澳大利亚岩画研究史

IF 1.1 3区 历史学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY
P. Martín
{"title":"澳大利亚岩画研究史","authors":"P. Martín","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2194102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"backdrop. To summarise, this is one of the most detailed reports of an excavation I have ever read. Reading it, you will know exactly what they found in 6m of the PNG south coast and where it was found. Whether we need to know this with such precision might be debated. Now for a couple of more general comments. Although it is clear from the photos and acknowledgments that many Papua New Guineans were involved in the work, only one, the late Hermann Mandui, is an author. The first Caution Bay volume (Richards et al. 2016) says that many University of Papua New Guinea (UPNG) students and some others were trainees on site, but there does seem to be something of a hierarchy in presenting the results. Perhaps the meticulousness of this excavation results from being partly seen as a field school? In terms of production, this is a 350-page book of which well over 200 pages are data tables. In the twenty-first century these should be online, or otherwise available in an electronic repository; printed, or even as a pdf, they are very difficult to manipulate and use. This seems an extraordinary oversight. Otherwise, the presentation is fine: my pdf had many excellent colour photos, well organised text and only a couple of minor problems (e.g. the size of sherd in Square N, XU2, #2: compare p.80 with Figures 3.15 and 3.18). It is not clear (Richards et al. 2016:6) how many other Caution Bay monographs there will be, but this project has already made a considerable contribution to the history of Papua New Guinea.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"93 - 95"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Histories of Australian Rock Art Research\",\"authors\":\"P. Martín\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03122417.2023.2194102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"backdrop. To summarise, this is one of the most detailed reports of an excavation I have ever read. Reading it, you will know exactly what they found in 6m of the PNG south coast and where it was found. Whether we need to know this with such precision might be debated. Now for a couple of more general comments. Although it is clear from the photos and acknowledgments that many Papua New Guineans were involved in the work, only one, the late Hermann Mandui, is an author. The first Caution Bay volume (Richards et al. 2016) says that many University of Papua New Guinea (UPNG) students and some others were trainees on site, but there does seem to be something of a hierarchy in presenting the results. Perhaps the meticulousness of this excavation results from being partly seen as a field school? In terms of production, this is a 350-page book of which well over 200 pages are data tables. In the twenty-first century these should be online, or otherwise available in an electronic repository; printed, or even as a pdf, they are very difficult to manipulate and use. This seems an extraordinary oversight. Otherwise, the presentation is fine: my pdf had many excellent colour photos, well organised text and only a couple of minor problems (e.g. the size of sherd in Square N, XU2, #2: compare p.80 with Figures 3.15 and 3.18). It is not clear (Richards et al. 2016:6) how many other Caution Bay monographs there will be, but this project has already made a considerable contribution to the history of Papua New Guinea.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Archaeology\",\"volume\":\"89 1\",\"pages\":\"93 - 95\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Archaeology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2194102\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2194102","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景总之,这是我读过的最详细的挖掘报告之一。阅读它,你会确切地知道他们在巴布亚新几内亚南海岸6米处发现了什么,以及它是在哪里发现的。我们是否需要如此精确地了解这一点可能会引起争论。现在我们来谈几点一般性的评论。尽管从照片和致谢中可以清楚地看到,许多巴布亚新几内亚人参与了这项工作,但只有一位已故的赫尔曼·曼杜伊是作者。第一卷《小心湾》(Richards等人,2016)称,巴布亚新几内亚大学(UPNG)的许多学生和其他一些学生都是现场受训人员,但在呈现结果时似乎确实存在某种等级制度。也许这次挖掘的细致性在一定程度上被视为一所野外学校?就制作而言,这是一本350页的书,其中200多页是数据表。在二十一世纪,这些应该是在线的,或者以其他方式在电子存储库中提供;打印出来的,甚至是pdf格式的,都很难操作和使用。这似乎是一个非同寻常的疏忽。除此之外,演示也很好:我的pdf有很多出色的彩色照片,组织良好的文本,只有几个小问题(例如,广场N,XU2,#2的碎片大小:将第80页与图3.15和3.18进行比较)。目前还不清楚(Richards等人2016:6)还有多少其他Caution Bay专著,但这个项目已经为巴布亚新几内亚的历史做出了相当大的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Histories of Australian Rock Art Research
backdrop. To summarise, this is one of the most detailed reports of an excavation I have ever read. Reading it, you will know exactly what they found in 6m of the PNG south coast and where it was found. Whether we need to know this with such precision might be debated. Now for a couple of more general comments. Although it is clear from the photos and acknowledgments that many Papua New Guineans were involved in the work, only one, the late Hermann Mandui, is an author. The first Caution Bay volume (Richards et al. 2016) says that many University of Papua New Guinea (UPNG) students and some others were trainees on site, but there does seem to be something of a hierarchy in presenting the results. Perhaps the meticulousness of this excavation results from being partly seen as a field school? In terms of production, this is a 350-page book of which well over 200 pages are data tables. In the twenty-first century these should be online, or otherwise available in an electronic repository; printed, or even as a pdf, they are very difficult to manipulate and use. This seems an extraordinary oversight. Otherwise, the presentation is fine: my pdf had many excellent colour photos, well organised text and only a couple of minor problems (e.g. the size of sherd in Square N, XU2, #2: compare p.80 with Figures 3.15 and 3.18). It is not clear (Richards et al. 2016:6) how many other Caution Bay monographs there will be, but this project has already made a considerable contribution to the history of Papua New Guinea.
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
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
20
×
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