Conceptualizing Subject Classification

Chatterjee, Sidharta and Samanta, Mousumi (2021): Conceptualizing Subject Classification.

Abstract

In this research, we attempt to conceptualize the classification system by which information and knowledge are classified in libraries. This paper also examines the role of subject ontogeny in classification and delineates how subjects are classified following certain schemas and systems. It stresses on the role of ontology and ontogeny in classification schemes and how these tools of knowledge organization help libraries organize information more efficiently for their fast retrieval.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Classification schemes, Subject ontogeny, DDC, Knowledge Organization
• Subjects: A - General Economics and Teaching > A3 - Collective Works; Z - Other Special Topics > Z0 - General

References

1.Aabø, S. (2005). The role and value of public libraries in the age of digital technologies. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 37(4), 205-211.

2.Chatterjee, S. & Samanta, M. (2021). Information Organization Process. Available at SSRN 3903795.

3.Chatterjee, S., Samanta, M., & Dey, S. (2021). The Role Played by Public Libraries in Promoting Information Literacy and User Education. IUP Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(1), 36-49.

4.Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index. (1989). Devised by Melvil Dewey. Ed. 20., ed. By John P. Comaromi, Julianne Beale, Winton E. Mathews, Jr., and Gregory R New. Albany, N.Y.: Forest Press (Adivision of OCLC Online Computer Center), [4 vols. ISBN 0-910-6083-77 (set). $200.00.]

5.Feinberg, M. (2011). How information systems communicate as documents: the concept of authorial voice. Journal of Documentation.

6.Foskett, D. J. (1970, March). Classification and indexing in the social sciences. In Aslib proceedings. MCB UP Ltd.

7.Grigora, M., Maronitou, F., & Spathari, E. (2017). Introduction of Interactive and Product Design in reshaping the Public Library’s services through ICT and public engagement: The case of Mytilene Public Library’s archives.

8.Hjørland, B. (2018). Indexing: concepts and theory. KO Knowledge Organization, 45(7), 609-639.

9.Hjørland, B., & Pedersen, K. N. (2005). A substantive theory of classification for information retrieval. Journal of Documentation, 61(5), 582-597.

10.Hjørland, Birger. (1992): "The Concept of" Subject" in Information Science." Journal of Documentation 48, no. 2, 172-200.

11.Ilesanmi, T. C. (2013). Roles of the librarian in a research library in the digital era: Challenges and the way forward. New review of academic librarianship, 19(1), 5-14.

12.Lancaster, F. W., Lancaster, F. W., Lancaster, F. W., & Lancaster, F. W. (1991). Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice. London: Library Association.

13.Lougee, W. P. (2002). Diffuse Libraries: Emergent Roles for the Research Library in the Digital Age. Perspectives on the Evolving Library. Council on Library and Information Resources, 1755 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20036.

14.Poli, R. (1996). Ontology for knowledge organization. Advances in Knowledge Organization, 5, 313-319.

15.Ranganathan, S. R. (1937). Prolegomena to library classification. Madras Library Association, Madras.

16.Ranganathan, S.R. (1964). Subject heading and facet analysis. Journal of Documentation, March 1.

17.Shera, H. Jessy and Perry, W. James. (1965); Changing Concepts of Classification: Philosophical And Educational Implications, in Library Science Today, Vol. 1 Ranganathan Series in Library Science 14.

18.Smiraglia, R. P., & van den Heuvel, C. (2013). Classifications and concepts: towards an elementary theory of knowledge interaction. Journal of Documentation, 69(3), 360-383.

19.Tennis, J. (2002). Subject ontogeny: subject access through time and the dimensionality of classification. In Challenges in Knowledge Representation and Organization for the 21st Century: Integration of Knowledge across Boundaries. Proceedings of the Seventh International ISKO Conference.

20.Tennis, J. (2008). Epistemology, theory, and methodology in knowledge organization: Toward a classification, metatheory, and research framework. Knowledge organization, 35(2/3), 102-112.

21.Tennis, J. T. (2012). The strange case of eugenics: A subject's ontogeny in a long‐lived classification scheme and the question of collocative integrity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(7), 1350-1359.