Pub Date : 2021-09-02DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.1987938
M. Howard, K. Jarvie, S. Wright
ABSTRACT Researchers must continually discriminate between competing sources of evidence, knowledge and theoretical justification, selecting who we believe to be credible informants and what we perceive as reliable testimony. In the keeping of records, particularly in the act of appraisal, we utilise methods of evaluation that reflect the social processes, institutional procedures, and interpersonal influences common to our disciplinary milieu. Viewing activist community recordkeeping and archiving through the lens of Rancière and SMT (Social Movement Theory), this article extends theoretical discussion into areas silent in the archival discourse to date. Activists working in radical community recordkeeping environments and archival situations face political and epistemic choices with regard to how and why they represent certain subjects and materials. The authors explore these contentions through the experiences of two such radical archives: Archimovi, an Italian archive of radical social movements; and the archive in a records continuum sense, the radical recordkeeping of animal activist group Direct Action Everywhere, based in the United States.
{"title":"Rancière, political theory and activist community appraisal","authors":"M. Howard, K. Jarvie, S. Wright","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1987938","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1987938","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Researchers must continually discriminate between competing sources of evidence, knowledge and theoretical justification, selecting who we believe to be credible informants and what we perceive as reliable testimony. In the keeping of records, particularly in the act of appraisal, we utilise methods of evaluation that reflect the social processes, institutional procedures, and interpersonal influences common to our disciplinary milieu. Viewing activist community recordkeeping and archiving through the lens of Rancière and SMT (Social Movement Theory), this article extends theoretical discussion into areas silent in the archival discourse to date. Activists working in radical community recordkeeping environments and archival situations face political and epistemic choices with regard to how and why they represent certain subjects and materials. The authors explore these contentions through the experiences of two such radical archives: Archimovi, an Italian archive of radical social movements; and the archive in a records continuum sense, the radical recordkeeping of animal activist group Direct Action Everywhere, based in the United States.","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49405036","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-02DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.1997609
Indigenous Archives Collective
On 9 August 2021, the Indigenous Archives Collective released its Position Statement on the Right of Reply to Indigenous Knowledges and Information held in Archives (the Statement). This Statement draws on outcomes of the ‘Right of Reply – Indigenous Rights in Data and Collections Symposium’. Collective members’ experience working and researching in collecting institutions holding archives and records relating to Indigenous peoples and Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) also informed the development of the Statement. All of these themes raised in the Statement resonate with the aims and aspirations of the Indigenous Archives Collective. Kirsten Thorpe and Dr Shannon Faulkhead are founding members of the Collective, establishing the then Indigenous Archives Network in 2011 through the National Archives of Australia Ian Maclean Research Award. In 2018, the group was revitalised as the Indigenous Archives Collective. Current members include Indigenous and nonIndigenous professional archivists and researchers. It has been re-imagined as a place where Indigenous practitioners and researchers lead; as a place of support; and as a place where culturally safe collaboration, dialogue and reflexive practice, and advocacy for transformation in the Australian and international GLAM sector can occur. The Symposium was held in October 2019 at the National Centre for Indigenous Excellence. Its purpose was to address developments in technology and the management and preservation of collections, which have the potential to either undermine or support Indigenous self-determination and data sovereignty. It was made possible through the leadership of the Jumbunna Institute for Indigenous Education and Research, and sponsorship from University of Technology Sydney, the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, Monash University, the Australian Society of Archivists, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Data Archive, the State Library of New South Wales and the Australian Library and Information Association. The relevance of the event was clear in the response to it: it was oversubscribed, and attendees included Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples from the community, professionals, researchers, and representatives of organisations, which hold records about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The importance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples accessing and responding to records that pertain to themselves, their families and communities were asserted in the 1997 report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families, and reiterated in the 2019
{"title":"The Indigenous Archives Collective position statement on the right of reply to Indigenous knowledges and information held in archives","authors":"Indigenous Archives Collective","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1997609","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1997609","url":null,"abstract":"On 9 August 2021, the Indigenous Archives Collective released its Position Statement on the Right of Reply to Indigenous Knowledges and Information held in Archives (the Statement). This Statement draws on outcomes of the ‘Right of Reply – Indigenous Rights in Data and Collections Symposium’. Collective members’ experience working and researching in collecting institutions holding archives and records relating to Indigenous peoples and Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) also informed the development of the Statement. All of these themes raised in the Statement resonate with the aims and aspirations of the Indigenous Archives Collective. Kirsten Thorpe and Dr Shannon Faulkhead are founding members of the Collective, establishing the then Indigenous Archives Network in 2011 through the National Archives of Australia Ian Maclean Research Award. In 2018, the group was revitalised as the Indigenous Archives Collective. Current members include Indigenous and nonIndigenous professional archivists and researchers. It has been re-imagined as a place where Indigenous practitioners and researchers lead; as a place of support; and as a place where culturally safe collaboration, dialogue and reflexive practice, and advocacy for transformation in the Australian and international GLAM sector can occur. The Symposium was held in October 2019 at the National Centre for Indigenous Excellence. Its purpose was to address developments in technology and the management and preservation of collections, which have the potential to either undermine or support Indigenous self-determination and data sovereignty. It was made possible through the leadership of the Jumbunna Institute for Indigenous Education and Research, and sponsorship from University of Technology Sydney, the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, Monash University, the Australian Society of Archivists, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Data Archive, the State Library of New South Wales and the Australian Library and Information Association. The relevance of the event was clear in the response to it: it was oversubscribed, and attendees included Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples from the community, professionals, researchers, and representatives of organisations, which hold records about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The importance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples accessing and responding to records that pertain to themselves, their families and communities were asserted in the 1997 report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families, and reiterated in the 2019","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46735232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-02DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.2005715
Viviane Frings‐Hessami
{"title":"Transitioning to open access","authors":"Viviane Frings‐Hessami","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.2005715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.2005715","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45740254","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-02DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.1961086
R. Barrowcliffe, L. Booker, Sue McKemmish, K. Thorpe
ABSTRACT This article discusses opportunities for activating and supporting the International Council on Archives Tandanya – Adelaide Declaration on Indigenous Archives. It discusses the background and context of the Declaration and reflects on pathways for it to be enacted. This article draws from a panel discussion ‘Supporting and Activating the Adelaide Tandanya Declaration on Indigenous Archives’ hosted by the Australian Society of Archivists (ASA) in September 2020. It explores questions of mobilising action to support the Declaration in an Indigenous Australian context. It examines key themes and issues relating to the importance of ongoing dialogue and Indigenous leadership in actioning and expanding the five key themes of the statement of 1) Knowledge authorities 2) Property and ownership 3) Recognition and identity 4) Research and access, and 5) Self-determination. It concludes with a discussion and recommendations for further action to support the activation of the Tandanya – Adelaide Declaration.
{"title":"Activating and supporting the Tandanya Adelaide Declaration on Indigenous Archives","authors":"R. Barrowcliffe, L. Booker, Sue McKemmish, K. Thorpe","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1961086","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1961086","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article discusses opportunities for activating and supporting the International Council on Archives Tandanya – Adelaide Declaration on Indigenous Archives. It discusses the background and context of the Declaration and reflects on pathways for it to be enacted. This article draws from a panel discussion ‘Supporting and Activating the Adelaide Tandanya Declaration on Indigenous Archives’ hosted by the Australian Society of Archivists (ASA) in September 2020. It explores questions of mobilising action to support the Declaration in an Indigenous Australian context. It examines key themes and issues relating to the importance of ongoing dialogue and Indigenous leadership in actioning and expanding the five key themes of the statement of 1) Knowledge authorities 2) Property and ownership 3) Recognition and identity 4) Research and access, and 5) Self-determination. It concludes with a discussion and recommendations for further action to support the activation of the Tandanya – Adelaide Declaration.","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46852807","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-04DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.1954041
F. Golding, Sue McKemmish, Barbara Reed
{"title":"Towards Transformative Practice in Out of Home Care: Chartering Rights in Recordkeeping","authors":"F. Golding, Sue McKemmish, Barbara Reed","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1954041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1954041","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01576895.2021.1954041","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47644431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-02DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.1958237
Zhiying Lian
ABSTRACT Based on ethnographic fieldwork on community archives in mainland China, this article identifies three models of community archives in mainland China, and reveals reasons for the emergence and survival of community-based archives in mainland China: first, the regulations on non-governmental museums and social organisations can provide the legal basis for the emergence and survival of community-based archives despite the fact that the archival legislative framework, the centralised archives management system and the dominant statist archival paradigm seem to leave little room for their emergence and development; second, the purposes of establishing community-based archives can be consistent with or not contradictory to the political, social and cultural development strategies of the state; third, the relationship of contingent symbiosis between government and community archives can create spaces for the emergence and survival of community-based archives.
{"title":"Dancing with the state: the emergence and survival of community archives in mainland China","authors":"Zhiying Lian","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1958237","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1958237","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Based on ethnographic fieldwork on community archives in mainland China, this article identifies three models of community archives in mainland China, and reveals reasons for the emergence and survival of community-based archives in mainland China: first, the regulations on non-governmental museums and social organisations can provide the legal basis for the emergence and survival of community-based archives despite the fact that the archival legislative framework, the centralised archives management system and the dominant statist archival paradigm seem to leave little room for their emergence and development; second, the purposes of establishing community-based archives can be consistent with or not contradictory to the political, social and cultural development strategies of the state; third, the relationship of contingent symbiosis between government and community archives can create spaces for the emergence and survival of community-based archives.","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01576895.2021.1958237","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43741609","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-06DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.1922815
Peta Jane Blessing, John Schilling
Trusting Records in the Cloud is a compilation of the most recent research generated by the research project of the International Research on Permanent Authentic Records in Electronic Systems (Inte...
《云中的可信记录》汇编了国际电子系统永久真实记录研究项目(Inte…)的最新研究成果。
{"title":"Trusting records in the cloud","authors":"Peta Jane Blessing, John Schilling","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1922815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1922815","url":null,"abstract":"Trusting Records in the Cloud is a compilation of the most recent research generated by the research project of the International Research on Permanent Authentic Records in Electronic Systems (Inte...","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01576895.2021.1922815","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46677028","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.1913757
Liudmila Varlamova, E. Latysheva, O. Mukhatova, Dzmitry Varnashou
ABSTRACT The archival schools of the post-Soviet countries discussed in this article (Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus and Ukraine), despite having much in common, are quite different from one another. Their similarity is due to a comprehensive legal and methodological base inherited from the USSR, as well as to a well-established common practice. The principles of normative regulation of archiving were laid down in the USSR and built on the basic law on archiving and the normative acts of the central state body responsible for the archival affairs of the country. All the countries examined have retained the principles of forming the terminological system of the professional area through the development of a special national terminological standard which includes the terms given in the fundamental law on archiving. However, the extent to which the terminological systems are elaborated and are consistent both within themselves and with the terminological systems of related fields of activity in each country, is different. The article contains an analytical comparison of the definitions of fundamental archival terms standardised in national standards and laws on archival affairs in the abovementioned countries and in the USSR, and also shows the influence of ISO standards on the development of terminological systems in these countries.
{"title":"Archival terminology in the USSR and in post-Soviet countries: continuity and change","authors":"Liudmila Varlamova, E. Latysheva, O. Mukhatova, Dzmitry Varnashou","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1913757","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1913757","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The archival schools of the post-Soviet countries discussed in this article (Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus and Ukraine), despite having much in common, are quite different from one another. Their similarity is due to a comprehensive legal and methodological base inherited from the USSR, as well as to a well-established common practice. The principles of normative regulation of archiving were laid down in the USSR and built on the basic law on archiving and the normative acts of the central state body responsible for the archival affairs of the country. All the countries examined have retained the principles of forming the terminological system of the professional area through the development of a special national terminological standard which includes the terms given in the fundamental law on archiving. However, the extent to which the terminological systems are elaborated and are consistent both within themselves and with the terminological systems of related fields of activity in each country, is different. The article contains an analytical comparison of the definitions of fundamental archival terms standardised in national standards and laws on archival affairs in the abovementioned countries and in the USSR, and also shows the influence of ISO standards on the development of terminological systems in these countries.","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01576895.2021.1913757","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43177669","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2021.1919043
E. Ketelaar, Viviane Frings‐Hessami
The differences between archival traditions have hindered communication between archival practitioners and scholars from different countries and traditions and have impacted on the success of international recordkeeping projects. Some of the concepts that underpin the current archival literature in English are difficult to translate, one of the reasons being that many other languages do not have a word for the concept of ‘records’. Even within the Anglophone professional community, concepts and terms differ (likewise in the French-, Germanand Spanish-speaking world and other language spheres). Records Continuum concepts, which have influenced the development of the international Records Management standard ISO 15489, are generally misunderstood outside of Australia. On the other hand, very little literature is available in English about archival theories and practices in non-Anglophone countries. More research is needed on the impact of language and culture on recordkeeping traditions and practices. In this special issue of Archives & Manuscripts, we are seeking to develop our knowledge base by bringing together authors that represent different archival traditions and practices. This issue covers important aspects of the archival traditions in France, Italy, Slovenia, Finland, Iceland, Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Japan, and through the discussion of translations of the Universal Declaration on Archives, it brings insights from as far afield as the Dutch Caribbean Islands, the Philippines, China, Iran, Israel and the Arab world. In addition to these, contributions from Germany, Spain, Denmark and Canada were planned for this issue. However, due to increased workloads in the COVID-19 pandemic, the contributors were not able to submit their pieces. From the very first relationships archivists endeavoured across political and cultural borders, coping with differences between archival traditions has been a major challenge. One of the schemes to facilitate communication between archival practitioners and scholars from different countries and traditions was (and still is) the creation of glossaries and dictionaries. These tools, more often than not, are also used to standardise terminologies and practices and thereby contribute to further professionalisation. Such standardisation and professionalisation was the ambition of Dutch archivists Muller, Feith and Fruin who composed the Manual for the arrangement and description of archives (1898). Not only in chapter 6 ‘on the conventional use of certain terms and signs’, but throughout the book the authors strived to standardisation and uniformity in the arrangement and description of archives. Shortly after the publication of the Manual the first translation appeared: a German edition translated by Hans Kaiser, and closely supervised by the Dutch trio. The translation into another language and into another archival tradition led to many, especially terminological questions. Some professional Du
档案传统的差异阻碍了来自不同国家和传统的档案从业者和学者之间的交流，影响了国际档案保存项目的成功。当前英语档案文献的一些概念很难翻译，原因之一是许多其他语言没有“记录”这个概念的单词。即使在以英语为母语的专业团体中，概念和术语也有所不同(在法语、德语和西班牙语世界以及其他语言领域也是如此)。影响了国际记录管理标准ISO 15489发展的记录连续统概念，在澳大利亚以外通常被误解。另一方面，关于非英语国家档案理论和实践的英文文献很少。语言和文化对记录保存传统和做法的影响需要更多的研究。在这期《档案与手稿》的特刊中，我们试图通过汇集代表不同档案传统和实践的作者来发展我们的知识库。本期杂志涵盖了法国、意大利、斯洛文尼亚、芬兰、冰岛、俄罗斯、白俄罗斯、乌克兰、哈萨克斯坦和日本档案传统的重要方面，并通过对《世界档案宣言》翻译的讨论，带来了远至荷属加勒比群岛、菲律宾、中国、伊朗、以色列和阿拉伯世界的见解。除此之外，德国、西班牙、丹麦和加拿大也计划为本期提供文章。然而，由于COVID-19大流行的工作量增加，撰稿人无法提交他们的作品。从最初的关系开始，档案工作者就努力跨越政治和文化边界，应对档案传统之间的差异一直是一个重大挑战。促进来自不同国家和传统的档案从业者和学者之间交流的方案之一是(现在仍然是)创建词汇和字典。这些工具通常也用于标准化术语和实践，从而有助于进一步专业化。这种标准化和专业化是荷兰档案学家穆勒，菲思和Fruin的野心，他们编写了《档案安排和描述手册》(1898年)。不仅在第6章“关于某些术语和符号的常规使用”中，而且在整本书中，作者都努力在档案的安排和描述中实现标准化和统一性。《手册》出版后不久，第一个译本出现了:汉斯·凯泽(Hans Kaiser)翻译的德文版本，并由荷兰三人组密切监督。翻译成另一种语言和另一种档案传统导致了许多问题，特别是术语问题。一些荷兰专业术语仍未翻译;对另一些人来说，几乎找不到合适的翻译。在他的前言Wilhelm Wiegand ARCHIVES AND manuscript 2021, VOL. 49, no .1 - 2,1 - 7 https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1919043
{"title":"Scholarly and professional communication in archives: archival traditions and languages","authors":"E. Ketelaar, Viviane Frings‐Hessami","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1919043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1919043","url":null,"abstract":"The differences between archival traditions have hindered communication between archival practitioners and scholars from different countries and traditions and have impacted on the success of international recordkeeping projects. Some of the concepts that underpin the current archival literature in English are difficult to translate, one of the reasons being that many other languages do not have a word for the concept of ‘records’. Even within the Anglophone professional community, concepts and terms differ (likewise in the French-, Germanand Spanish-speaking world and other language spheres). Records Continuum concepts, which have influenced the development of the international Records Management standard ISO 15489, are generally misunderstood outside of Australia. On the other hand, very little literature is available in English about archival theories and practices in non-Anglophone countries. More research is needed on the impact of language and culture on recordkeeping traditions and practices. In this special issue of Archives & Manuscripts, we are seeking to develop our knowledge base by bringing together authors that represent different archival traditions and practices. This issue covers important aspects of the archival traditions in France, Italy, Slovenia, Finland, Iceland, Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Japan, and through the discussion of translations of the Universal Declaration on Archives, it brings insights from as far afield as the Dutch Caribbean Islands, the Philippines, China, Iran, Israel and the Arab world. In addition to these, contributions from Germany, Spain, Denmark and Canada were planned for this issue. However, due to increased workloads in the COVID-19 pandemic, the contributors were not able to submit their pieces. From the very first relationships archivists endeavoured across political and cultural borders, coping with differences between archival traditions has been a major challenge. One of the schemes to facilitate communication between archival practitioners and scholars from different countries and traditions was (and still is) the creation of glossaries and dictionaries. These tools, more often than not, are also used to standardise terminologies and practices and thereby contribute to further professionalisation. Such standardisation and professionalisation was the ambition of Dutch archivists Muller, Feith and Fruin who composed the Manual for the arrangement and description of archives (1898). Not only in chapter 6 ‘on the conventional use of certain terms and signs’, but throughout the book the authors strived to standardisation and uniformity in the arrangement and description of archives. Shortly after the publication of the Manual the first translation appeared: a German edition translated by Hans Kaiser, and closely supervised by the Dutch trio. The translation into another language and into another archival tradition led to many, especially terminological questions. Some professional Du","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01576895.2021.1919043","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45269760","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/01576895.2020.1833226
Pauline Soum-Paris
ABSTRACT In 1985, Michel Duchein published ‘Les Archives dans la Tour de Babel: Problèmes de Terminologie Archivistique Internationale’ in La Gazette des Archives. To this day, his article remains the most articulate expression of the difficulties linked to the translation of archival terminology between French and English. It was written as a reaction to the publication of the Dictionary of Archival Terminology by the International Council on Archives (1984). Departing from Duchein’s work, this article assesses the current situation regarding the translation of archival terminology from English to French. The article mainly considers four existing tools dealing exclusively with archival terminology: the Elsevier Lexicon of Archive Terminology (1964), the International Council on Archives’ Dictionary of Archival Terminology (1984), the Association Française de Normalisation’s Vocabulaire des Archives (1986) and the International Council on Archives’ Multilingual Archival Terminology database (2012- …). This article is based on an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool, and on practical tests carried out during the translation of a corpus of texts for Comma, the journal of the International Council on Archives. This article intends to show that the existing tools for translating archival terminology from English to French lack either up-to-date content or reliability.
摘要1985年，Michel Duchin在《档案公报》上发表了《巴别塔之旅档案：国际档案学术语问题》。时至今日，他的文章仍然最清晰地表达了法语和英语之间档案术语翻译的困难。它是对国际档案理事会出版的《档案术语词典》（1984年）的回应。本文从杜钦的工作出发，评估了档案术语英法翻译的现状。本文主要考虑了四种专门处理档案术语的现有工具：《爱思唯尔档案术语词典》（1964年）、国际档案理事会档案术语词典（1984年）、，法国标准化协会的Vocabulaire des Archives（1986年）和国际档案理事会的多语言档案术语数据库（2012-201…）。这篇文章基于对每种工具的优势和劣势的分析，以及在为国际档案理事会期刊《Comma》翻译文本语料库时进行的实际测试。本文旨在表明，现有的档案术语英法翻译工具要么缺乏最新的内容，要么缺乏可靠性。
{"title":"‘La Tour de Babel,’ 35 years later: challenges and tools relating to the translation of archival terminology from English to French","authors":"Pauline Soum-Paris","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2020.1833226","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2020.1833226","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In 1985, Michel Duchein published ‘Les Archives dans la Tour de Babel: Problèmes de Terminologie Archivistique Internationale’ in La Gazette des Archives. To this day, his article remains the most articulate expression of the difficulties linked to the translation of archival terminology between French and English. It was written as a reaction to the publication of the Dictionary of Archival Terminology by the International Council on Archives (1984). Departing from Duchein’s work, this article assesses the current situation regarding the translation of archival terminology from English to French. The article mainly considers four existing tools dealing exclusively with archival terminology: the Elsevier Lexicon of Archive Terminology (1964), the International Council on Archives’ Dictionary of Archival Terminology (1984), the Association Française de Normalisation’s Vocabulaire des Archives (1986) and the International Council on Archives’ Multilingual Archival Terminology database (2012- …). This article is based on an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool, and on practical tests carried out during the translation of a corpus of texts for Comma, the journal of the International Council on Archives. This article intends to show that the existing tools for translating archival terminology from English to French lack either up-to-date content or reliability.","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01576895.2020.1833226","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48706399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：