Classification scheme as a reflection of the social and communicative nature of document phenomenon

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

CLASSIFICATION SCHEME AS A REFLECTION OF THE SOCIAL AND COMMUNICATIVE NATURE OF DOCUMENT PHENOMENON

Komova Maria, Candidate of Philological Sciences (Ph. D.) Associate professor at the Department of Social Communication and Information Science Lviv Polytechnic National University

The purpose of the article is to study methodological approaches to drafting the classification schemes of documents. The methodology consists of general scientific methods and unique methods: analysis, synthesis, comparative and logical method, method of visualization of research results. The application of analysis, synthesis, comparative, and logical methods allowed to determine the methodological principles of documents ' classification and to carry out a comparative analysis of the leading concepts of documents ' classification, that is accepted in Ukrainian general documentary studies. Primary documents ' classifications were compared using the method of visualization by the features of iconic means offixation and transmitting information, by the features of the medium of information, by the information component, by the circumstances of existence in the external environment. The scientific novelty of the work consists of the fact that in the article, the comparative analysis of the main concepts of documents ' classification in Ukrainian general documentary studies is carried out. Conclusions. The classification schemes reflect the unity or proximity of the views of Ukrainian scholars on the nature of the document as a social and communication phenomenon, on the classification features and species of documents. These schemes reflect the vision of their creators on the nature of the document as a social-communication phenomenon, on the features of the document. These features make it possible to carry out a kind of differentiation to solve theoretical and practical tasks on the terminological aspects of classification. However, while adhering principles of completeness and systematicity of classification schemes, this is rather a trend. As the comparative analysis of the schemes shows, none of them is exhaustive. The classifications complement each other both at the level offacet definition and the specific variety of documents, forming in their unity a deep and complete analytical product. Author 's classification schemes have features for determining facets, species diversity of documents, forming in its unity a complete analytical product. The fundamental difference between concepts is to determine the status of the semiotic component of a document.

Key words: document, classification of documents, a classification scheme of documents.

Комова Марія Василівна, кандидат філологічних наук, доцент, доцент кафедри соціальних комунікацій та інформаційної діяльності Національного університету «Львівська політехніка»

КЛАСИФІКАЦІЙНА СХЕМА ЯК ВІДОБРАЖЕННЯ СОЦІАЛЬНО-КОМУНІКАЦІЙНОЇ ПРОРОДИ ФЕНОМЕНА ДОКУМЕНТА

Метою роботи є вивчення методологічних підходів до складання класифікаційних схем документів. Методологія дослідження полягаєу використання і загальнонаукових методів і спеціальних методик: аналізу, синтезу, порівняльного і логічного методів, методу візуалізації результатів дослідження. Застосування аналізу, синтезу, порівняльного і логічного методів дало змогу визначити методологічні принципи класифікації документів, здійснити порівняльний аналіз провідних концепцій класифікації документів, визнаних в українському загальному документознавстві. За допомогою методу візуалізації результатів дослідження було зіставено провідні видові класифікації документів за особливостями знакових засобів фіксації та передавання інформації, за особливостями носія інформації, за інформаційним складником, за обставинами побутування у зовнішньому середовищі. Наукова новизна роботи полягає в тому, що в статті здійснено порівняльний аналіз провідних концепцій класифікації документів, визнаних в українському загальному документознавстві. Висновки. Схеми класифікації відображають єдність чи близькість поглядів українських науковців на природу документа як соціально-комунікаційного феномена, на класифікаційні ознаки та види документів. Авторські класифікаційні схеми мають особливості щодо визначення фасетів, видового різноманіття документів, формуючи у своїй єдності повний аналітичний продукт. Принципова відмінність концепцій полягає у визначенні статусу семіотичної компоненти документа.

Ключові слова: документ, класифікація документів, класифікаційна схема документів.

Комова Мария Васильевна, кандидат филологических наук, доцент, доцент кафедры социальных коммуникаций и информационной деятельности Национального университета «Львовская политехника»

КЛАССИФИКАЦИОННАЯ СХЕМА КАК ОТРАЖЕНИЕ СОЦИАЛЬНО-КОММУНИКАЦИОННОЙ ПРОРОДЫ ФЕНОМЕНА ДОКУМЕНТА

drafting classification scheme document

Целью работы является изучение методологических подходов к составлению классификационных схем документов. Методология исследования заключается в использовании общенаучных методов и специальных методик: анализа, синтеза, сравнительного и логического методов, метода визуализации результатов исследования. Применение анализа, синтеза, сравнительного и логического методов позволило определить методологические принципы классификации документов, осуществить сравнительный анализ ведущих концепций классификации документов, осуществленных в украинском общем документоведении. С помощью метода визуализации результатов исследования было сопоставено ведущие видовые классификации документов по особенностям знаковых средств фиксации и передачи информации, по особенностям носителя информации, по информационному компоненту, по обстоятельствам бытования во внешней среде. Научная новизна работы заключается в том, что в статье осуществлен сравнительный анализ ведущих концепций классификации документов, осуществленных в украинском общем документоведении. Выводы. Схемы классификации отражают единство или близость взглядов украинских ученых на природу документа как социально-коммуникационного феномена, на классификационные признаки и виды документов. Авторские классификационные схемы имеют особенности по определению фасетов, видового разнообразия документов, формируя в своем единстве полный аналитический продукт. Принципиальное отличие концепций заключается в определении статуса семиотической компоненты документа.

Ключевые слова: документ, классификация документов, классификационная схема документов.

The relevance of the research. In conditions of the transformation of the typological and species structure of the document system, caused by the processes of informatization, the issue of classification of documents functioning in social communication is actualized. The importance of the classification process is determined by the significance of the division of materials into classes as a scientific method of social interaction and practical tools. The purpose of this article is to study methodological approaches for drafting classification schemes of documents. To achieve the goal, the main tasks are to determine the methodological principles of document classification, to perform a comparative analysis of the leading concepts of document classification, implemented according to the Ukrainian general document science.

Analysis of recent research and publications. Classification of documents on paper and electronic medium, to which mass media belong, is one of the underlying methodological problems of scientific disciplines of the document-communication cycle. According to general documentary science, Ukrainian researchers H. Shvetsova-Vod- ka, N. Kushnarenko, V. Bezdrabko, S. Kuleshov have created a series of models of species and typological classification of documents [2; 5; 7; 11]. Analyzing theoretical and practical achievements in the ranking of materials, V. Bezdrabko points out that the constant search for optimal classification schemes of documents and document information took place in the 1990-2000s [2]. Classification consolidates its position in document science as a proven method of materials cognition. It allows to systematize and reflect a problematic, contradictory epistemological experience. There were many practical suggestions. Some of them are following general documentary science and claim to be comprehensive. Others are special, and they prefer a particular species of documents and variable features of their graduation [1, 490]. The classification of modern mass media is one of the fundamental scientific problems of both theoretical and practical importance. Klymchuk conducted a historiographic analysis of the methodology of classification of documents used by Ukrainian and foreign scientists [3]. The multifaceted processes of informatization and convergence have opened a new sphere of document functioning - the electronic environment. This led to the need for establishment, systematization, and classification of electronic resources. Strishanets N. examines the scope and meaning of the notion of «classification» in the electronic environment and its genetic connection with traditional ratings. The researcher describes the online variants of the Library of Congress Classification, Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and defines features of electronic resources' classification [8]. Shevchenko O. analyzes the place of an electronic document in e-commerce and qualifying a bank payment card as an electronic document. This statement substantiates the peculiarities of the content of a bank payment card and the technological processes of its creation and functioning in e-commerce. The author carried out the classification of bank payment cards [12; 13].

Presentation of the main material. The methodology of document classification relies on the doctrine of systematology, which is professing the use of priority-systemic and algorithmic thinking to achieve the goal. It includes several aspects:

- determination and adherence to the general principles of activity, which are based on the internal ideological thinking organization;

- application of logical methods of differentiation and integration of documentary concepts based on specified above principles;

- creation of knowledge that reflects the system of coding and organization of documents in logical sequence and subordination.

During the species differentiation of documents, the internal ideological organization of thinking reveals itself in the following basic cognitive principles:

- systematic grouping of documents, which involves the identification of a set of classification features that are related and linked with each other and thus form certain integrity;

- logical grouping of documents, which involves the separation of the scope of the notion and grouping of objects in different levels, united by generic and species relations, providing hierarchy and logical consistency of the classification scheme;

- innovative grouping of documents, which we interpret as a reflection of the transformation processes in classification development and their tendencies in the documentation sphere, namely the introduction of new classification features for fixing and grading new species of documents, substantiation of the features of their conceptual and categorical apparatus;

- the succession of the classification methodology based on the experience of differentiation, accumulated in the library, book and archival science.

Generally accepted is a system of logical methods, approaches (integration, differentiation, generalization) to construct classification schemes, adherence of which provides:

- completeness of divisions, that is, all features of the notion must be exhaustively differentiated by one classification feature;

- the uniqueness of divisions, that is, each of the divisions must have its peculiarity, which corresponds to one of the features of the notion;

- the proportionality of divisions, that is, divisions must be correlated with equally significant features of the notion in terms of prevalence, relevance and a trend towards development;

- subordination of divisions, that is, generic- and species-related objects shouldn't be within the divisions in one range;

- the structure of divisions, that is, divisions within the same classification feature must reproduce the structure of notions and belong to the same range, being in opposition and contradistinction to each other [4; 7].

Attention is drawn to the leading concepts of document classification implemented by N. Kushnarenko and H. Shvetsova-Vodka according to general documentary science. S. Kuleshov pointed to the scientific and practical potential of these classifications, calling them «perfect schemes that can be used or taken as a basis in practical activities or in performing specific theoretical tasks» [5, 53]. Both concepts of classification schemes belong to the facet-block, but variable diversities indicate different interpretations of the nature of the attribute components of the document, as well as show more or less detail in the differentiation of document species. The classification schemes of

N. Kushnarenko and H. Shvetsova-Vodka integrate the internal essential classification features of the document, based on the axiomatic nature of the statement about the twofold - informational and material - the nature of the document, and features caused by the influence of external circumstances. The schemes combine the classification features, which are grouped into facet- blocks by information and physical components of the document, as well as by the circumstances of the document's existence in the external environment [7, 198-199; 9, 142-180]. However, H. Shvetsova-Vodka also distinguishes in exude block t species of documents by the features of sign means of fixing and transmitting information. According to the scientist, it would be more accurate to characterize sign systems of information recording as a semiotic component of a document, separating it from both material and information component [9, 159; 10].

Comparison of the author's positions in mainstream accentuation at the level of facet formulation (classification features) and species differentiation in the block «Species of documents by features of sign-fixing and information transmission» (Table 1) allows confirming:

- lists of facets are identical without considering the variability of formulation, except facet «Method of decoding information by a person» by the concept of H. Shvetsova-Vodka;

- there is inequality of detailing of facets and species of documents accordingly; so, if the species of documents highlighted in the facet of the «Information recording method» mostly coincide in both classifications, the facet of the «Character of sign record» (N. Kushnarenko) is correlated with the three facets: «Character of sign means for information transmitting», «Belonging of record's signs to certain sign systems», «Character of the linguistic sign system in which information is embodied» (H. Shvetsova-Vodka). Such detailing gives a higher accuracy of document classification. However, in our view, through the requirements for classification schemes (uniqueness, division subordination) division of documents into verbal, musical, pictorial and, at the same time, cartographic species in the facet «Character of the linguistic sign system in which information is embodied» is debatable. Isn't cartographic species imaginable? At the same time, it bribes by clarity, conciseness, the generalization of the division into species of documents, proposed by N. Kushnarenko: textual, iconographic, ideographic, sound, matrix, complex.

Species of documents on the features of sign means of recording and transmitting information

Table 1

Comparison of facet forming (classification features) and species differentiation in the block “Species of documents by features of the medium of information” (Table 2) allows concluding on some stability concerning material and construction in these matters, which is due to the presence of regulatory framework and deep scientific understanding. The synonymous variant of the nomination of the species - block or codex - should, in our view, be clarified in favor of the code document, since it reveals the essence of the notion more fully. It is known that the book block is the most essential element of the book and is a set of fastened between themselves notebooks or sheets, containing all the pages and components of the future edition. The term codex refers to the form of a ready-made book - folded sheets of paper, parchment, cloth or other material fastened to the root and framed in a cover or cover.

Table 2

Species of documents on medium features

H. Shvetsova-Vodka also identifies the “External structure of the document,” “Internal structure of the document” in addition to these facets. In our view, species differentiation into a single-volume, a multi-volume document within the first of these facets, and a mono document and poly document within the second facet, is worth maintaining. However, what are the essential features of the concept that a declared species of record may have, such as “part of the medium,” “part of the document”?

Comparison of facet formulation and species differentiation in the “Species of documents by information component” block (Table 3) shows that both notions only coincide with the mutual recognition of the classification characteristic “Generalization level of information,” establishing the species of primary and secondary documents. H. Shvetsova-Vodka defines another facet, the “Sphere of information origin and the display object,” within which it outlines the species of documents by branch, but misses the field of technology. In the concept of the classification scheme, N. Kushnarenko includes all the characteristics of the material on the features of sign systems of recording information to the block of features according to the information component of the document. According to N. Kushnarenko, a distinctive feature of the document is that the information (content) contained therein is transmitted by means of certain signs [7, с. 104].

Table 3

Species of documents by information component

Comparison of facet formulation and species differentiation in the block “Species of documents by circumstances of existence in the external environment” (Table 4) certifies that the two concepts coincide only by the common recognition of the classification feature “Time of appearance in the external environment”, defining such species of documents as the original and the copy. H. Shvetsova-Vodka defines such qualifying features as “Nature of the audience to which the document is intended” (species: unpublished, published) and “Degree of authenticity and legal force” (species: authentic, false). N. Kushnarenko fills up the scheme of facets “Regularity of appearance in the world” (species: periodic, non-periodic), “Place of origin” (species: local, regional, national, foreign).

Table 4

Species of documents by circumstances of existence in the external environment

Conclusions

The classification schemes of N. Kushnarenko and H. Shvetsova-Vodka are recognized and respected in the professional circles of the author's development. These schemes reflect the vision of their creators on the nature of the document as a social- communication phenomenon, on the features of the document, by which it is possible to carry out a kind of differentiation to solve theoretical and practical tasks, on the terminological aspects of classification. However, while adhering to the principles of completeness and systematicity of classification schemes, this is rather a trend. As the comparative analysis of the schemes shows, none of them is exhaustive. The classifications complement each other both at the level of facet definition and the specific variety of documents, forming in their unity a deep and complete analytical product. The fundamental difference between the presented concepts of classification schemes is to determine the status of the semiotic component of the document: according to the concept of N. Kushnarenko, the semiotics of the document is a part of the information component of the document; according to the concept of H. Shvetsova-Vodka, the semiotics of the document is a separate component of the document's nature.

Список використаних джерел

1. Бездрабко В.В. Документознавство в Україні : інституціоналізація та сучасний розвиток : монографія. Київ : Четверта хвиля, 2006. 720 с.

2. Бездрабко В.В. Управлінське документознавство : навч. посіб. Київ, 2006. 207 с.

3. Климчук Л.В. Класифікація документів: досвід, історіографічний аналіз // Бібліотекознавство. Документознавство. Інформологія. 2013. № 3. С. 44-47.

4. Комова М.В. Документальна та інтерпретаційна природа контенту в соціальних комунікаціях. Львів : Тріада-плюс, 2014. 384 с.

5. Кулешов С. Г Документознавство : історія, теоретичні основи. Київ, 2000. 161 с.

6. Кулешов С. Г. Управлінське документознавство. Київ, 2003. 57 с.

7. Кушнаренко Н. Н. Документоведение : учебник. Київ : Знання, 2007. 406 с.

8. Стрішанець Н. Класифікація в електронному середовищі // Бібліотечний вісник. 2010. № 5. С.34-43.

9. Швецова-Водка Г.М. Документознавство : навч. посіб. Київ : Знання, 2007. 398 с.

10. Швецова-Водка Г.М. Загальна теорія документа і книги : навч. посіб. Київ : Знання, 2014. 405 с.

11. Швецова-Водка Г.М. Типологія документа : навч. посіб. Київ : Кн. палата України, 1998. 80 с.

12. Шевченко О.В. Визначення місця електронного документа в електронній комерції // Бібліотекознавство. Документознавство. Інформологія. 2015. № 4. С. 63-67.

13. Шевченко О.В. Розвиток торговельної документації в Україні: документознавчий аспект. Полтава : Копі-центр, 2016. 319 с.

References

1. Bezdrabko V.V. (2006) Document Studies in Ukraine: institutionalization and modem development. Kyiv : Chetverta khvylia. [in Ukrainian].

2. Bezdrabko V.V. (2006) Management Document Studies. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].

3. Klymchuk L.V. (2013) Classification of Documents: experience, historiographical analysis // Bibliotekoznavstvo. Dokumentoznavstvo. Informolohiia, 3, 44 - 47. [in Ukrainian].

4. Komova M.V. (2014) The documentary and interpretative nature of content in social communications. Lviv : Triada-plius.[in Ukrainian].

5. Kuleshov S.H. (2000) Document Studies : history, theoretical foundations. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].

6. Kuleshov S.H. (2003) Management Document Studies. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].

7. Kushnarenko N.N. (2007) Document Studies. Kyiv : Znannia. [in Russian].

8. Strishanets N. (2010) Classification in the electronic environment // Bibliotechnyi visnyk, 5, 34 - 43. [in Ukrainian].

9. Shvetsova-Vodka H.M. (2007) Document Studies. Kyiv : Znannia. [in Ukrainian].

10. Shvetsova-Vodka H.M. (2014) The general theory of the document and the book. Kyiv : Znannia. [in Ukrainian].

11. Shvetsova-Vodka H.M. (1998) Document typology. Kyiv : Knyzhkova palata Ukrainy. [in Ukrainian].

12. Shevchenko O.V. (2015) Define the place of an electronic document in an e-commerce // Bibliotekoznavstvo. Dokumentoznavstvo. Informolohiia, 4, 63 - 67. [in Ukrainian].

13. Shevchenko O.V. (2016) Development of trade documentation in Ukraine: documentary aspect. Poltava : Kopi-tsentr. [in Ukrainian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru