The purpose of this dissertation is to examine how the first dictionary of science that appeared in English (Lexicon Technicum: or, an Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences by John Harris) and one of the most recent dictionaries of science published in English (McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms) participate in the scientific knowledge economy. In order to answer that question, the study analyses the dictionaries from two perspectives: (1) as participants in knowledge making and (2) as products of capitalism. The model of production-consumption cycles is used, which is the extended version of Latour's model of knowledge accumulation, to consider dictionaries of science from both perspectives. The methodology combines lexicography (the science of dictionary-making and dictionary criticism) and cultural studies (the approach that focuses on the questions of power and culture and, therefore, allows one to discuss "knowledge legitimation within cultural contexts" (Longo, Approach 112). I am using lexicographic archaeology, which is one of the standard lexicographical methods for the comparison of different versions of the same dictionary. At the same time, I am extending the traditional lexicographic analysis by applying a cultural studies approach and using the cultural analysis of the front matter of each edition of a dictionary and employing production-consumption model, which is the discussion of how each dictionary functions in the model of production-consumption cycles.
University of Minnesota Ph.D. dissertation. August 2012. Major:Rhetoric and Scientific and Technical Communication. Advisor: Dr. Bernadette Longo. 1 computer file (PDF); ix, 234 pages, appendices A-B.
Dictionaries of science as participants in the scientific knowledge economy..
Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy,
Content distributed via the University of Minnesota's Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor.