In an article for LTO to which I am via Terms of became interested in Prof. Dr. Roland Schimmel is the so-called "phantom directories" apart. He calls it the citing as examples of conditions which did not appear despite notice, but published in electronic catalogs.
The cause
The cause for such Errors, especially in legal papers, he has identified it correctly, the late Jazz up or creating the bibliography. It is a misconception that is common in the housework time does not support the current approach is , as it is (library internal) hopelessly out of print or hidden. Of necessity, therefore, sometimes you work with a Altauflage - of course with the firm intention to check the reference on the occasion in the current edition. One to two days before delivery then you stand with red gemarkerten footnotes and bibliography as a half-finished and everything starts to look up eagerly. Here one finds that some plants are still unlocated. Sometimes would But it awkward to remove a source entirely. Either we find no alternative source, it is a primary source or the bibliography is already very thin.
rational decision of the students
You put now in a quandary. The absence of the source could interpret the correction assistant at worst negative. A false quote, but of course as well. Experience shows that individual footnotes but rarely looked in detail. As long as you avoid anomalies, not as the same author cites two conflicting views and has a standard form of citation, the risk of a blind quote in this setting is low. Since one has been always drummed, to cite a Altauflagen, you go again at the end all sources by using an internet search and review the rest. This can lead to the described errors. I would dare to say, however, that the citing of a Altauflage rather striking and is considered similar to negative. If time is short - what it is about to release almost always - I think such blind quotes therefore quite reasonable. Scientifically this is not necessarily the pack as the cud means been sucked standard raises problems but not necessarily interested in a strictly scientific treatment. Such is the correction Assistant just in rare cases assessed, usually on the contrary, are penalized, since the deviations are often larger of the model solution.
Uni Legend? Phantom magic wanted!
addition to the various errors and inaccuracies that undermine not nut students but make them dangerous and in many commentaries and textbooks of each blind quote (up to 10% failure rate in my experience, in judgments almost 0%), there should also be conscious failure quotes . After rumors that are spread by professors and over again, it should have happened occasionally, that employees or student assistants often delegated the task of footnotes in a fit of frustration or Schalk, Incorrect citations to sources that contradict the statement or at least being in a completely new context, or have invested in fictional works with evocative titles. I would like to know if this is just a legend, or whether anyone actually no such cases have already seen.
As a student of this possible phenomenon would be even more variety, the set of footnotes to inappropriate place to mention about the title, which refers to a textbook site which worked on the legal matter referred to as difficult to understand or purely academic.
any comments or emails with your experiences and discoveries, I would happy.
0 comments:
Post a Comment