Concept theory and semiotics in knowledge organization

Andersen, J. (2004), “Analyzing the role of knowledge organization in scholarly communication: an inquiry into the intellectual foundation of knowledge organization”, PhD thesis, Royal School of Library and Information Science.

Atkin, A. (2006), “Peirce's theory of signs”, in Zalta, E.N. (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Metaphysics Research Laboratory, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford, CA, available at: http://plato.stanford.edu.

Atkin, A. (2008), “Peirce's final account of signs and the philosophy of languange”, The Transactions of The Charles S. Peirce Society, Vol. 44, pp. 63‐85.

Bartels, A. (2006), “Defending the structural concept of representation”, Theoria, Vol. 55, pp. 7‐19.

Blair, D.C. (1990), Language and Representation in Information Retrieval, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.

Brewster, C. and O'Hara, K. (2007), “Knowledge representation with ontologies: present challenges – future possible”, International Journal of Human Computer Studies, Vol. 65, pp. 563‐8.

Brier, S. (1996), “Cybersemiotics: a new interdisciplinary development applied to the problems of knowledge organisation and document retrieval in information science”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 52, pp. 296‐344.

Broughton, V., Hansson, J., Hjørland, B. and López‐Huertas, M.J. (2005), Knowledge Organisation. European Curriculum Reflections on Education in Library and Information Science, Royal School of Library and Information Science, Copenhagen.

Buckland, M. (1991), Information and Information Systems, Praeger, New York, NY.

Chandler, D. (2004), Semiotics for Beginners, Oxford, Routledge, Oxford, available at: www.aber.ac.uk/∼dgc/semiotic.htm (accessed November 9, 2004).

Clark, A. (1997), “The dynamical challenge”, Cognitive Science, Vol. 21, pp. 461‐81.

Colapietro, V. (2003), “Toward a truly pragmatic theory of signs: reading Peirce's Semeiotic in light of Dewey's gloss”, available at: www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/colapietro/theoryofsigns.htm.

Dahlberg, I. (1978), “A referent‐oriented, analytical concept theory for INTERCONCEPT”, International Classification, Vol. 5, pp. 142‐51.

Dahlberg, I. (1987), “Classification and philosophy”, International Classification, Vol. 14 No. 1 (editorial).

Dahlberg, I. (1993), “Knowledge organization: its scope and possibilities”, Knowledge Organization, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 211‐22.

Dahlberg, I. (1994), “Conceptual structures and systematization”, in Negrini, G. (Ed.), Categorie, Ogetti e Strutture della Conoscenza, Roma.

Dahlberg, I. (1995), “Conceptual structures and systematization”, International Forum on Information & Documentation, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 9‐24.

Dahlberg, I. (2006), “Knowledge organization: a new science?”, Knowledge Organization, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 11‐19.

Davis, R., Shrobe, H. and Szolovits, P. (1993), “What is a knowledge representation?”, AI Magazine, Vol. 14, pp. 17‐33.

Frege, G. (1892), “Über Sinn and Bedeutung?”, Zeitschrift für Phoilosophie und Philosophische Kritik, NF 100, pp. 25‐50. Quotations from translations by Max Black in Geach, P. and Black, M. (Eds), Translations from the Philosophical Writings by Gottlob Frege (1952), Blackwell, Oxford.

Farias, P. and Queiros, J. (2003), “On diagrams for Peirce's 10, 28 and 66 classes of signs”, Semiotica, Vol. 147, pp. 165‐84.

Farias, P. and Queiros, J. (2006), “Images, diagrams, and metaphors: hypoicons in the context of Peirce's sixty‐six‐fold classification of signs”, Semiotica, Vol. 162, pp. 287‐307.

Fitzgerald, J.J. (1966), Peirce's Theory of Signs as Foundation for Pragmatism, Mouton, The Hague.

Fodor, J. (1998), Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

Goodman, B.A. (1987), “Repairing reference identification failures by relaxation”, in Reilly, R.G. (Ed.), Communication Failure in Dialogue and Discourse, North‐Holland, Amsterdam.

Griffin, E. (1997), A First Look at Communication Theory, McGraw‐Hill, New York, NY.

Hall, S. (1997), “Representation, meaning and language”, in Hall, S. (Ed.), Representation, Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 15‐30.

Hartmann, R.R.K. and Stork, F.C. (1972), Dictionary of Language and Linguistics, Applied Science Publishers, London (Chinese translation Yuyan yu yuyan xue cidian published 1981).

Hermann, H. (2005), Knowledge Representation and the Semantics of Natural Language Secaucus, Springer‐Verlag, Secaucus, NJ.

Hjørland, B. (1997), Information Seeking and Subject Representation: An Activity‐theoretical Approach to Information Science, Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.

Hjørland, B. (2002), “Epistemology adn the socio‐cognitive perspective in information science”, Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 257‐70.

Hjørland, B. (2005), “Epiricism, rationalism and positivism in library and information science”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 130‐5.

Hjørland, B. (2007a), Lifeboat for Knowledge Organization, available at: www.db.dk/bh/lifeboat_ko/CONCEPTS/enumerative_systems.htm (accessed December 16, 2009).

Hjørland, B. (2007b), “Semantics and knowledge organization”, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 41, pp. 367‐405.

Hjørland, B. (2008), “What is knowledge organization?”, Knowledge Organization, Vol. 35, pp. 86‐101.

Hodge, G. (2000), “Systems of knowledge organization for digital libraries: beyond traditional authority files”, available at: www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub91/contents.html.

Jorna, R.J. and Van Heusden, B. (2003), “Why representations will not go away: crisis of concept or crisis of theory?”, Semiotica, Vol. 143, pp. 113‐34.

Laurence, S. and Margolis, E. (2002), “Radical concept nativism”, Cognition, Vol. 86, pp. 25‐55.

Liszka, J.J. (1996), A General Introduction to the Semeiotic of Charles Sanders Peirce, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN.

Olson, H.A. (1998), “Mapping beyond Dewey's boundaries: constructing classificatory space for marginalized knowledge domains”, in Bowker, G.C. and Star, S.L. (Eds), How Classifications Work: Problems and Challenges in an Electronic Age, a special issue of Library Trends, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 233‐54.

Mai, J.‐E. (2000), “The subject indexing process: an investigation of problems in knowledge representation”, PhD thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.

Mai, J.‐E. (2001), “Semiotics and indexing: an analysis of the subject indexing process”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 57, pp. 591‐622.

Mai, J.‐E. (2002), “Is classification theory possible? Rethinking classification research”, Challenges in Knowledge Representation and Organization for the 21st Century, Integration of Knowledge across Boundaries, Proceedings of the 7th International ISKO Conference, Advances in Knowledge Organization, Vol. 8, pp. 472‐8.

Mai, J.‐E. (2005), “Analysis in indexing: document and domain centred approaches”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 599‐611.

Margolis, E. and Laurence, S. (2005), Concepts, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Macmillan, London.

Markman, A.B. (1999), Knowledge Representation, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

Martinich, A.P. (Ed.) (1961), The Philosophy of Language, 3rd ed., OUP, Oxford.

Montague, W.P. (1925), The Ways of Knowing or the Methods of Philosphy, The Macmillan Company, New York, NY.

Mounce, H.O. (1997), The Two Pragmatisms: From Peirce to Rorty, Routledge, Abingdon.

Palmer, S.E. (1978), “Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation”, in Rosch, E. and Lloyd, B.L. (Eds), Cognition and Categorization, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

Peacocke, C. (1992), A Study of Concepts, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Peirce, C.S. (1992), The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN.

Poli, R. (1996), “Ontology for knowledge organization”, in Green, R. (Ed.), Knowledge Organiztion and Change, Indeks, Frankfurt.

Priss, U. (2004), “Signs and formal concepts”, in Eklund, P.W. (Ed.), Concept Lattices: Second International Conference on Formal Concept Analysis, Springer Verlag.

Rosentahl, S.B. (1994), Charles Peirce's Pragmatic Pluralism, State University of New York Press, New York, NY.

Schneider, J.W. (2006), “Concept symbols revisited: naming clusters by parsing and filtering of noun phrases from citation contexts of concept symbols”, Scientometrics, Vol. 68, pp. 573‐93.

Shapiro, M. (1983), The sense of grammar: language as semeiotic, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN.

Short, T. (1981), “Peirce's concept of final causation”, Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, pp. 17‐33.

Smiraglia, R.P. (2002a), “Further progress in theory in knowledge organization”, Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, Vol. 26, pp. 30‐49.

Smiraglia, R.P. (2002b), “The progress of theory in knowledge organization”, Library Trends, Vol. 50, pp. 330‐49.

Smiraglia, R.P. (2005), “Content metadata: an analysis of Etruscan artifacts in a museum of archeology”, Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, Vol. 40, pp. 135‐51.

Smith, S.B. (2006), “From ars to scientia: the revolution of anatomic illustration“, Clinical Anatomy, Vol. 19, pp. 382‐388, available at: www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi‐bin/fulltext/112570915/PDFSTART?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0.

Sowa, J.F. (2000), Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical and Computational Foundations, Course Technology, New York, NY.

Spangler, G.A. (1985), “Reference and identification”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 333‐65.

Svenonius, E. (2001), The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Svenonius, E. (2004), “The epistemological foundations of knowledge representation”, Library Trends, Vol. 52, pp. 571‐87.

Szostak, R. (2004), Classifying Science: Phenomena, Data, Theory, Method, Practice, Springer, Berlin.

Szostak, R. (2010), “Universal and domain‐specific classifications from an interdisciplinary perspective”, in Gnoli, C. and Mazzochi, F. (Eds), Paradigms and Conceptual Systems in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the 2010 Conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization, Rome, February.

Thellefsen, T. (2002), “Semiotic knowledge organization: theory and method development”, Semiotica, Vol. 142, pp. 71‐90.

Thellefsen, T., Brier, S. and Thellefsen, M. (2003), “Problems concerning the process of subject analysis and the practice of indexing: a semiotic and semantic approach towards user oriented needs in document representation and information searching”, Semiotica, p. 144.

Webster's Dictionary (1976) in Soukhanov, A.H. (Ed.), New Riverside University Dictionary, The Riverside Publishing Company, Boston, MA.

Borzacchini, L. (1995), Being and Sign I: Syntactic Paradigm and Negative Judgement Paradox, available at: www.dm.uniba.it/∼psiche/bas1/node2.html#SECTION00010100000000000000 (accessed January 18, 2010).

Brier, S. (2006), “The foundation of LIS in information science and semiotics”, Libreas, Vol. 6.

De Almeida Campus, M.L. (2007), “Integration of ontologies: the domain of bioinformatics”, RECIIS, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 115‐9.

Frege, G. (1879), “Begriffsschrift, eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens, Halle a. S.: Louis Nebert”, translated as Concept Script, a formal language of pure thought modelled upon that of arithmetic, by S. Bauer‐Mengelberg in van Heijenoort, J. (Ed.), From Frege to Gödel: A Source Book in Mathematical Logic, 1879‐1931, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1967.

Friedman, A. (2010), “The use of concept maps in knowledge organization: an analysis of conference papers”, Knowledge Organization Journal, Vol. 36, u.pag.

Holma, B. (2005), Linguistic Aspects of Knowledge Organization, Latvijas Universitāte, Riga.

Jackendoff, R. (1989), “On Larson's treatment of the double object construction”, Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 21, pp. 427‐56.

Karamuftuoglu, M. (1998), Knowledge Based Information Retrieval: a Semiotic Approach, City University, London.

Kearns, K. (2000), Semantics, Macmillan Press, London.

Laurence, S. and Margolis, E. (1999), “Concepts and cognitive science”, in Margolis, E. and Laurence, F. (Eds), Concepts: Core Readings, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Morris, C.W. (1946), Signs Language and Behaviour, George Braziller Inc., New York, NY.

Peirce, C.S. (1966), Collected Papers, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Smiraglia, R.P. (2000), “Words and works; signs, symbols and canons: the epistemology of the work”, Dynamism and Stability in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, Toronto, Vol. 7, pp. 295‐300.

Smiraglia, R.P. (2001), “Works as signs, symbols, and canons: the epistemology of the work”, Knowledge Organization, Vol. 28, pp. 192‐202.

Soergel, D., Lauser, B., Liang, A., Fisseha, F., Keizer, J. and Katz, S. (2004), “Reengeneering thesauri for new applications: the AGROVOC example”, Journal of Digital Information, Vol. 4 No. 257.

Spang‐Hanssen, H.D. (1976), Roles and Links Compared with Grammatical Relations in Natural Languages, Dansk Teknisk Litteraturselskab, Lyngby.

Thellefsen, T. (2003), “Semiotics of terminology: a semiotic knowledge profile”, SEED Journal, Vol. 3, pp. 80‐93.

Thellefsen, T. (2004), “Knowledge profiling: the basis for knowledge organization”, Library Trends, Vol. 52, pp. 507‐14.

Thellefsen, T. (2005), “Pragmatic semiotics and knowledge management: introducing the knowledge profile as a tool for knowledge managing the meaning of scientific concepts”, Arisbe: The Peirce Gateway.