Verso una comunicazione sistemica nei musei archeologici: Il ruolo degli strumenti digitali: caratteristiche e modelli.
Campetella, P.
Ph.D. Thesis, [Université d'Avignon], 2016.
🏷️ /unread
link
bibtex
@phdthesis{campetella2016,
address = {[Université d'Avignon]},
title = {Verso una comunicazione sistemica nei musei archeologici: {Il} ruolo degli strumenti digitali: caratteristiche e modelli},
shorttitle = {实现考古博物馆的系统通信：数字设备的作用：特点和模式},
language = {en},
author = {Campetella, Paolo},
year = {2016},
note = {🏷️ /unread},
keywords = {/unread},
}
Archaeology, the Digital Humanities, and the “Big Tent”.
Watrall, E.
In Gold, M. K.; and Klein, L. F., editor(s),
Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016, pages 345–358. University of Minnesota Press, 2016.
🏷️ /unread
![Archaeology, the Digital Humanities, and the “Big Tent” [link]](//bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "Paper")
Paper
link
bibtex
abstract
@incollection{watrall2016,
title = {Archaeology, the {Digital} {Humanities}, and the “{Big} {Tent}”},
isbn = {978-0-8166-9954-4},
shorttitle = {考古学、数字人文学科与 "大帐篷"},
url = {http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctt1cn6thb.31},
abstract = {There has been much discussion about “the big tent” as the metaphor that defines and delineates the boundaries of the digital humanities. In some cases, such as at the University College London Centre for Digital Humanities (Warwick et al.), the “big tent” is framed quite broadly, defined not by traditional disciplinary boundaries but by practice. Kathleen Fitzpatrick,¹ on the other hand, defines the “big tent” as “a nexus of fields within which scholars use computing technologies to investigate the kinds of questions that are traditional to the humanities, or, as is more true of [her] own work, who ask traditional
【摘要翻译】关于 "大帐篷 "作为界定和划分数字人文科学界限的隐喻，已经有很多讨论。在某些情况下，例如在伦敦大学学院数字人文中心（沃里克等人），"大帐篷 "的框架相当宽泛，不是由传统的学科界限而是由实践来定义。另一方面，凯瑟琳-菲茨帕特里克¹将 "大帐篷 "定义为 "学者们利用计算机技术研究人文学科传统问题的领域的纽带，或者，就她自己的工作而言，提出传统问题的学者"。},
language = {en},
urldate = {2021-03-07},
booktitle = {Debates in the {Digital} {Humanities} 2016},
publisher = {University of Minnesota Press},
author = {Watrall, Ethan},
editor = {Gold, Matthew K. and Klein, Lauren F.},
year = {2016},
note = {🏷️ /unread},
keywords = {/unread},
pages = {345--358},
}
There has been much discussion about “the big tent” as the metaphor that defines and delineates the boundaries of the digital humanities. In some cases, such as at the University College London Centre for Digital Humanities (Warwick et al.), the “big tent” is framed quite broadly, defined not by traditional disciplinary boundaries but by practice. Kathleen Fitzpatrick,¹ on the other hand, defines the “big tent” as “a nexus of fields within which scholars use computing technologies to investigate the kinds of questions that are traditional to the humanities, or, as is more true of [her] own work, who ask traditional 【摘要翻译】关于 "大帐篷 "作为界定和划分数字人文科学界限的隐喻，已经有很多讨论。在某些情况下，例如在伦敦大学学院数字人文中心（沃里克等人），"大帐篷 "的框架相当宽泛，不是由传统的学科界限而是由实践来定义。另一方面，凯瑟琳-菲茨帕特里克¹将 "大帐篷 "定义为 "学者们利用计算机技术研究人文学科传统问题的领域的纽带，或者，就她自己的工作而言，提出传统问题的学者"。
Jean-Claude Gardin on Archaeological Data, Representation and Knowledge: Implications for Digital Archaeology.
Dallas, C.
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 23(1): 305–330. March 2016.
🏷️ /unread
Paper
doi
link
bibtex
abstract
@article{dallas2016,
title = {Jean-{Claude} {Gardin} on {Archaeological} {Data}, {Representation} and {Knowledge}: {Implications} for {Digital} {Archaeology}},
volume = {23},
issn = {1573-7764},
shorttitle = {让-克洛德-加尔丁（{Jean}-{Claude} {Gardin}）谈考古数据、表征和知识：数字考古学的意义},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-015-9241-3},
doi = {10.1007/s10816-015-9241-3},
abstract = {This paper presents Jean-Claude Gardin’s distinctive approach to archaeological data, representation and knowledge in the context of his early engagement with semiotics and structural semantics and his grounding in fields as diverse as documentation, classification theory, material culture studies, argumentation theory and the philosophy of the human sciences. Pointing at Gardin’s ambivalence vis-à-vis the promises of automated classification and machine reasoning in archaeology, it shows that his approach goes beyond a normative, positivist conception of archaeological research, recognizing the contextual, theory-laden nature of archaeological data constitution, the priority of focusing on actual archaeological interpretation practices and the complementarity between narrative and formal representations of archaeological reasoning. It connects his early development of archaeological descriptive and typological metalanguages with his later elaboration of a theoretically informed approach to archaeological argumentation, analysis and publication, situates his logicist programme as a relevant contribution to the development of an archaeological “theory of practice”, grounded on reflexivity and modesty vis-à-vis the possibility of knowledge and the limits of scientism, and highlights aspects of Gardin’s work that point to potentially fruitful directions for contemporary research and practice in the field of archaeological informatics and digital humanities communication.
【摘要翻译】本文介绍了让-克洛德-加尔丹（Jean-Claude Gardin）处理考古数据、表征和知识的独特方法，包括他早期对符号学和结构语义学的研究，以及他在文献学、分类理论、物质文化研究、论证理论和人文科学哲学等不同领域的基础。该书指出了加尔丁对考古学中自动分类和机器推理的矛盾态度，表明他的研究方法超越了考古学研究的规范性和实证主义概念，认识到考古学数据构成的语境和理论性质，关注实际考古解释实践的优先性，以及考古推理的叙事和形式表述之间的互补性。该书将加尔丁早期对考古学描述和类型学金属语言的发展与他后来对考古学论证、分析和出版的理论方法的阐述联系起来，将他的逻辑学方案定位为对考古学 "实践理论 "发展的相关贡献，其基础是对知识可能性和科学主义局限性的反思性和谦逊性，并强调了加尔丁工作的各个方面，这些方面为考古信息学和数字人文交流领域的当代研究和实践指出了可能富有成果的方向。},
language = {en},
number = {1},
urldate = {2020-06-12},
journal = {Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory},
author = {Dallas, Costis},
month = mar,
year = {2016},
note = {🏷️ /unread},
keywords = {/unread},
pages = {305--330},
}
This paper presents Jean-Claude Gardin’s distinctive approach to archaeological data, representation and knowledge in the context of his early engagement with semiotics and structural semantics and his grounding in fields as diverse as documentation, classification theory, material culture studies, argumentation theory and the philosophy of the human sciences. Pointing at Gardin’s ambivalence vis-à-vis the promises of automated classification and machine reasoning in archaeology, it shows that his approach goes beyond a normative, positivist conception of archaeological research, recognizing the contextual, theory-laden nature of archaeological data constitution, the priority of focusing on actual archaeological interpretation practices and the complementarity between narrative and formal representations of archaeological reasoning. It connects his early development of archaeological descriptive and typological metalanguages with his later elaboration of a theoretically informed approach to archaeological argumentation, analysis and publication, situates his logicist programme as a relevant contribution to the development of an archaeological “theory of practice”, grounded on reflexivity and modesty vis-à-vis the possibility of knowledge and the limits of scientism, and highlights aspects of Gardin’s work that point to potentially fruitful directions for contemporary research and practice in the field of archaeological informatics and digital humanities communication. 【摘要翻译】本文介绍了让-克洛德-加尔丹（Jean-Claude Gardin）处理考古数据、表征和知识的独特方法，包括他早期对符号学和结构语义学的研究，以及他在文献学、分类理论、物质文化研究、论证理论和人文科学哲学等不同领域的基础。该书指出了加尔丁对考古学中自动分类和机器推理的矛盾态度，表明他的研究方法超越了考古学研究的规范性和实证主义概念，认识到考古学数据构成的语境和理论性质，关注实际考古解释实践的优先性，以及考古推理的叙事和形式表述之间的互补性。该书将加尔丁早期对考古学描述和类型学金属语言的发展与他后来对考古学论证、分析和出版的理论方法的阐述联系起来，将他的逻辑学方案定位为对考古学 "实践理论 "发展的相关贡献，其基础是对知识可能性和科学主义局限性的反思性和谦逊性，并强调了加尔丁工作的各个方面，这些方面为考古信息学和数字人文交流领域的当代研究和实践指出了可能富有成果的方向。
![Networks, Connectivity, and Material Culture [link]](http://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "Paper")
Paper
link
bibtex