Scholarship, community formation and book reviews: The Literarisches Centralblatt as arena and meeting place

Q1 Arts and Humanities Studia Historiae Scientiarum Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.4467/2543702xshs.21.019.14050
Christiaan Engberts
{"title":"Scholarship, community formation and book reviews: The Literarisches Centralblatt as arena and meeting place","authors":"Christiaan Engberts","doi":"10.4467/2543702xshs.21.019.14050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Book reviews serve multiple functions. They are not only used to assess the merit of individual books but also contribute to the creation and maintenance of scholarly communities. This paper draws on nineteenth-century book reviews to outline three of their features that contributed to the selfdefinition of such communities: the assessment of books, the assessment of authors, and the use of positive and negative politeness strategies to address individual authors as well as a broader audience. The analysis will be based on the book reviews of the German Semitist Theodor Nöldeke and the experimental psychologist Wilhelm Wundt in the Literarisches Centralblatt in the eighteenseventies. In their book reviews they both criticized and praised their peers, which turned review journals like the Centralblatt in arenas for polemic debate as well as meeting places for likeminded scholars. To be more precise, book reviews were used to communicate standards of scholarly excellence, expectations of the character and skills of scholars, and the acknowledgement of the value of the continued existence of aims and interests shared among a large group of academically educated and employed scholars. By contributing to the establishment and maintenance of scholarly peer groups with shared values, book reviews also reinforced the dividing line between academic researchers and lay contributors to their fields.","PeriodicalId":36875,"journal":{"name":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Historiae Scientiarum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.21.019.14050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Book reviews serve multiple functions. They are not only used to assess the merit of individual books but also contribute to the creation and maintenance of scholarly communities. This paper draws on nineteenth-century book reviews to outline three of their features that contributed to the selfdefinition of such communities: the assessment of books, the assessment of authors, and the use of positive and negative politeness strategies to address individual authors as well as a broader audience. The analysis will be based on the book reviews of the German Semitist Theodor Nöldeke and the experimental psychologist Wilhelm Wundt in the Literarisches Centralblatt in the eighteenseventies. In their book reviews they both criticized and praised their peers, which turned review journals like the Centralblatt in arenas for polemic debate as well as meeting places for likeminded scholars. To be more precise, book reviews were used to communicate standards of scholarly excellence, expectations of the character and skills of scholars, and the acknowledgement of the value of the continued existence of aims and interests shared among a large group of academically educated and employed scholars. By contributing to the establishment and maintenance of scholarly peer groups with shared values, book reviews also reinforced the dividing line between academic researchers and lay contributors to their fields.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学术、社区形成与书评:文学中心作为舞台和集会场所
书评有多种功能。它们不仅用于评估个别书籍的价值,而且有助于创建和维护学术团体。本文借鉴了19世纪的书评,概述了它们的三个特征,这些特征有助于这种社区的自我定义:对书籍的评估,对作者的评估,以及使用积极和消极的礼貌策略来应对个别作者和更广泛的受众。分析将基于十九世纪七十年代德国犹太主义者西奥多Nöldeke和实验心理学家威廉冯特在《文学中心》上的书评。在他们的书评中,他们对同行既有批评,也有赞扬,这使得《中央布拉特》(Centralblatt)等书评杂志成为辩论的舞台,以及志同道合的学者的聚会场所。更准确地说,书评被用来传达学术卓越的标准,对学者的性格和技能的期望,以及对一大群受过学术教育和就业的学者所共有的目标和兴趣继续存在的价值的承认。书评有助于建立和维护具有共同价值观的学术同行群体,同时也强化了学术研究人员和各自领域的非专业贡献者之间的分界线。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studia Historiae Scientiarum
Studia Historiae Scientiarum Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊最新文献
Nowa propozycja periodyzacji dziejów botaniki w Polsce Dlaczego nadal interesuje nas Mikołaj Kopernik (1473–1543)? 550-lecie urodzin Mikołaja Kopernika i 150-lecie pierwszego publicznego posiedzenia Akademii Umiejętności w Krakowie Under the Spell of Distant Landscapes: On the Lives and Work of a Few Famous Hungarian Travellers and Explorers after 1945 – an Introduction to the Topic for English-Speaking Readers Uzupełniony wykaz polskich czasopism historycznych oparty na modelu ewaluacji czasopism opracowanym przez Pracownię Naukoznawstwa IHN PAN Incommensurability Explained in the Terms of Presuppositions. A Comment to Kuhn’s Thesis on Radical Meaning Variance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1