Search (4435 results, page 1 of 222)

0.1523617 = product of:
  0.6094468 = sum of:
    0.6094468 = weight(_text_:hearing in 72) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.6094468 = score(doc=72,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.53799975 = queryWeight, product of:
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        1.1328013 = fieldWeight in 72, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=72)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports the hearing on libraries and their role in the information infrastructure held by the Senate Subcommittee on Education, Arts and Humanities on 19 Apr 1994 and timed to coincide with National Library Week and Legislative Day. Contributions highlighted the degree to which library services in libraries throughout the USA are enhanced by electronic data transmission and the urgent need on the part of libraries for support from federal government with funding their policies

0.117613114 = product of:
  0.47045246 = sum of:
    0.47045246 = weight(_text_:judge in 4324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.47045246 = score(doc=4324,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        1.0250188 = fieldWeight in 4324, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4324)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Public library quarterly 15(1996) no.1, S.65-66 (A.L. Judge)

0.10773599 = product of:
  0.43094397 = sum of:
    0.43094397 = weight(_text_:hearing in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.43094397 = score(doc=3807,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.53799975 = queryWeight, product of:
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.80101144 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In April 93 the Cheshire Library Service and the Cheshire Deaf society, UK began collaboration on a project to satisfy the information needs of deaf and hard of hearing people. Describes the aims and objectives of the project, the Carnegie Bulletin Board, the installation of personal computers, the use of videophone technology, deaf awreness trainig, the video lending service for the deaf, the input of the National Captioning Institute, and a survey of user needs

0.080801986 = product of:
  0.32320794 = sum of:
    0.32320794 = weight(_text_:hearing in 676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.32320794 = score(doc=676,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.53799975 = queryWeight, product of:
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.60075855 = fieldWeight in 676, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=676)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Collection development theory has generally neglected issues of fairness in the treatment of materials dealing with politics, religion, and other controversial subjects. The communication theory of Jurgen Habermas is proposed as a basis for a rational policy, and for dealing with difficult cases. It is suggested that as ideological conflict becomes less important in the relations between religious groups, it will be more acceptable for libraries to serve the particular religious interest of specific communities, rather than to treat religions as interest groups that, like political parties, should get "equal time" at all libraries. It is further argued that religious fundamentalism and "creation science" are not entitled in the library to "equal time" with science, since our society has made a provisional decision that such questions are most appropriately answered by conventional science. When the status of science is itself the issue, however, its critics from religion and elsewhere are entitled to a respectful and equitable hearing.

0.07840874 = product of:
  0.31363496 = sum of:
    0.31363496 = weight(_text_:judge in 5025) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.31363496 = score(doc=5025,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.68334585 = fieldWeight in 5025, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5025)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Abstracts enable users to judge the relevance of articles, provide a summary and may be a substitute for the original document. Defines abstracts and considers who they are written be according to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and other sources. Distinguishes between indicative and informative abstracts. Informative abstracts are preferred by ANSI and ERIC. Discusses the content and procedures for abstracting, writing style, tests of quality and readability and informativeness. Presents statistics analyzing abstracts from 3 general interest databases and on abstract length and type

0.07840874 = product of:
  0.31363496 = sum of:
    0.31363496 = weight(_text_:judge in 7870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.31363496 = score(doc=7870,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.68334585 = fieldWeight in 7870, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7870)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Describes the information explosion and poses the question of whether the explosion is driving an equal and opposite information implosion. Uses 4 criteria to judge whether available information has become better or worse: cost, ease or difficulty of access; variety of sources; and clarity. Concludes that none of these have improved over the last generation

0.07840874 = product of:
  0.31363496 = sum of:
    0.31363496 = weight(_text_:judge in 1153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.31363496 = score(doc=1153,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.68334585 = fieldWeight in 1153, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1153)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.07840874 = product of:
  0.31363496 = sum of:
    0.31363496 = weight(_text_:judge in 2004) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.31363496 = score(doc=2004,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.68334585 = fieldWeight in 2004, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2004)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Präsentation folgender Gestaltungsprinzipien: (1) Help the user develop an understanding of the operation of the interface and the search process; (2) Provide information to help users judge the value of continuing a search path; (3) Assist the user in refining the search query or search topic; (4) Provide verbal labels suggestive of meaning

0.07840874 = product of:
  0.31363496 = sum of:
    0.31363496 = weight(_text_:judge in 3816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.31363496 = score(doc=3816,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.68334585 = fieldWeight in 3816, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3816)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.06860765 = product of:
  0.2744306 = sum of:
    0.2744306 = weight(_text_:judge in 4844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2744306 = score(doc=4844,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.59792763 = fieldWeight in 4844, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4844)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Replicates a previous study by Eisenberg and Hu regarding users' perceptions of the binary or dichotomous nature of their relevance judgements. The studies examined the assumptions that searchers divide documents evenly into relevant and nonrelevant. 35 staff, faculty and doctoral students at Michigan Univ., School of Education and Dept. of Psychology conducted searchers and the retrieved documents submitted to the searchers in 3 incremental versions: title only; title and abstract; title, abstract and indexing information: At each stage the subjects were asked to judge the relevance of the document to the query. The findings support the earlier study and the break points between relevance and nonrelevance was not at or near 50%

0.06860765 = product of:
  0.2744306 = sum of:
    0.2744306 = weight(_text_:judge in 7418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2744306 = score(doc=7418,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.59792763 = fieldWeight in 7418, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7418)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Considers two kinds of queries that may be applied to a database. The first is a query written by a searcher to express an information need. The second is a request for documents most similar to a document already judge relevant by the searcher. Examines the effectiveness of these two procedures and shows that in important cases the latter query types is more effective than the former. This provides a new view of the cluster hypothesis and a justification for document neighbouring procedures. If all the documents in a database have readily available precomputed nearest neighbours, a new search algorithm, called parallel neighbourhood searching. Shows that this feedback-based method provides significant improvement in recall over traditional linear searching methods, and appears superior to traditional feedback methods in overall performance

0.06860765 = product of:
  0.2744306 = sum of:
    0.2744306 = weight(_text_:judge in 3946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2744306 = score(doc=3946,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.59792763 = fieldWeight in 3946, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3946)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

With the increased use of local area networks, CD-ROMs and the Internet, an enormous amount of traditional material is becoming available. Quality issues are therefore becoming even more vital. Describes a methodology being evaluated by The Centre for Information Quality (CIQM) whereby databases can be quantitatively labelled by their producers, so that users can judge how much reliance can be place on them. At the same time, each label bacomes a database specific standard to which its information provider must adhere. This may be a route to responsible information supply

0.06860765 = product of:
  0.2744306 = sum of:
    0.2744306 = weight(_text_:judge in 4295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2744306 = score(doc=4295,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.59792763 = fieldWeight in 4295, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4295)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports on one area of research in an Electronic Libraries Programme (eLib) MODELS (MOving to Distributed Environments for Library Services) supporting study in 3 investigative areas: examination of current database producers' guidelines for their abstract writers; a brief survey of abstracts in some traditional online databases; and a detailed survey of abstracts from 3 types of electronic database (print sourced online databases, Internet subject trees or directories, and Internet gateways). Examination of database producers' guidelines, reported here, gave a clear view of the intentions behind professionally produced traditional (printed index based) database abstracts and provided a benchmark against which to judge the conclusions of the larger investigations into abstract style, readability and content

0.058806557 = product of:
  0.23522623 = sum of:
    0.23522623 = weight(_text_:judge in 2445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23522623 = score(doc=2445,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.5125094 = fieldWeight in 2445, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2445)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.058806557 = product of:
  0.23522623 = sum of:
    0.23522623 = weight(_text_:judge in 3299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23522623 = score(doc=3299,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4589696 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.5125094 = fieldWeight in 3299, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3299)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

State of the art review of the criteria used to judge and evaluate the quality of databases, including: content, ease of use, accessibility, customer support, documentation, and value to cost ratio. Concludes that the principle factor governing quality is content, defined by the scope and the coverage of the database and its currency, accuracy, consistency and completeness. Scope is determined by its composition and coverage, including time period, number of periodicals and other primary sources, number of articles and geographic and language distribution. Currency is measured by the time lag between publication of the primary source and availability of the corresponding records in the database. Accuracy is governed by the extent to which the records are free from errors of all types. Consistency depends on the extent to which records within the database follow the same rules. Completeness is measured by the consistency with which applicable data elements are assigned to all the records in the database. Reviews the major contributions to the literature in the field and summarizes the background of milestone studies

0.047134493 = product of:
  0.18853797 = sum of:
    0.18853797 = weight(_text_:hearing in 709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18853797 = score(doc=709,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.53799975 = queryWeight, product of:
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.3504425 = fieldWeight in 709, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=709)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This past year has seen an unprecedented wave of censorship, and overzealous law enforcement has swept through the online world. This paper attempts to look at this growing phenomenon from a rhetorical viewpoint by seeking to answer the following question: How is rhetoric deployed to support a partisan value? After a literature review concerning media and value, policy and pornography, and rhetoric and politics, the method of study was discussed. This consisted of downloading the text of the Supreme Court hearing of the ACLU v. Reno case. This transcript was analyzed and found several metaphors used by the government defense in trying to support its view. These were revealed in the results and examined in the discussion section. Findings were discussion according to exact wording: KNOWING, reference to immediate authority: PARENTS, defending definitions: FREE SPACE, and attacking the previous battle: "THEY DIDN'T . . .". Finally, a review of what was discovered along with what this study presented for further research was revealed. The author then encouraged researchers, as well as those in politics, to be aware of how words are used to support and sway the public and legal system. Also, that we need to constantly be on guard to protect our right to speak through whatever medium we deem necessary. The Internet is an impressive medium for communications, research, entertainment and commercial agencies. The number of Internet users over the age of 16 in the U.S. and Canada has reached 79 million. Also, for the first time, more than 50 percent of the population between the ages of 16 and 34 are Internet users, which comes to around 40 million individuals (McPhee & Coyle, 1998). With this growth comes the good and the bad of society. Pornography, to some a good thing and others a bad item, has accumulated phenomenal success on the Internet. It is this question, is it good or bad, that has sparked a continuous debate among politicians and practitioners. It is this arena that this study endeavors to consider. The legal battles between the online providers of pornographic material and the legal authorities along with those that would want to keep such material out of their lives have been in the courts over the past two years. In these battles, words have been used to sway judges toward certain lines of thought. It is this battle with words that this author seeks to study. How are words being used in the defense of policies that are ultimately considered unconstitutional? In particular, are politicians trying to influence the courts to support a biased agenda? This paper will try to answer this question in the following manner. First a literature review will be given considering the role of media in value making, a brief report of how the discussion of pornography has been played out in the court system, and then a look at rhetoric and the political voice. From there a brief discussion of the methodology the study will be given followed by a look at what was discovered in the analysis. The final section will consider what this means to policy makers and the public whom the policies effect. First, let us Consider what others have said concerning the areas of interest for this study

0.047134493 = product of:
  0.18853797 = sum of:
    0.18853797 = weight(_text_:hearing in 561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18853797 = score(doc=561,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.53799975 = queryWeight, product of:
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.3504425 = fieldWeight in 561, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          9.06241 = idf(docFreq=13, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=561)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

The 36th Allerton Institute, sponsored by the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Graduate School of Library and Information Science was held at the University of Illinois Conference Center near Monticello, Illinois on October 23-25, 1994. The theme centered around new roles for library classification in the electronic age. Representatives of six of the world's most used library classifications presented papers and demonstrations to show how traditional uses for shelf arrangement will be expanded to include uses on the Internet, World Wide Web, Library homepages and in other networks. Several of these papers will be included in this issue of Cataloging & Classification Quarterly: Joan S. Mitchell for Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Ia Mcllwaine for the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), Eric Coates for both the Broad System of Ordering (BSO) and the Bliss Classification (BC). (Other issues of this journal will cover the National Library of Medicine and Library of Congress Classification.) An international trio of keynote addresses by Lois Chan, Ingetraut Dahlberg, and Pat Moholt faced the future and found several roles for library classification systems if they can match the growing need for organization of electronic resources. Several panels representing varying viewpoints was the vehicle for hearing from participants at the Allerton Conference. Some of these discussions were covered by student reporters and are included in this issue (Ann Marie Ziadie for the discussion of networks abroad; Shirley Lincicum for those discussing non-traditional uses of classification; and Brendan Wyly for those focusing on information networks). Janet Swan Hill's paper, included here, is representative of the panel of library administrators. The closing remarks by Marcia Bates and Sarah Thomas pointed to a dozen directional signals for those interested in a more meaningful role for library classification in the world of electronic information resources:

0.025251083 = product of:
  0.10100433 = sum of:
    0.10100433 = weight(_text_:und in 615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10100433 = score(doc=615,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13166797 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.7671139 = fieldWeight in 615, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=615)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Series

Philosophie und Geschichte der Wissenschaften; Bd.18

Source

Wirklichkeit und Wissen: Realismus, Antirealismus und Wirklichkeits-Konzeptionen in Philosophie und Wissenschaften. Hrsg.: H.J. Sandkühler

0.024861583 = product of:
  0.099446334 = sum of:
    0.099446334 = weight(_text_:und in 1190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.099446334 = score(doc=1190,freq=76.0), product of:
        0.13166797 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.75528115 = fieldWeight in 1190, product of:
          8.717798 = tf(freq=76.0), with freq of:
            76.0 = termFreq=76.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1190)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

BK

18.00 Einzelne Sprachen und Literaturen allgemein

Classification

ES 940 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft / Datenverarbeitung und Sprachwissenschaft. Computerlinguistik / Maschinelle Sprachanalyse
ET 400 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Einzelgebiete der Sprachwissenschaft, Sprachbeschreibung / Semantik und Lexikologie / Allgemeines
ES 945 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft / Datenverarbeitung und Sprachwissenschaft. Computerlinguistik / Spracherkennung
ET 580 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Einzelgebiete der Sprachwissenschaft, Sprachbeschreibung / Semantik und Lexikologie / Lexikologie (diachrone und synchrone) / Lexikographie
18.00 Einzelne Sprachen und Literaturen allgemein

RVK

ES 940 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft / Datenverarbeitung und Sprachwissenschaft. Computerlinguistik / Maschinelle Sprachanalyse
ET 400 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Einzelgebiete der Sprachwissenschaft, Sprachbeschreibung / Semantik und Lexikologie / Allgemeines
ES 945 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft / Datenverarbeitung und Sprachwissenschaft. Computerlinguistik / Spracherkennung
ET 580 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Einzelgebiete der Sprachwissenschaft, Sprachbeschreibung / Semantik und Lexikologie / Lexikologie (diachrone und synchrone) / Lexikographie

Series

Sprache und Information ; 33

0.02326637 = product of:
  0.09306548 = sum of:
    0.09306548 = weight(_text_:und in 2578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09306548 = score(doc=2578,freq=104.0), product of:
        0.13166797 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.059366077 = queryNorm
        0.7068194 = fieldWeight in 2578, product of:
          10.198039 = tf(freq=104.0), with freq of:
            104.0 = termFreq=104.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2578)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

BK

17.03 / Theorie und Methoden der Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft
18.00 / Einzelne Sprachen und Literaturen allgemein

Classification

ER 720 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachtheorie. Theorien und Methoden der Sprachwissenschaft / Einzelne Richtungen der Sprachtheorie
ER 610 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachphilosophie (Primärliteratur der Sprachphilosophie; Sekundärliteratur s.o. bei Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft) / Wesen und Bedeutung der Sprache
ES 160 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachphänomenologie / Allgemeines
ER 710 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachtheorie. Theorien und Methoden der Sprachwissenschaft / Funktion der Sprache
ER 765 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachtheorie. Theorien und Methoden der Sprachwissenschaft / Methodologie der Spachwissenschaft / Einzelmethoden, z.B. Informationsbefragung, Feldarbeit
ER 900 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachpsychologie. Psycholinguistik / Allgemeines
17.03 / Theorie und Methoden der Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft
18.00 / Einzelne Sprachen und Literaturen allgemein

RVK

ER 720 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachtheorie. Theorien und Methoden der Sprachwissenschaft / Einzelne Richtungen der Sprachtheorie
ER 610 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachphilosophie (Primärliteratur der Sprachphilosophie; Sekundärliteratur s.o. bei Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft) / Wesen und Bedeutung der Sprache
ES 160 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachphänomenologie / Allgemeines
ER 710 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachtheorie. Theorien und Methoden der Sprachwissenschaft / Funktion der Sprache
ER 765 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachtheorie. Theorien und Methoden der Sprachwissenschaft / Methodologie der Spachwissenschaft / Einzelmethoden, z.B. Informationsbefragung, Feldarbeit
ER 900 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft / Sprachpsychologie. Psycholinguistik / Allgemeines

Series

Grundlagen der Kommunikation und Kognition