Analysis reveals retrieval issues in translations of foreign literature from 1896-1949, suggesting a bibliographic database improves access.
This study examines the archival materials of Chinese translations of foreign literature (CTFL) published in modern periodicals, highlighting the pervasive issue of ‘different names for the same entity’ that obstructs effective retrieval through existing Late Qing and Republican era periodical databases and catalogues. To address this challenge, this project adopts the methodologies from classical Chinese bibliography to catalogue, organize, and exegetically analyze CTFL and its associated phenomena featured in 226 periodicals spanning 1896 to 1949. By integrating modern technological tools such as the Python programming language and Elasticsearch, it successfully constructs the Bibliographic Database of Chinese Translations of Foreign Literature in Modern Periodicals (1896–1949). This database not only resolves longstanding retrieval difficulties but also digitally reconstructs the historical landscape of CTFL in modern periodicals, offering both a foundational infrastructure and an advanced toolset for future research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: