Core or Periphery? Digital Humanities from an Archaeological Perspective. Huggett, J. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 37(3 (141)):86–105, 2012. 🏷️ /unread![Core or Periphery? Digital Humanities from an Archaeological Perspective [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper abstract bibtex The relationship between Digital Humanities and individual humanities disciplines is difficult to define given the uncertainties surrounding the definition of Digital Humanities itself. An examination of coverage within Digital Humanities journals narrows the range but at the same time emphasises that, while the focus of Digital Humanities might be textual, not all textually-oriented disciplines are equally represented. Trending terms also seem to suggest that Digital Humanities is more of a label of convenience, even for those disciplines most closely associated with Digital Humanities. From an archaeological perspective, a relationship between Digital Archaeology and Digital Humanities is largely absent and the evidence suggests that each is peripheral with respect to the other. Reasons for this situation are discussed, and the spatial expertise of Digital Archaeology is reviewed in relation to Digital Humanities concerns regarding the use of GIS. The conclusion is that a closer relationship is possible, and indeed desirable, but that a direct conversation between Digital Humanities, Digital Archaeology and humanities geographers needs to be established. 【摘要翻译】鉴于数字人文学科本身定义的不确定性，数字人文学科与各个人文学科之间的关系很难界定。对数字人文期刊覆盖范围的研究缩小了范围，但同时也强调，虽然数字人文的重点可能是文本，但并非所有以文本为导向的学科都有同等的代表性。趋势性术语似乎也表明，数字人文更多的是一种方便的标签，甚至对于那些与数字人文关系最密切的学科也是如此。从考古学的角度来看，数字考古学与数字人文学科之间的关系在很大程度上是不存在的，而且有证据表明，二者相对于其他学科而言都是边缘学科。本文讨论了造成这种状况的原因，并结合数字人文对地理信息系统（GIS）使用的关注，对数字考古学的空间专业知识进行了评述。结论是，建立更紧密的关系是可能的，也是可取的，但需要在数字人文、数字考古和人文地理学家之间建立直接对话。
@article{huggett2012,
title = {Core or {Periphery}? {Digital} {Humanities} from an {Archaeological} {Perspective}},
volume = {37},
issn = {0172-6404},
shorttitle = {核心还是边缘？考古学视角下的数字人文},
url = {https://www.jstor.org/stable/41636599},
abstract = {The relationship between Digital Humanities and individual humanities disciplines is difficult to define given the uncertainties surrounding the definition of Digital Humanities itself. An examination of coverage within Digital Humanities journals narrows the range but at the same time emphasises that, while the focus of Digital Humanities might be textual, not all textually-oriented disciplines are equally represented. Trending terms also seem to suggest that Digital Humanities is more of a label of convenience, even for those disciplines most closely associated with Digital Humanities. From an archaeological perspective, a relationship between Digital Archaeology and Digital Humanities is largely absent and the evidence suggests that each is peripheral with respect to the other. Reasons for this situation are discussed, and the spatial expertise of Digital Archaeology is reviewed in relation to Digital Humanities concerns regarding the use of GIS. The conclusion is that a closer relationship is possible, and indeed desirable, but that a direct conversation between Digital Humanities, Digital Archaeology and humanities geographers needs to be established.
【摘要翻译】鉴于数字人文学科本身定义的不确定性，数字人文学科与各个人文学科之间的关系很难界定。对数字人文期刊覆盖范围的研究缩小了范围，但同时也强调，虽然数字人文的重点可能是文本，但并非所有以文本为导向的学科都有同等的代表性。趋势性术语似乎也表明，数字人文更多的是一种方便的标签，甚至对于那些与数字人文关系最密切的学科也是如此。从考古学的角度来看，数字考古学与数字人文学科之间的关系在很大程度上是不存在的，而且有证据表明，二者相对于其他学科而言都是边缘学科。本文讨论了造成这种状况的原因，并结合数字人文对地理信息系统（GIS）使用的关注，对数字考古学的空间专业知识进行了评述。结论是，建立更紧密的关系是可能的，也是可取的，但需要在数字人文、数字考古和人文地理学家之间建立直接对话。},
language = {en},
number = {3 (141)},
urldate = {2021-03-08},
journal = {Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung},
author = {Huggett, Jeremy},
year = {2012},
note = {🏷️ /unread},
keywords = {/unread},
pages = {86--105},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":{"_str":"53446fdbf1c2d1f22d0003e2"},"__v":1,"authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Huggett, J."],"bibbaseid":"huggett-coreorperipherydigitalhumanitiesfromanarchaeologicalperspective-2012","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Core or Periphery? Digital Humanities from an Archaeological Perspective","volume":"37","issn":"0172-6404","shorttitle":"核心还是边缘？考古学视角下的数字人文","url":"https://www.jstor.org/stable/41636599","abstract":"The relationship between Digital Humanities and individual humanities disciplines is difficult to define given the uncertainties surrounding the definition of Digital Humanities itself. An examination of coverage within Digital Humanities journals narrows the range but at the same time emphasises that, while the focus of Digital Humanities might be textual, not all textually-oriented disciplines are equally represented. Trending terms also seem to suggest that Digital Humanities is more of a label of convenience, even for those disciplines most closely associated with Digital Humanities. From an archaeological perspective, a relationship between Digital Archaeology and Digital Humanities is largely absent and the evidence suggests that each is peripheral with respect to the other. Reasons for this situation are discussed, and the spatial expertise of Digital Archaeology is reviewed in relation to Digital Humanities concerns regarding the use of GIS. The conclusion is that a closer relationship is possible, and indeed desirable, but that a direct conversation between Digital Humanities, Digital Archaeology and humanities geographers needs to be established. 【摘要翻译】鉴于数字人文学科本身定义的不确定性，数字人文学科与各个人文学科之间的关系很难界定。对数字人文期刊覆盖范围的研究缩小了范围，但同时也强调，虽然数字人文的重点可能是文本，但并非所有以文本为导向的学科都有同等的代表性。趋势性术语似乎也表明，数字人文更多的是一种方便的标签，甚至对于那些与数字人文关系最密切的学科也是如此。从考古学的角度来看，数字考古学与数字人文学科之间的关系在很大程度上是不存在的，而且有证据表明，二者相对于其他学科而言都是边缘学科。本文讨论了造成这种状况的原因，并结合数字人文对地理信息系统（GIS）使用的关注，对数字考古学的空间专业知识进行了评述。结论是，建立更紧密的关系是可能的，也是可取的，但需要在数字人文、数字考古和人文地理学家之间建立直接对话。","language":"en","number":"3 (141)","urldate":"2021-03-08","journal":"Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Huggett"],"firstnames":["Jeremy"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2012","note":"🏷️ /unread","keywords":"/unread","pages":"86–105","bibtex":"@article{huggett2012,\n\ttitle = {Core or {Periphery}? {Digital} {Humanities} from an {Archaeological} {Perspective}},\n\tvolume = {37},\n\tissn = {0172-6404},\n\tshorttitle = {核心还是边缘？考古学视角下的数字人文},\n\turl = {https://www.jstor.org/stable/41636599},\n\tabstract = {The relationship between Digital Humanities and individual humanities disciplines is difficult to define given the uncertainties surrounding the definition of Digital Humanities itself. An examination of coverage within Digital Humanities journals narrows the range but at the same time emphasises that, while the focus of Digital Humanities might be textual, not all textually-oriented disciplines are equally represented. Trending terms also seem to suggest that Digital Humanities is more of a label of convenience, even for those disciplines most closely associated with Digital Humanities. From an archaeological perspective, a relationship between Digital Archaeology and Digital Humanities is largely absent and the evidence suggests that each is peripheral with respect to the other. Reasons for this situation are discussed, and the spatial expertise of Digital Archaeology is reviewed in relation to Digital Humanities concerns regarding the use of GIS. The conclusion is that a closer relationship is possible, and indeed desirable, but that a direct conversation between Digital Humanities, Digital Archaeology and humanities geographers needs to be established.\n\n【摘要翻译】鉴于数字人文学科本身定义的不确定性，数字人文学科与各个人文学科之间的关系很难界定。对数字人文期刊覆盖范围的研究缩小了范围，但同时也强调，虽然数字人文的重点可能是文本，但并非所有以文本为导向的学科都有同等的代表性。趋势性术语似乎也表明，数字人文更多的是一种方便的标签，甚至对于那些与数字人文关系最密切的学科也是如此。从考古学的角度来看，数字考古学与数字人文学科之间的关系在很大程度上是不存在的，而且有证据表明，二者相对于其他学科而言都是边缘学科。本文讨论了造成这种状况的原因，并结合数字人文对地理信息系统（GIS）使用的关注，对数字考古学的空间专业知识进行了评述。结论是，建立更紧密的关系是可能的，也是可取的，但需要在数字人文、数字考古和人文地理学家之间建立直接对话。},\n\tlanguage = {en},\n\tnumber = {3 (141)},\n\turldate = {2021-03-08},\n\tjournal = {Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung},\n\tauthor = {Huggett, Jeremy},\n\tyear = {2012},\n\tnote = {🏷️ /unread},\n\tkeywords = {/unread},\n\tpages = {86--105},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Huggett, J."],"key":"huggett2012","id":"huggett2012","bibbaseid":"huggett-coreorperipherydigitalhumanitiesfromanarchaeologicalperspective-2012","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://www.jstor.org/stable/41636599"},"keyword":["/unread"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"downloads":0},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://api.zotero.org/groups/2386895/collections/Y3QIGY5X/items?format=bibtex&limit=100","downloads":0,"keywords":["/unread"],"search_terms":["core","periphery","digital","humanities","archaeological","perspective","huggett"],"title":"Core or Periphery? Digital Humanities from an Archaeological Perspective","year":2012,"dataSources":["yMLLs8ACHBAKj9HB3","iC76hZbMPQr3su9Sj"]}