University of Virginia Library

Enumerative Bibliography

The concordance principle has been successfully applied to the production of fully analyzed enumerative bibliographies in the fields of chemistry and physics.[18] A new publication called Chemical Titles indexes the key words of titles of articles in 550 journals so that each key word appears in context in a concordance of key words. The bibliography in each issue consists of two parts: a list of articles alphabetized according to author, with full titles and publication data, and a concordance of key title-words in context, with an easily interpreted identifying code that provides a cross-reference to the first part. On the

average, there are 5.3 concordance-entries per title. The indexing of key words is entirely automatic. As soon as the journals are received, the titles of articles are transcribed into machine-readable form by punch-card operators. When the file of punch-cards is complete, it is transferred to magnetic tape, which is then processed by an IBM 704. Omitting non-distinctive words such as OF, ON, AND, EFFECTS, ANALYSIS, CHEMISTRY by referring to a dictionary of excluded terms stored in its core memory, the computer edits the materials on the tape in 12 minutes; auxiliary equipment arranges and prints the bibliography in 18 to 20 hours; altogether no more than 21 days elapse between the time the journals are received and the time Chemical Titles is published.

Leading scholarly organizations should seriously consider the production of bibliographies by computer. Apart from the rapidity of its appearance in print and its comprehensiveness, a computer-produced bibliography in the field of English literature will satisfy the criterion of full analysis more completely than any of the presently available bibliographies. Each item will appear under various subject-headings, so that a scholar interested in a subject covered only in part in a given book, chapter, or article will find a reference to that source under the subject-heading of his interest. A title such as "Hamlet, Antonio's Revenge, and the Ur-Hamlet"[19] ought rightly to appear not only under "Shakespeare" but also under "Marston" and under the key word "Revenge," so that the article will be brought to the attention of anyone interested in the theme of revenge in Elizabethan literature. In the latest PMLA bibliography, the title seems to appear only under "Shakespeare."[20] I am not, of course, singling out the PMLA bibliographies for special criticism. Within the limits of their chosen form, they are admirably comprehensive, and they offer many cross-references; the instance just mentioned is doubtless atypical. My point, rather, is that all of the present bibliographies are subject to human error which can be much reduced by computer techniques and that none of them meet the criterion of full analysis, which computers can easily satisfy.

A certain amount of processing will probably be necessary before one can be certain that a reference will appear under all appropriate rubrics. If "Shakespeare" and "Marston" were inserted in square brackets in the title cited above, the article would be automatically indexed under those names. For purposes of subject-analysis, it would help if scholars curbed their metaphorical propensities and made their

titles as nearly descriptive as possible. But even such titles as The Unicorn and the Crocodile can be made to yield their literal contents, sometimes by reference to the descriptive subtitle (A Study of Allegorical Motifs in Medieval and Renaissance Painting and Literature), sometimes by a little effort on the part of the scholars who will review the titles before passing them on to punch-card operators.

May one take this opportunity to plead for a coordinated effort to satisfy still another criterion of enumerative bibliography, the criterion of efficiency or non-duplication? As printed materials in active fields of research increase exponentially, it becomes increasingly wasteful for independent groups of workers to prepare largely identical bibliographies. The devotion of scholars who spend long hours compiling indexes of current research is impressive, but it is disheartening to think of the extravagant repetition of routine tasks. Does it really serve the needs of our profession to produce half a dozen annual bibliographies of Shakespearean scholarship? Would not one bibliography — complete, fully analyzed, and swiftly produced by data-processing machines — suffice?

A bibliography becomes even more useful when it provides a brief summary of the contents of a work. Since the beginning of 1958, English Abstracts has been filling a serious gap in research resources. But this excellent publication may some day be confronted by grave problems. Its coverage has been growing constantly and gives every promise of continuing to do so. In January, 1958, the journal listed 32 abstractors on its cover; in December, 1960, it listed 122, an increase of almost 400 per cent. To be sure, the number of items abstracted did not increase by so large a factor. But it did increase very considerably. The first three issues of 1958 printed 426 abstracts on 79 pages; the last three issues of 1960 printed 678 abstracts on 144 pages — an increase, in less than three years, of about 35 per cent in the number of items and 80 per cent in the number of pages. In the not so distant future, English Abstracts, like its kindred services in scientific fields, may be forced to seek machine aid to avoid being engulfed by a tidal wave of publications. Should such a need arise, there is a good chance that data-processing machines will be able to meet it. H. P. Luhn, the IBM engineer whose research made possible the concordance-index of Chemical Titles, has already conducted successful experiments in automatic abstracting.[21] Before very many years pass, text-reading machines may

be scanning printed articles, encoding them on magnetic tape, and producing a rapid succession of automatic abstracts — in translation, where necessary.