中西圖書分類原理之比較研究

A Comparative Study on the Principles of Book Classification between China and the West

鄭惠珍(Hui-Chen Cheng)

指導教授 ： 陳雪華

國立臺灣大學/文學院/圖書資訊學研究所/博士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2009.03380

摘要

本研究旨在藉由中西圖書分類原理的溯源與比較，瞭解其淵源、內涵、特質及差異，並進一步發掘影響中西圖書分類發展分歧之背景因素。希冀能有助於圖書分類之深入探討和跨文化之研究發展，進而建立中西圖書分類所需之參照，拓寬國人對圖書分類之視野。
本研究採行的研究方法為文獻分析法。探討的問題主要有：一、中西圖書分類之思想淵源；二、中西圖書分類原理及其異同之處；三、中西圖書分類系統之特質及建置過程中異同之處；四、影響中西圖書分類系統發展分歧之重要因素。
根據研究問題之設定，本研究之具體成果共有四大項，包括：一、中西圖書分類思想淵源：西方階層式圖書分類屬於「古典範疇理論」，中國圖書分類比較傾向「現代範疇理論」。二、中西圖書分類原理及其異同：1. 標記原理由西方產出；2. 敘述性與動態性理論在西方是先後發展，中國曾並行發展；3. 部份圖書分類原理的萌芽，中國早於西方；4. 中西圖書分類原理受到哲學或邏輯學等領域的影響；5. 中西皆重類目設置原則。三、中西圖書分類系統之特質及建置圖書分類系統之異同：1. 中國的主要特質為價值性、繼承性、具象性、助記性、精簡性、及統一性；西方的則是價值性、繼承性、抽象性、國際性、助記性、通用性、精簡性、及民主性；2. 中西以藏書為分類基礎，西方另具邏輯分類之類型；3. 分類系統類目的層級位置皆取決於類目本身的價值性；4. 中西圖書分類系統的本質皆是減熵原理；5. 中西圖書分類表多奠基在前人的基礎上發展；6. 中西圖書分類系統的內容與教育緊密結合；7. 西方依類歸書，中國因書設類；8. 西方為階層式和分面分析架構，中國則是階層式；9. 西方的標記為抽象式符號，中國的則是文字標記。四、影響中西圖書分類發展分歧之重要因素：1. 中西早期封建政體不同；2. 政治干擾的時期中國長於西方；3. 中國古代學科為整合式，西方為分科式；4. 早期高等教育授課內容中西不同；5. 中西人文傳統思想不同；6. 可借鑒哲學、邏輯學或生物學的分類原理中西有別；7. 跨國學習的經驗西方多於中國；8. 西方目錄學與圖書分類體系獨立發展，中國則相依發展；9. 分類者學科背景中西不同；10. 分類者思維模式中西不同，包括中國形象性與概括性，西方抽象性與分析性。
綜上結論，本研究提出以下幾點建議：一、確保階層分類符合互斥性原則。二、兼顧具象性與抽象性的分類思維。三、現代圖書分類系統可朝「辨章學術，考鏡源流」的目標努力。四、中西圖書分類原理應受到同等重視。五、重視文獻保證原理與類目修訂。

關鍵字

中國圖書分類 ； 西方圖書分類 ； 圖書分類原理 ； 範疇理論 ； 目錄學

並列摘要

This research aims at tracing the source and comparing the principles of book classification between China and the West to find out their origins, intentions, characteristics, and differences. Besides, it further explores background factors which make developments of their own library classification systems divergent. It is hoped that this research can facilitate an in-depth and cross-cultural study, and then set up a necessary reference of comparison, as well as broaden horizons on the topic of library classification.
The approach adopted in this research is literature analysis. The research attempts to find answers to the issues: First, what are the origins of thinking on book classification of both China and the West? Second, what principles of book classification do both China and the West hold? What are the similarities and dissimilarities between them? Third, what special features do both Chinese and Western library classification systems have? Are there any similarities and dissimilarities during the course of establishment for Chinese and Western library classification systems? Fourth, what factors cause divergent development of book classification systems between China and the West?
The results of this research can be detailed in four corresponding categories:
First, with a major difference on the theoretical application of book classification, the West tends to apply the classical theory of categories, whereas China tends to apply the modern theory of categories.
Second, in terms of principles of book classification and their similarities and dissimilarities between China and the West, the results are listed below: 1. Notation principles were proposed in the West; 2. In the West, desrcriptive theories were advanced before dynamic theories while in China these developments were synchronized; 3. Some principles of book classification proposed by Western classificationists originated in China; 4. Both Chinese and Western ideas of library classification were affected by philosophical or logical principles of classification; 5. Both China and the West put more emphasis on principles of class headings.
Third, with regard to the characteristics of library classification systems as well as the same and different ideas of building library classification systems between China and the West, the results are listed below: 1. Features of Chinese library classification systems include value, succession, concrete thinking, mnemonics, simplicity, and unity while Western systems include value, succession, abstract thinking, internationalism, mnemonics, interchangeability, simplicity, and democracy; 2. Both Chinese and Western library classification schemes are based on practical collection, whereas those of Western libraries are also based on logical of knowledge classification in addition to practical collection; 3. How a class heading was placed in a classificaiton system depends on its value; 4. The essence of building library classification systems in Chinese and Western libraries was all based on entropy-reducing principle; 5. Both China and the West took their predecessors’ experiences as a foundation while setting up a new book classification system; 6. The contents of book classification systems linked closely with higher education between China and the West; 7. In West, a book classification scheme had been created before its application, whereas in China both were done simultaneously; 8. Most of the structures of Western book classification systems are hierarchical and faceted while those of China are hierarchical only; 9. In the West, notations are abstract symbols while those of China are characters.
Fourth, in the category of important factors which caused Chinese and Western library classification systems to develop divergently: 1. Forms of feudal government differed greatly between ancient China and Western countries; 2. China suffered from political interference longer than the West; 3. The academic disciplines of ancient China were integratded, whereas those of the West were classified; 4. The programs of higher education were different between ancient China and the West; 5. China and the West have different traditional humanist thinking patterns; 6. The ideas of library classification which could be borrowed from the philosophical, logical or biological principles of classification were different between China and the West; 7. The West had more experience than China in transnational learning; 8. In the West, bibliography and book classification schemes developed independently while in China both developed in a convergent manner; 9. The academic backgrounds of classificationists were different between China and the West; 10. In the West, modes of thought are mostly abstract and analytical while those of China are often based on images and generality.
To sum up, this research makes the following suggestions. First, it should be ensured that hierarchical classifications have conformed to the canon of mutual exclusivity. Second, classificationists should give consideration to concrete thinking and abstract thinking on classification at the same time. Third, modern book classification systems may work diligently toward the goal for achieving “revealing the academic principles and defining the origins of different principles.” Fourth, the principles of book classification between China and the West should be paid attention to on an equal basis. Fifth, literary warrant and the revision of class headings should be emphasized.

並列關鍵字

Chinese book classification ； Western book classification ； principles of book classification ； category theory ； bibliography

參考文獻

李萬健（1993）。中國目錄學家傳略。北京：書目文獻。

陳昭珍（民82）。布里斯書目分類法之理論與應用探討，圖書館學刊（臺大），（8），115-134。

王應文、李隆盛、石延平（1995）。建構技學知識分類的考慮要項。中學工藝教育，28（7），2-8。

顧毓民（民80）。方以智的知識學。哲學論集，25，181-192。

曾春海（民90）。兩漢魏晉哲學史。臺北市：五南。