首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
文章检索
  按 检索   检索词:      
出版年份:   被引次数:   他引次数: 提示:输入*表示无穷大
  收费全文   295篇
  免费   5篇
  国内免费   1篇
教育   247篇
科学研究   8篇
体育   15篇
文化理论   3篇
信息传播   28篇
  2024年   1篇
  2023年   3篇
  2022年   9篇
  2021年   11篇
  2020年   12篇
  2019年   18篇
  2018年   23篇
  2017年   28篇
  2016年   20篇
  2015年   6篇
  2014年   15篇
  2013年   49篇
  2012年   17篇
  2011年   4篇
  2010年   8篇
  2009年   8篇
  2008年   7篇
  2007年   8篇
  2006年   4篇
  2005年   7篇
  2004年   4篇
  2003年   3篇
  2002年   8篇
  2001年   2篇
  2000年   2篇
  1999年   1篇
  1998年   4篇
  1997年   3篇
  1995年   1篇
  1993年   2篇
  1992年   2篇
  1991年   1篇
  1990年   1篇
  1987年   1篇
  1986年   1篇
  1981年   1篇
  1977年   2篇
  1976年   2篇
  1975年   1篇
  1974年   1篇
排序方式: 共有301条查询结果,搜索用时 15 毫秒
301.
Historical settings structure how archivists and museum staff understand their work and how they apply relevant professional principles including the three core principles of provenance, context, and original identification. Their professional practices shape how the public understands or reads “original” artifacts and records. In helping to define what originals (artifacts and documents) are at a particular point in time, archivists and museum staff reinforce, support, or contradict theoretical paradigms, discourses, and social narratives on ethnicity, empire/internal colonialism, class, and gender among others. The article discusses two exemplary cases from the museum world that illustrate how the application of the three core principles is influenced by historical conditions and theoretical concepts and how these contingent applications influence what originals come to signify. In the first example, the theoretical concept of social evolution and the World Columbian Exposition in Chicago informed the founding, collecting, describing, and displaying of American Indian objects at the Field Museum of Natural History in 1894. Reflecting this, provenance, context, and original identifications were defined to mean different things for Euro-American versus American Indian objects and records, and Native Americans and others challenged these definitions and practices at the time. In the second example, the 1929–1933 making and displaying of the Hall of Races, a specific race anthropological understanding of race created unambiguous race anthropological provenance, context and original titles (identifications) for both the exhibit and individual race sculptures. By altering information concerning the three principles over the next 60 years, the Field Museum consciously destroyed the integrity of the originals and their meanings. The exhibit had become a political liability and the museum wanted to erase any trace of the race anthropological roots of the project and its sculptures. The article ends by asserting the contingency and importance of the three core principles for archivists and museum staff regardless of the format of the material involved and adds a few related observations for our contemporary hybrid, that means physical and digital, work world.  相似文献   
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号