论文部分内容阅读
《秘书》杂志1996年第2期发表了黄俊琳同志的《试论公文学研究的三个理论问题》(以下简称黄文)一文,对拙文《公文学研究的三个理论问题》(载《秘书》杂志1995年第4期)进行商榷。难得以文会友,共探文是。为将论题引向深入,本文拟就公文学研究的三个理论问题进一步表述浅见,并与黄俊琳同志进行反商榷, 应当承认,黄文在拙文的基础上对公文定义所作的界定,即将笔者定义中的“公务”二宇删略,符合逻辑规则,是正确的和合理的。对此,笔者予以接
In the journal No. 2 of 1996, Secretary magazine published Comrade Huang Junlin’s article “Three Theoretical Problems in the Study of Official Document Science” (hereinafter referred to as “Huang Wen”). The article “Three Theoretical Issues in the Study of Official Document” Magazine No. 4 of 1995) for discussion. Rare friends to the text, a total of exploration is. In order to divert the thesis further, this paper attempts to further express my views on the three theoretical issues in the study of public documentations and to conduct a counter-argument with Comrade Huang Junlin. It should be acknowledged that Huang Wen’s definition of a document’s definition on the basis of Zhuo Wen is about to define the author In the “official” two buildings deleted, in line with the rules of logic, is correct and reasonable. In this regard, I give access