论文部分内容阅读
王振铎先生《质疑“核心期刊”论》一文(刊《出版广角》2000年第12期,以下简称“王文”)提出了一个十分严肃的问题:对我国的期刊出版管理而言,“核心期刊”论能否用于对期刊的整体质量进行评价,能否以刊物是否“核心”来评判期刊质量的优劣。在“核心期刊”日益泛滥的今天,这是一篇注定要引起纷争的文章。不出所料,2001年张林祥先生发表《学术期刊的评价与“核心期刊”》一文(刊《出版广角》2001年第9期,以下简称“张文”),对王文进行商榷。张文的立足点就是:“刊以文名,文因刊贵”,对论文学术水平的认定,最简单的方法就是看发表文章的刊物。在笔者看来,张文的这种商榷与王文的“对接点”、“交锋点”并不准确,商榷得也不“精彩”。鉴于张文对“核心期刊”某些问题的模糊认识具有代表性,颇有“市场”和“群众基础”,这里不妨对张文的“商榷”再度进行“商榷”。
Mr. Wang Zhenduo put forward a very serious question on “questioning” the core journal “On” (published in “Wide Angle of Publication” No. 12 of 2000, hereinafter referred to as “Wang Wen”): For our country’s periodical publishing management, “core journals Whether the theory can be used to evaluate the overall quality of the journal, whether the publication is ”core“ to judge the pros and cons of journal quality. Today, with the growing proliferation of ”core journals,“ it is an article destined to cause controversy. Unsurprisingly, in 2001, Mr. Zhang Linxiang published an article entitled ”Evaluation of Academic Journals and Core Journals“ (published in Wide Angle of Publication, No. 9, 2001, hereinafter referred to as Zhang Wen), to discuss Wang Wen. Zhang Wen’s foothold is: ”published in the name of the article, the text is expensive“, the academic standards of the thesis, the easiest way is to see the publication of the publication. In my opinion, Zhang Wen’s discussion with Wang Wen’s ”docking point“ and ”confrontation point“ are not accurate, nor are they ”negotiable“. In view of Zhang Wen’s fuzzy understanding of certain issues in the ”core periodical“ is representative, quite ”market“ and ”mass base“, Zhang Wen’s ”deliberation“ here may wish to once again ”debatable."