How Digital Are the Digital Humanities? An Analysis of Two Scholarly Blogging Platforms

Statut

“In this paper we compare two academic networking platforms, HASTAC and Hypotheses, to show the distinct ways in which they serve specific communities in the Digital Humanities (DH) in different national and disciplinary contexts. After providing background information on both platforms, we apply co-word analysis and topic modeling to show thematic similarities and differences between the two sites, focusing particularly on how they frame DH as a new paradigm in humanities research. We encounter a much higher ratio of posts using humanities-related terms compared to their digital counterparts, suggesting a one-way dependency of digital humanities-related terms on the corresponding unprefixed labels. The results also show that the terms digital archive, digital literacy, and digital pedagogy are relatively independent from the respective unprefixed terms, and that digital publishing, digital libraries, and digital media show considerable cross-pollination between the specialization and the general noun. The topic modeling reproduces these findings and reveals further differences between the two platforms. Our findings also indicate local differences in how the emerging field of DH is conceptualized and show dynamic topical shifts inside these respective contexts.”

URL : https://microblogging.infodocs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/journal.pone.0115035.pdf

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115035

Digital_Humanities

Statut

“Digital_Humanities is a compact, game-changing report on the state of contemporary knowledge production. Answering the question, “What is digital humanities?,” it provides an in-depth examination of an emerging field. This collaboratively authored and visually compelling volume explores methodologies and techniques unfamiliar to traditional modes of humanistic inquiry–including geospatial analysis, data mining, corpus linguistics, visualization, and simulation–to show their relevance for contemporary culture.

Included are chapters on the basics, on emerging methods and genres, and on the social life of the digital humanities, along with “case studies,” “provocations,” and “advisories.” These persuasively crafted interventions offer a descriptive toolkit for anyone involved in the design, production, oversight, and review of digital projects. The authors argue that the digital humanities offers a revitalization of the liberal arts tradition in the electronically inflected, design-driven, multimedia language of the twenty-first century.Written by five leading practitioner-theorists whose varied backgrounds embody the intellectual and creative diversity of the field, Digital_Humanities is a vision statement for the future, an invitation to engage, and a critical tool for understanding the shape of new scholarship.”

URL : http://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/9780262018470_Open_Access_Edition.pdf

Research Infrastructures in the Digital Humanities

This peer reviewed document reflects on the centrality of Research Infrastructures (RIs) to the Humanities. It argues that without RIs such as archives, libraries, academies, museums and galleries (and the sources that they identify, order, preserve and make accessible) significant strands of Humanities research would not be possible. After proposing a wide-ranging definition of digital RIs – with the aim of reflecting on the meaning of infrastructure in the Humanities rather than on those parts common to other domains of science – it attempts to relate physical RIs to digital ones. By drawing on a number of case studies – chosen to showcase the variety of research around existing or emerging infrastructures – it demonstrates that digital RIs offer Humanities scholars new and productive ways to explore old questions and develop new ones.

URL : http://www.esf.org/media-centre/ext-single-news/article/humanities-researchers-and-digital-technologies-building-infrastructures-for-a-new-age-776.html

“Rome Wasn’t Digitized in a Day”: Building a Cyberinfrastructure for Digital Classics

Cogent and insightful, Rome Wasn’t Digitized in a Day: Building a Cyberinfrastructure for Digital Classicists rewards the reader with a many-faceted exploration of classical studies: the history of this complex and multidimensional field, its development of computer-based resources and tools over the last several decades, its current opportunities and needs in a digital era, and prospects for its future evolution as envisioned by digital classicists. Alison Babeu reminds us early in her report of the astonishing reach of classical studies, a field that includes the disciplines of history, literature, linguistics, art, anthropology, science, and mythology, among others, bounded by the Mycenean culture at its most distant past and continuing to the seventh century C.E. Not surprisingly, within this historical compass the sources for classicists are equally complex: stone fragments, papyri, pottery shards, the plastic arts, coins, and some of the most breathtaking physical structures the world has known.

In the course of this report, the substantial gains in the use of digital technologies in service to classical studies become obvious. Over the past 40 years, remarkable resources have been built, including largescale text databases in a variety of languages; digital repositories for archeological data, as well as for coins and cuneiform tablets; and datasets of texts for paleography and epigraphical studies. Applications that assist the scholar in morphological analysis, citation linking, text mining, and treebank construction, among others, are impressive. The challenges are also significant: there persist problems with the integrity of OCR scans; the interoperability of multimedia data that contain texts, images, and other forms of cultural expression; and the daunting magnitude of so many languages in so many different scripts.

The intellectual return on this investment in technology as a service to classical studies is equally startling and complex. One of the more salient developments has been the reconceptualization of the text. As recently as a generation ago, the “text” in classics was most often defined as a definitive edition, a printed artifact that was by nature static, usually edited by a single scholar, and representing a compilation and collation of several extant variations. Today, through the power and fluidity of digital tools, a text can mean something very different: there may be no canonical artifact, but instead a dataset of its many variations, with none accorded primacy. A work of ancient literature is now more often deeply contextualized, its transmission over time more nuanced, and its continuity among the various instantiations more accurately articulated. The performative nature of some of the great works—the epics of Homer are a prime example—can be captured more rigorously by digital technology, which can layer the centuries of manuscript fragments to produce a sharper understanding of what was emphasized in the epics over time and what passages or stories appear less important from one era to another, affording new insight into the cultural appropriation of these fundamental expressions of the human condition.

Achieving these new perspectives has required a cultural change in the classics. Scholarship in the digital environment is more collaborative, and can include students as integral contributors to the research effort. The connections, continuities, and cultural dialogue to which classical works were subject are reflected by new teams of scholars, working across traditional disciplines (which can often include computer science) to develop new methodological approaches and intellectual strategies in pursuit of knowledge about the ancient world. In this regard, the digital classics encompass new alignments of traditional hierarchies, academic boundaries, and technologies.

The Council on Library and Information Resources is pleased to publish this far-reaching study. The issues and perspectives to which it gives voice pertain significantly to the humanities at large. Its appearance is especially relevant as plans to build very large digital libraries in Europe and the United States flourish. Indeed, a transdisciplinary approach will be essential in constructing a digital environment with the scale and sophistication necessary to support advanced research, teaching, and lifelong learning. As this study suggests, we must continue to engage humanists, engineers, scientists, and all manner of pedagogical expertise in pursuit of a new, transformative educational ecology.

URL : http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub150/pub150.pdf

Digitize Me, Visualize Me, Search Me : Open Science and its Discontents

[…] Digitize Me, Visualize Me, Search Me takes as its starting point the so-called ‘computational turn’ to data-intensive scholarship in the humanities.

The phrase ‘the computational turn’ has been adopted to refer to the process whereby techniques and methodologies drawn from (in this case) computer science and related fields – including science visualization, interactive information visualization, image processing, network analysis, statistical data analysis, and the management, manipulation and mining of data – are being used to produce new ways of approaching and understanding texts in the humanities; what is sometimes thought of as ‘the digital humanities’.

The concern in the main has been with either digitizing ‘born analog’ humanities texts and artifacts (e.g. making annotated editions of the art and writing of William Blake available to scholars and researchers online), or gathering together ‘born digital’ humanities texts and artifacts (videos, websites, games, photography, sound recordings, 3D data), and then taking complex and often extremely large-scale data analysis techniques from computing science and related fields and applying them to these humanities texts and artifacts – to this ‘big data’, as it has been called.

Witness Lev Manovich and the Software Studies Initiative’s use of ‘digital image analysis and new visualization techniques’ to study ‘20,000 pages of Science and Popular Science magazines… published between 1872-1922, 780 paintings by van Gogh, 4535 covers of Time magazine (1923-2009) and one million manga pages’ (Manovich, 2011), and Dan Cohen and Fred Gibb’s text mining of ‘the 1,681,161 books that were published in English in the UK in the long nineteenth century’ (Cohen, 2010).

What Digitize Me, Visualize Me, Search Me endeavours to show is that such data-focused transformations in research can be seen as part of a major alteration in the status and nature of knowledge. It is an alteration that, according to the philosopher Jean-François Lyotard, has been taking place since at least the 1950s.

It involves nothing less than a shift away from a concern with questions of what is right and just, and toward a concern with legitimating power by optimizing the social system’s performance in instrumental, functional terms. This shift has significant consequences for our idea of knowledge.

[..] In particular, Digitize Me, Visualize Me, Search Me suggests that the turn in the humanities toward datadriven scholarship, science visualization, statistical data analysis, etc. can be placed alongside all those discourses that are being put forward at the moment – in both the academy and society – in the name of greater openness, transparency, efficiency and accountability.

URL : http://livingbooksaboutlife.org/pdfs/bookarchive/DigitizeMe.pdf