基于我国古籍引经据典现象的引文分析研究

doi:10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.12.011

情报学报

2021, Vol. 40

Issue (12): 1338-1346 DOI: 10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.12.011

情报分析方法与技术

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

基于我国古籍引经据典现象的引文分析研究

舒非¹, 丰鹂萱¹, 邱均平¹, 舒仕斌¹, LariviereVincent²

1.杭州电子科技大学，杭州 310018
2.蒙特利尔大学，蒙特利尔 H3C3J7

Exploring the Function of Citation Using Ancient Chinese Literature

Shu Fei¹, Feng Lixuan¹, Qiu Junping¹, Shu Shibin¹, Lariviere Vincent²

1.Hangzhou Dianzi University, Hangzhou 310018
2.University of Montreal, Montreal H3C3J7

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (2)

全文: PDF (1876 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要关于引文本质和引用动机国际学术界一直存在争议，规范主义理论（normative theory）认为引用是对前人研究的认可，而建构主义理论（constructive theory）则认为引用只是为了说服读者自己论点的权威性，本研究通过分析中国古典文学中的引经据典现象，试图从历史角度提供一个关于引用动机的新解释，增加科学计量学理论研究中的中国话语权。本研究对《古文观止》和《古文辞类纂》中近600处引文根据引用的目的和作用进行分类，分析引文在文章中的主要作用，发现我国古籍中引文的普遍作用是为了说服读者自己论点的权威性，从而证实了建构主义理论对于引文作用的解释。同时，本研究发现，不同历史年代的作者引用动机以及对不同被引文献的引用原因存在差异。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	舒非
	丰鹂萱
	邱均平
	舒仕斌
	LariviereVincent

关键词 ：引文本质, 规范主义, 建构主义, 中国古典文学

收稿日期: 2021-01-27

基金资助:国家社会科学基金重大项目“基于大数据的科教评价信息云平台构建和智能服务研究”（19ZDA348）。

作者简介: 舒非，男，1976年生，博士，研究员，硕士生导师，主要研究领域为科学计量学与科研评价；丰鹂萱，女，2001年生，硕士研究生，主要研究领域为大学评价；邱均平，男，1947年生，教授，博士生导师，主要研究领域为科学计量学与大学评价，E-mail：case.hdu@outlook.com；舒仕斌，男，1977年生，硕士，主要研究领域为中国古代文学；Vincent Lariviere，男，1979年生，博士，教授，主要研究领域为文献计量学与科学计量；

引用本文:

舒非, 丰鹂萱, 邱均平, 舒仕斌, LariviereVincent. 基于我国古籍引经据典现象的引文分析研究[J]. 情报学报, 2021, 40(12): 1338-1346.
Shu Fei, Feng Lixuan, Qiu Junping, Shu Shibin, Lariviere Vincent. Exploring the Function of Citation Using Ancient Chinese Literature. 情报学报, 2021, 40(12): 1338-1346.

链接本文:

https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.12.011 或 https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/Y2021/V40/I12/1338

1 Garfield E. Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation[J]. Science, 1972, 178(4060): 471-479.
2 Garfield E. Citation indexing—its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities[M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1979.
3 Melkers J. Bibliometrics as a tool for analysis of R&D impacts[M]// Bozeman B, Melkers J. Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice. Boston: Springer, 1993: 43-61.
4 Small H. Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1973, 24(4): 265-269.
5 Garfield E. To cite or not to cite: a note of annoyance[OL]. Essays of an Information Scientist, 1977, 3: 215-218. (1977-08-29). http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v3p215y1977-78.pdf.
6 Garfield E. Can citation indexing be automated?[OL]// Essays of an Information Scientist, 1970, 1: 84-90. (1970-03-04). http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/V1p084y1962-73.pdf.
7 Smith L C. Citation analysis[J]. Library Trends, 1981, 30(1): 83-106.
8 White M D, Wang P L. A qualitative study of citing behavior: contributions, criteria, and metalevel documentation concerns[J]. The Library Quarterly, 1997, 67(2): 122-154.
9 Moed H F. Citation analysis in research evaluation[M]. Dordrecht: Springer, 2005.
10 Leydesdorff L. Theories of citation?[J]. Scientometrics, 1998, 43(1): 5-25.
11 Nicolaisen J. Citation analysis[J]. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 2007, 41(1): 609-641.
12 Merton R K. The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973.
13 Garfield E. Citation indexes for science: a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas[J]. Science, 1955, 122(3159): 108-111.
14 Garfield E. “Science citation index”—a new dimension in indexing[J]. Science, 1964, 144(3619): 649-654.
15 Small H G. Cited documents as concept symbols[J]. Social Studies of Science, 1978, 8(3): 327-340.
16 De Solla Price D J. Little science, big science[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963.
17 Nigel Gilbert G. Referencing as persuasion[J]. Social Studies of Science, 1977, 7(1): 113-122.
18 Cozzens S E. What do citations count? The rhetoric-first model[J]. Scientometrics, 1989, 15(5/6): 437-447.
19 Cronin B. The citation process: the role and significance of citations in scientific communication[M]. London: Taylor Graham, 1984.
20 Martin B R, Irvine J. Assessing basic research: some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy[J]. Research Policy, 1983, 12(2): 61-90.
21 Van Raan A F J. In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much[J]. Scientometrics, 1998, 43(1): 129-139.
22 White H D. Reward, persuasion, and the Sokal Hoax: a study in citation identities[J]. Scientometrics, 2004, 60(1): 93-120.
23 Zuckerman H. Citation analysis and the complex problem of intellectual influence[J]. Scientometrics, 1987, 12(5/6): 329-338.
24 Cronin B. The need for a theory of citing[J]. Journal of Documentation, 1981, 37(1): 16-24.
25 Small H. On the shoulders of Robert Merton: towards a normative theory of citation[J]. Scientometrics, 2004, 60(1): 71-79.
26 Teufel S, Siddharthan A, Tidhar D. Automatic classification of citation function[C]// Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics, 2006: 103-110.
27 Kochen M. Principles of information retrieval[M]. Los Angeles: Melville Publishing Company, 1974.
28 Edge D. Why I am not a co-citationist[J]. Society for Social Studies of Science Newsletter, 1977, 2: 13-19.
29 Kaplan N. The norms of citation behavior: prolegomena to the footnote[J]. American Documentation, 1965, 16(3): 179-184.
30 Camacho-Mi?ano M D M, Nú?ez-Nickel M. The multilayered nature of reference selection[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2009, 60(4): 754-777.
31 Cronin B. Norms and functions in citation: the view of journal editors and referees in psychology[J]. Social Science Information Studies, 1982, 2(2): 65-77.
32 Franck G. Scientific communication—a vanity fair?[J]. Science, 1999, 286(5437): 53-55.
33 Merton R K. Priorities in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science[J]. American Sociological Review, 1957, 22(6): 635-659.
34 Hagstrom W O. The scientific community[M]. New York: Basic Books, 1965.
35 Baldi S. Normative versus social constructivist processes in the allocation of citations: a network-analytic model[J]. American Sociological Review, 1998, 63(6): 829-846.
36 Knorr-Cetina K. The manufacture of knowledge: an essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science[M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981.
37 Piaget J. Biology and knowledge: an essay on the relations between organic regulations and cognitive processes[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.
38 Latour B, Woolgar S. Laboratory life: the social construction of scientific facts[M]. Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications, 1979.
39 Bloor D. Knowledge and social imagery[M]. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976.
40 Mulkay M J. Science and the sociology of knowledge[M]. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1979.
41 May K O. Abuses of citation indexing[J]. Science, 1967, 156(3777): 890-892.
42 Small H. Citations and consilience in science[J]. Scientometrics, 1998, 43(1): 143-148.
43 Prabha C G. Some aspects of citation behavior: a pilot study in business administration[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1983, 34(3): 202-206.
44 Vinkler P. A quasi-quantitative citation model[J]. Scientometrics, 1987, 12(1/2): 47-72.
45 Bonzi S, Snyder H W. Motivations for citation: a comparison of self citation and citation to others[J]. Scientometrics, 1991, 21(2): 245-254.
46 Hellqvist B. Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2010, 61(2): 310-318.
47 Mansourizadeh K, Ahmad U K. Citation practices among non-native expert and novice scientific writers[J]. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2011, 10(3): 152-161.
48 Lipetz B A. Improvement of the selectivity of citation indexes to science literature through inclusion of citation relationship indicators[J]. American Documentation, 1965, 16(2): 81-90.
49 Hodges T L. Citation indexing: its potential for bibliographical control[D]. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, 1972.
50 Moravcsik M J, Murugesan P. Some results on the function and quality of citations[J]. Social Studies of Science, 1975, 5(1): 86-92.
51 Angrosh M A, Cranefield S, Stanger N. Context identification of sentences in related work sections using a conditional random field: towards intelligent digital libraries[C]// Proceedings of the 10th Annual Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 293-302.
52 Athar A. Sentiment analysis of citations using sentence structure-based features[C]// Proceedings of the ACL 2011 Student Session. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics, 2011.
53 Bottle R T, Gong Y T. A bibliometric study on the ageing and content typology relationship of the biochemical literature[J]. Journal of Information Science, 1987, 13(1): 59-63.
54 Cole S. The growth of scientific knowledge: theories of deviance as a case study[M]// The Idea of Social Structure: Papers in Honor of Robert K Merton. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. 1975: 175-220.
55 Dong C, Sch?fer U. Ensemble-style self-training on citation classification[C]// Proceedings of the 5th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing. Chiang Mai: Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing, 2011: 623-631.
56 Finney B. The reference characteristics of scientific texts[D]. London: The City University, 1979.
57 Garzone M A. Automated classification of citations using linguistic semantic grammars[D]. London: The University of Western Ontario, 1997.
58 Tabatabaei N. Contribution of information science to other disciplines as reflected in citation contexts of highly cited JASIST papers[D]. Montreal: McGill University, 2013.
59 Hooten P A. Frequency and functional use of cited documents in information science[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1991, 42(6): 397-404.
60 Magee M. How research biochemists use information: an analysis of use of information from cited references[D]. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1966.
61 Ruff I. Citation analysis of a scientific career: a case study[J]. Social Studies of Science, 1979, 9(1): 81-90.
62 Simone T. Argumentative zoning: information extraction from scientific text[D]. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 2000.
63 Walsh J A, Sugimoto C R. Victorian paratextual poetics and citation analysis[C]// Proceedings of the 25th Digital Humanities Conference, 2013.
64 蒋国华. 从普赖斯到鲁索: 影响中国科学计量学发展的若干国际交往纪事[J]. 评价与管理, 2008, 6(3): 1-5.
65 崔红. 我国科技人员引文动机聚类分析[J]. 情报杂志, 1998, 17(2): 68-70.
66 马凤, 武夷山. 关于论文引用动机的问卷调查研究——以中国期刊研究界和情报学界为例[J]. 情报杂志, 2009, 28(6): 9-14, 8.
67 邱均平, 陈晓宇, 何文静. 科研人员论文引用动机及相互影响关系研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(9): 36-44.
68 张敏, 赵雅兰, 张艳. 从态度、意愿到行为: 人文社会科学领域引文行为的形成路径分析[J]. 现代情报, 2017, 37(9): 23-29.
69 张敏, 夏宇, 刘晓彤, 等. 科技引文行为的影响因素及内在作用机理分析——以情感反应、认知反应和社会影响为研究视角[J]. 图书馆, 2017(5): 77-84.
70 张敏, 夏宇, 刘晓彤. 科技引文行为的影响因素分析[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2017, 40(4): 72-77.
71 张敏, 刘盈, 严炜炜. 科研工作者引文行为的影响因素及认知过程——基于情感结果预期和绩效结果预期的双路径分析视角[J]. 图书馆杂志, 2018, 37(6): 74-84.
72 刘宇, 张永娟, 齐林峰, 等. 知识启迪与权威尊崇: 基于重复发表的引文动机研究[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2018, 38(4): 49-57.
73 冬青. 引经据典[J]. 社会科学战线, 1979(3): 11.
74 王英. 引经据典要准[J]. 新闻知识, 1993(4): 39.
75 张茹粉. “引经据典”析[J]. 党政干部学刊, 1993(1): 45, 9.
76 中建. 引经据典纵论古今——论辩中的“以典类推”法[J]. 现代交际, 1994(12): 29-30.
77 王京州. 引经据典与“体同书钞”——魏晋论说文中的引证[J]. 衡水学院学报, 2013, 15(2): 77-82.
78 陈炜强. 古代中国判词之“引经据典”探析[J]. 上海政法学院学报(法治论丛), 2012, 27(6): 14-21.
79 陈平原. 现代中国的述学文体——以“引经据典”为中心[J]. 文学评论, 2001(4): 23-32.
80 Zhang G, Ding Y, Milojevi? S. Citation content analysis (CCA): a framework for syntactic and semantic analysis of citation content[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2013, 64(7): 1490-1503.
81 Shu F, Qiu J P, Shu S B, et al. Exploring the function of citations in ancient Chinese literature[J]. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2019, 56(1): 472-476.
82 Dolby W. William Dolby[M]. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Straightback Publishing, 2016.