Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present the initial relationship between the Classification Research Group (CRG) and the Center for Documentation and Communication Research (CDCR) and how this relationship changed between 1952 and 1970. The theory of normative behavior and its concepts of worldviews, social norms, social types, and information behavior are used to characterize the relationship between the small worlds of the two groups with the intent of understanding the gap between early classification research and information retrieval (IR) research.

This is a mixed method analysis of two groups as evidenced in published artifacts by and about their work. A thorough review of historical literature about the groups as well as their own published works was employed and an author co-citation analysis was used to characterize the conceptual similarities and differences of the two groups of researchers.

The CRG focused on fundamental principles to aid classification and retrieval of information. The CDCR were more inclined to develop practical methods of retrieval without benefit of good theoretical foundations. The CRG began it work under the contention that the general classification schemes at the time were inadequate for the developing IR mechanisms. The CDCR rejected the classification schemes of the times and focused on developing punch card mechanisms and processes that were generously funded by both government and corporate funding.

This paper provides a unique historical analysis of two groups of influential researchers in the field of library and information science.

The group has continued to meet regularly since the publication of the last bulletin and has welcomed a number of new members and visitors from both home and overseas. Many members who joined at the beginning or very early on in the Group's history still attend regularly, but several long‐standing members have also left, or ceased active participation, in the period under review. Towards the end of 1972 Mr Wells relinquished the chairmanship of the Group, due to pressure of work, and his place was taken by Mr Mills. Another departure, and one that robbed the Group of one of its most active and forceful members, was that of Jason Farradane. He left the country in 1974, and the Group presented him with a book as a memento of many enjoyable and provocative discussions stimulated by his presence at the meetings which he unfailingly attended. It was with great pleasure that he was welcomed back to a meeting while he was visiting this country in January 1976.

In the money under review the meetings of the Group have been lively and well attended, with over twenty members present at many meetings. The following visitors and overseas members were welcomed at Group meetings:

IThe activity of the group has continued to progress with great energy and enthusiasm for practical applications of the theoretical ideas and schemes of the members, many of whom have acted as consultants to private, government and international institutions. Some of the longer‐serving members retired, but continued to attend meetings. The Group heard with great regret of the death of Mr B. I. Palmer, its Founder Chairman. An important element in the discussions from its beginning was the theoretical scheme of S. R. Ranganathan, and this was largely due to Palmer, who had returned from war service in India fired with enthusiasm for Ranganathan's ideas, and determined to interest others in developing and applying them. His collaboration with Mr A. J. Wells, another founder member, had as an early result their little monograph, The fundamentals of library classification, which has greatly influenced both teaching and practice of classification, and not only in Britain.

This bulletin's immediate predecessor was devoted to the Facet Scheme devised for the Aslib Cranfield Research Project. Bulletin no. 4 dealt with the work and discussions of the Group up to its forty‐sixth meeting, and the present issue covers approximately thirty further meetings spread over the last three years.

This bulletin's immediate predecessor was devoted to the Facet Scheme devised for the Aslib Cranfield Research Project. Bulletin no. 4 dealt with the work and discussions of the Group up to its forty‐sixth meeting, and the present issue covers approximately thirty further meetings spread over the last three years.

A strong definition of aboutness and a theory of its role in information retrieval systems have not been developed. Such a definition and theory may be extracted from the work of T. A. van Dijk. This paper discusses some of the implications of van Dijk's work for bibliographic classification theory. Two kinds of intertextuality are identified: that between documents classified in the same class of the same classification system; and that between the classification system as a text in its own right and the documents that are classified by it. Consideration of the two kinds of intertextuality leads to an investigation of the linguistic/cognitive processes that have been called the ‘translation’ of a document topic into a classificatory language. A descriptive model of the cognitive process of classifying documents is presented. The general design of an empirical study to test this model is suggested, and some problems of implementing such a study are briefly identified. It is concluded that further investigation of the relationships between text linguistics and classification theory and practice might reveal other fruitful intersections between the two fields.

Before starting to trace the development of PRECIS to its theoretical beginnings I shall describe the system briefly in its present form. This will serve not only as an introduction for those who are not familiar with the system, but will also help to explain the relevance of some of the historical sections which follow, in which we shall see how a machine‐produced alphabetical indexing system, based on a syntax derived from a study of natural language, developed out of research into principles for a new general classification.

The group meetings have continued regularly since the last Report appeared. Several members from the earliest days are still present at most meetings, but new members have also been welcomed. The meetings continue to be the ideal medium for refurbishing old ideas, or trying out new ones, however outrageous, in a spirit of cheerful goodwill. There have been frequent visitors, many from overseas, and if they are unprepared they may find the rapid changes of discussion somewhat bewildering. Among the visitors who made special contributions have been: Mrs J. Aitchison, who described her thesaurofacet scheme for the English Electric Co.; Dr Perreault (Director of Libraries, University of Alabama in Huntsville), who discussed the relations between philosophy and science; Mr Bhattacharya (Documentation Research and Training Centre, Bangalore), who described the work of the Centre (established by Ranganathan in 1962); and Dr H. Borko (University of Southern California) who gave a wonderfully clear account of his work on automated classification.

The last CRG Bulletin, no. 7, dealt only with the practical application of four faceted special classifications.