{"title":"广东图书协会学汇四十年(回顾)","authors":"Priscilla C. Yu","doi":"10.1353/LAC.2005.0062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Anderson provides. And yet, since readers have managed so long without such a study as this, Anderson ought to have at least attempted to argue for the significance of his work for early American studies or the field of book history. Rarely can a scholar so thoroughly resituate such a foundational work as William Bradford’s history as Anderson does here. Yet a scholar capable of such work ought also to be able to situate his own work and clarify its key contributions.","PeriodicalId":81853,"journal":{"name":"Libraries & culture","volume":"40 1","pages":"572 - 573"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/LAC.2005.0062","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Guangdong Tushuguan Xuehui Sishi Nian (The Guangdong Library Association: 40 Years) (review)\",\"authors\":\"Priscilla C. Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/LAC.2005.0062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Anderson provides. And yet, since readers have managed so long without such a study as this, Anderson ought to have at least attempted to argue for the significance of his work for early American studies or the field of book history. Rarely can a scholar so thoroughly resituate such a foundational work as William Bradford’s history as Anderson does here. Yet a scholar capable of such work ought also to be able to situate his own work and clarify its key contributions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":81853,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Libraries & culture\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"572 - 573\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/LAC.2005.0062\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Libraries & culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/LAC.2005.0062\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Libraries & culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/LAC.2005.0062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Anderson provides. And yet, since readers have managed so long without such a study as this, Anderson ought to have at least attempted to argue for the significance of his work for early American studies or the field of book history. Rarely can a scholar so thoroughly resituate such a foundational work as William Bradford’s history as Anderson does here. Yet a scholar capable of such work ought also to be able to situate his own work and clarify its key contributions.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
