• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.45 no.3
• /
• pp.191-212
• /
• 2014

This research was conducted to analyze the actual condition of records related to Korea shown in the catalog of major 10 European university libraries. The results are as follows. To begin with, most libraries apply subject headings of the national library, or go together with LCSH, and organize records in MARC 21 format rather than UNIMARC. Second, Korean materials usually Romanize Korean words, but three libraries are only marked with the original Korean language and available Korean search. Third, Korea-related records in most university libraries are very poor except for some libraries and are generally 2 times less than Japan related records. There are even 6 times less in 2 libraries. Forth, on investigation of the subject distribution in sub criteria of Korea-related records, subject related to 'history', 'politics', and 'economy' is largely shown in the highest rate. Fifth, Among the Korea-related subject heading, the terms such as 'Taekwondo', 'Kimchi', 'Dokdo', 'Donghae', 'Duman-gang', 'Baekdu-san' have different meanings in different libraries. However, these terms agree to LCSH in most libraries except for some libraries.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.249-274
• /
• 1998

It is the analyses of replies showed n the questionnaire consisted of four kinds of matters to see level of knowledge among SELIS (SEoul Women's University Library and Information System) OPAC users of keyword/boolean search. The result of this analyses is : in SELIS search, users who prefer keyword search than any other, who satisfy work of retrieval by means of boolean operator, and who think it easier, show lusher level of knowledge than those who deny it in the questionnaire. Knowledges Presented in the survey are ; characteristics of keyword search, single or double keys, using boolean operator in keyword, knowledge of index, knowledge of stop list, uncontrolled term. keyword search technique, right truncation, correct application of boolean logic operator, and selecting major subject in keyword browsing. The above mentioned knowledges will work as important factors n keyword/boolean search, OPAC. For successful search it requires conceptional knowledge of information retrieval processing, or inquiry word transformation how to search required information, and semantic ability to get result questioned In the given system, when and how to apply the characteristics of the system, and scientific record for user's inquiry, or fundamental computer technology and syntax knowledge to make search word in detail. But so far now important knowledge considered as user's online index search, has been emphasized on knowledge of scientific record, and has been lag of semantic and conceptional knowledge. So, it is recommendable for online index user to train to concentrate semantic knowledge, syntax ability, and conceptional knowledge, rather than scientific technique too much.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.50 no.3
• /
• pp.309-327
• /
• 2016

Scholarly monographs have been a main vehicle for knowledge representation and transfer as well as an important research outcome. University presses have long been considered as the last bastion for scholarly monographs that have low commercial prospect. Until now there has not been a systematic data analysis regarding scholarly monograph production by university presses in Korea. In this paper, we collected bibliographic records of university presses' monograph publications between 1950 and 2015 using the National Library of Korea's online catalog system. A total of 21,015 records were used in the analysis. In particular, for monographs published between 2001 and 2015, we categorized them into scholarly monographs and non-scholarly monographs. University presses' publishing showed sharp increase during the 1990's but is in decline after its peak in 2005. University presses seem to have engaged in publishing more non-scholarly monographs than scholarly monographs by a ratio of 6:4. Large university presses in size seem to produce higher proportions of scholarly monographs than smaller presses. In terms of authoring types, single authorship accounts for the highest proportion and on the increase. However, edited books are losing ground as translated books seem to hold steady. Monographs in social sciences have been published more frequently than any other subject areas as there seem to be significant discrepancies among subject areas in terms of the scholarly monograph proportion.