최소 단어 이상 선택하여야 합니다.
최대 10 단어까지만 선택 가능합니다.
다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기기록학연구 = The Korean Journal of Archival Studies, no.52, 2017년, pp.59 - 117
설문원 (부산대학교 문헌정보학과)
This study aims to logically investigate the changing interpretation and implementation of the principle of provenance by using an argument model for discourse analysis. First, it divides the history of discourses on the principle from the Dutch Manual publication of 1989 up to the present into four...
핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
---|---|---|
출처주의에 대해 이루어져 온 논쟁은? | 출처주의는 기록관리의 대표적 원칙으로, 19세기 말 이른바 『네덜란드 매뉴얼』을 통해 정립된 후 그 해석과 적용에 많은 변화가 있었으며 아직도 이에 대한 담론은 진행형이다. 출처주의는 기록의 조직을 결정하는 실무상의 원리이기 때문에, 기록관리 환경에 큰 변화가 있을 때마다 이 원칙을 새로운 환경에 어떻게 적용해야 하는지 논쟁이 이루어져왔다. 행정관료 조직의 변화, 기술의 발전, 시민 의식의 고양 등은 출처 및 원질서의 개념에 대한 새로운 해석을 요구해 왔으며, 디지털 환경에서 출처주의는 정리(arrangement) 원칙으로서의 지위를 잃어버렸다는 진단도 나오고 있다(Bunn 2014). | |
출처주의란? | 이 연구는 출처주의(Principle of Provenance)가 여전히 유효한가라는 질문에서 출발하였다. 출처주의는 기록관리의 대표적 원칙으로, 19세기 말 이른바 『네덜란드 매뉴얼』을 통해 정립된 후 그 해석과 적용에 많은 변화가 있었으며 아직도 이에 대한 담론은 진행형이다. 출처주의는 기록의 조직을 결정하는 실무상의 원리이기 때문에, 기록관리 환경에 큰 변화가 있을 때마다 이 원칙을 새로운 환경에 어떻게 적용해야 하는지 논쟁이 이루어져왔다. | |
서구 기록학계의 정리원칙에 대한 해석체계의 변화를 분석이 필요하게 된 배경은? | 특히 디지털기록이 영구기록물관리기관으로 대량 이관되는 상황에서 현재와 같이 출처 기반의 사후적이고 귀납적인 정리체계를 유지하기는 어려울 것이다. 이러한 현실 문제의 해법을 모색하기 위해서 우리는 서구 기록학계의 정리원칙에 대한 해석체계가 어떻게 변화하고 있는지 분석할 필요가 있다. |
국가기록원. 2011. 영구기록물 기술규칙. 기록관리업무표준(NAK/S 14:2011(v2.0)).
국가기록원 2007. 국가기록원 소장물 가이드. 대전: 국가기록원.
권명화. 2006. 호주제 폐지에 관한 논변구조 분석: 문화이론과 정책논변모형을 중심으로. 한국정책학회보, 15(3), 203-240.
김대성, 김연아. 2007. 정책논변모형을 통한 근로장려세제(EITC) 도입 담론분석. 한국정책연구, 7(2), 45-67.
박성희. 2014. 아규멘테이션: 설득하고 설득당하는 사회의 논쟁법. 서울: 이화출판사, 2014.
설진아. 2009. 탐사보도 프로그램의 논증모형에 관한 분석 연구: 의 '줄기세포' 관련 프로그램을 중심으로. 한국언론학보, 53(3), 370-394.
유민봉. 1994. 정책분석틀로서의 정책논변모형. 한국행정학보, 28(4), 1175-1190.
이승일. 2006. "국가기록원 소장 조선총독부 법무 문서군의 분류 방안. 서지학연구, 35, 113-143.
Acland, G. K. Cumming, and S. McKemmish. 1999. The end of the beginning; the SPIRT Recordkeeping Metadata Project. Retrieved June 2, 2016 from http://www.sims.monash.edu.au/research.rcrg.publiccations/asaq99.html.
Barr, Debra. 1987-1988. The Fonds concept in the Working Group on Archival Descriptive Standards Report, Archivaria, 25, 163-70.
Barr, Debra. 1989. Protecting provenance: Response to the report of the Working Group on Description at the Fonds Level. Archivaria, 28, 141-45.
Bastian, Jeanette Allis. 2003. Owning Memory: Howa Caribbean Community Lost its Archives and Found its History, Westport: Libraries Unlimited.
Bastian, Jeanette Allis. 2003-2004. In a 'House of Memory': Discovering the provenance of place. Archival Issues, 28, 9-19.
Bearman, David. 1994. Electronic Evidence. Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics.
Bearman, David & Lytle, Richard. 1985. The Power of the Principle of Provenance. Archivaria, 21(Winter 1985-86), 14-27.
Brothman, Brien. 1991. Orders of value: Probing the theoretical terms of archival practice. Archivaria, 32, 78-100.
Bunn, Jenny 2014. Questioning autonomy: an alternative perspective on the principles which govern archival description. Archival Science, 14, 3-15.
Cook, Terry. 2001. Archival science and postmodernism: New formulations for old concepts. Archival Science, 1, 3-24.
Cook, Terry. 1997. What is past is prologue: a history of archival ideas since 1898, and the future paradigm shift. Archivaria, 43, 17-63.
Cook, Terry. 1993. The concept of the archival fonds in the post-custodial era: theory, problems and solutions. Archivaria, 35, 24-37.
Cook, Terry. 1992. The concept of the archival fonds: Theory, description and provenance in the post-custodial era. In: The Archival Fonds; From Theory to Practice. Terry Eastwood. ed. Ottawa: Bureau of Canadian Archivists.
Douglas, Jennifer, 2010. Origins : evolving ideas about the Principle of Provenance. In: Currents of Archival Thinking. Terry Eastwood and Heather MacNeil. ed. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited, 23-43.
Duchein, Michel. 1983. Theoretical principles and practical problems of Respect des fonds in archival science. Archivaria, 16, 64-82.
Duff, W. M. & Harris, V. 2002. Stories and names: Archival description as narrating records and constructing meanings. Archival Science, 2, 263-85.
Eastwood, Terry. 2010. A contested realm : The nature of archives and the orientation of Archival Science. In: Currents of Archival Thinking. Terry Eastwood and Heatehr Macneil. ed. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited, 3-21.
Eastwood, Terry. 2000. Putting the parts of the whole together: Systematic arrangement of archives. Archivaria, 50, 93-116.
Holmes, O. W. 1964. Archival arrangement: Five different operations at five different levels. American Archivist, 27, 21-41.
Horsman, Peter 2002. The last dance of the phoenix, or the de-discovery of the archival fonds, Archivaria, 54, 1-23.
Horsman, Peter. 1994. Taming the elephant: An orthodox approach to the principle of provenance. In: The Principle of Provenance: Report from the First Stockholm Conference on the Archival Principle of Provenance, September 2-3, 1993. Stockholm: Swedish National Archives.
Horsman, Peter. 1999. Dirty hands: A new perspective on the original order. Archives and Manuscripts, 27, 42-53.
Hurley, Chris. 2004. Relationships in records. Retrieved July 12, 2016 from http://www.sims.monash.edu.au/research/rcrg/publications/relationships-in-records-rev-3b.rtf.
Hurley, Chris. 1995. Problems with provenance. Archives and Manuscripts, 23, 234-59.
International Council on Archives. 2000. ISAD(G): General International Standard Archival Description, 2nd ed. Madrid: International Council on Archives.
Ketelaar, Eric. 2005. Sharing: Collected memories in communities of records. Archives and Manuscripts, 33, 44-61.
Ketelaar, Eric. 2001. Tacit narratives: The meaning of archives. Archival Science, 1, 131-41.
Lowry, James. ed. 2017. Displaced Archives. Abingdon(UK): Routledge.
MacNeil, Heather 2005. Picking our text: Archival description, authenticity, and the archivist as editor. American Archivist, 68, 265-78.
MacNeil, Heather. 2008. Archivalterity: Rethinking original order, Archivaria, 66, 1-24.
Meehan, J. 2013. Arrangement and description: between theory and practice. In: Archives and Recordkeeping: Theory into Practice. Caroline Brown. ed. Facet Publishing.
Millar L. 2002. The death of the fonds and the resurrection of provenance: archival context in space and time. Archivaria, 53, 1-15.
Muller, Samuel; Feith, J. A. & Fruin, R. 2003. Manual for the Arrangement and Description of Archives: Drawn up by Direction of the Netherlands Association of Archivists. 2nd ed., trans. Arthur H. Leavitt. Chicago: Society of American Archivists.
Nesmith, Tom. 2006. The concept of societal provenance and records of nineteenthcentury Aboriginal-European relations in Western Canada: Implications for archival theory and practice. Archival Science, 6, 351-60.
Nesmith, Tom. 2005. Reopening archives: Bringing new contextualities into archival theory and practice. Archivaria, 60, 259-74.
Nesmith, Tom. 2002. seeing archives: Postmodernism and the changing intellectual place of archives. American Archivist, 65, 24-41.
Nesmith, Tom. 1999. Still fuzzy but more accurate: Some thoughts on the 'ghosts' of archival theory. Archivaria, 47, 136-150.
Pohjola, Raimo. 1994. The principle of provenance and the arrangement of records/archives. In: The Principle of Provenance: Report from the First Stockholm Conference on Archival Theory and the Principle of Provenance, 2-3 September 1993. Stockholm: The Swedish National Archives, 87-98.
Posner, Ernst. 1950. Max Lehmann and the genesis of the principle of provenance. In: Archives and the Public Interest: Selected Essays by Ernst Posner. Ken Munden. ed. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2006, 36-44.
Posner, Ernst. 1940. Some aspects of archival development since the French Revolution. In: Archives and the Public Interest: Selected Essays by Ernst Posner. Ken Munden. ed. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2006, 23-35.
Ridener. 2011. From Polders to Postmodernism: A Concise History of Archival Theory. Duluth(MN), Litwin Books.
Savoja, Maurizio & Vitali, Stefano. 2007. Authority control for creators in Italy: Theory and practice. Journal of Archival Organization, 5, 121-47.
Schellenberg, Theodore R. 2001. 현대 기록학개론. 이원영 옮김. 서울: 진리탐구. 원전 : Modern Archives: Principles and Techniques, 1956.
Scott, P. J. 1966. The record group concept: A case for abandonment. American Archivist 29, 493-504.
Shilton, Katie & Srinivasan, Ramesh. 2007. Participatory appraisal and arrangement for multicultural archival collections. Archivaria, 63, 87-101.
Stapleton, Rick. 1983-1984, Jenkinson and Schellenberg: A comparison. Archivaria, 17, 75-85.
Taylor, H, A. 1987. Transformation in the Archives: Technological Adjustment or Paradigm Shift. Archivaria, 25, 12-28.
Wurl, Joel. 2005. Ethnicity as provenance: In search of values and principles for documenting the immigrant experience. Archival Issues, 29, 65-76.
Yakel, Elizabeth. 2003. Archival representation. Archival Science, 3, 1-25.
Yeo, Geoffrey. 2012a. The conceptual fonds and the physical collection, Archivaria, 73, 43-80.
Yeo, Geoffrey. 2012b. Bringing things together: Aggregate records in a digital age. Archivaria, 74, 43-91.
Yeo, Geoffrey. 2010. Debates about description. In: Currents of Archival Thinking. Terry Eastwood and Heatehr Macneil. ed. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited, 89-14.
Zhang, Jane. 2012. Original oder in digital archives. Archivaria, 35, 167-193.
*원문 PDF 파일 및 링크정보가 존재하지 않을 경우 KISTI DDS 시스템에서 제공하는 원문복사서비스를 사용할 수 있습니다.
출판사/학술단체 등이 한시적으로 특별한 프로모션 또는 일정기간 경과 후 접근을 허용하여, 출판사/학술단체 등의 사이트에서 이용 가능한 논문
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.