现有的方法导致文化活动不断地从政府责任领域转移到纯粹的市场关系中,形成了对文化价值现象的错误理解,精神成分来源于文化价值现象。在服务领域,与图书馆事业一样,虽然是非商业性的,但作为一种营销,不能进行精神价值的保存、生产、传递和传播。作者提出以“善”概念取代“服务”概念作为图书馆事业的终极目标,将图书馆理解为提供具有社会意义的善的社会机构。系统方法要求将每个图书馆组件开发为一个四元素系统。作者宣称需要纠正几乎整个图书馆库存研究和目录学的概念机构,其中充斥着“信息资源”一词的引入,而不是“文件”的概念,这反过来又需要相当的澄清。对当前普通图书馆学的实际任务的落实提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of General Issues of Library Science: Modern Problem and Situational Discourse
The author presents the problems of general library science that need profound development. First, it is necessary to determine the relationship between the concepts of “library science” and “general library science”, as well as the content of the concepts of “partial library science”, “special library science”, “electronic library science”, etc. The author emphasizes to bring the Standard GOST 7.0—99 “Information and library activities, bibliography. Terms and definitions or coming to replace it the State Standart GOST “Library and information activities, bibliography. Terms and defenitions” into compliance with the Federal Law No. 78-FZ of 29.12.1994 “On Librarianship”, primarily in terms of the relationship between the concepts of “information and library” and “library and information”. Both of these terms are incorrect. Then, it is necessary to give the scientific definition of the concept of “library”, which differs from its normative-legal definition, as well as to abandon the terms and concepts artificially introduced into the library science thesaurus. It is required to separate the concepts of “librarianship” and “library activity”, to abandon the idea of library as a social institution for the provision of services. The existing approach leads to the steady displacement of cultural activities from the sphere of government responsibility into purely market relations, forms a false understanding of the phenomenon of cultural values, from which the spiritual component is derived. In the field of services, being a type of marketing, albeit non-commercial, as it is in librarianship, the preservation, production, transmission and dissemination of spiritual values cannot be carried out. The author proposes in place of the concept of “service” as the ultimate goal of librarianship to put the concept of “goodness” and to understand the library as a social institution providing socially significant goodness. The system approach requires the development of each of the library components as a four-element system. The author declares the need to correct almost the entire conceptual apparatus of library stock studies and catalogue science, littered with the introduction of the term “information resource” instead of the concept of “document”, which, in turn, needs considerable clarification. The author makes proposal for the implementation of the current actual tasks of general library science.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信