for the construction of aboriginal knowledge organization structures have also been defined according to existing related studies. It is hoped that this study will be able to serve as reference for the future research of scholars and other aborigine related institutions.
Keywords: Taiwan’s aborigines; Knowledge organization structures;
Aborigi-nal knowledge; Domain aAborigi-nalysis; Methodology
SUMMARY
The purpose of this study is to propose a series of methods and procedures for the construction of “Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure”.
This study has several focuses. First, through analyzing the characteristics and presentation of various “knowledge organization structure” types, this study iden-tifies the suitable types to present the aboriginal domain knowledge. Second, in studying the method of “domain analysis”, this research integrates the overall pro-cess of Taiwan aboriginal domain knowledge analysis. Third, a literature review on the existing related studies provides a basis to conclude the essential character-istics in constructing aboriginal knowledge organization.
http://joemls.tku.edu.tw The construction of a knowledge organization system is a practical way to present relevant knowledge about Taiwan aborigines. Based on the characteristics of various knowledge organization structure systems, and in light of the limita-tions and insufficiency in the current presentation of the aboriginal knowledge organization structure as well as the presentational feature of the knowledge pre-sentation structure in thematic analysis vocabulary tools, this study contends that
“classification structure” is a suitable type of knowledge organization systems to present Taiwan aboriginal domain knowledge. “Classification structure” not only provides clarity in category hierarchy and other auxiliary information links (such as synonyms and related links), but also makes the scope of the domain easily observable. The users, through browsing the classification structure, can imme-diately understand the hierarchy between domain concept vocabularies and their positions in the entire knowledge organization structure. Moreover, as the Inter-net is becoming increasingly popular today, the classification structure may break the “single category, single position” limitation in the traditional categorization method by allowing for the possibility of “multiple classifications” and presenting simultaneously a categorization anchored by various knowledge aspects, perspec-tives, and angles. The function of multiple classifications is especially important to aboriginal knowledge for its diverse classification bases.
In this study, the first draft of the overall process of Taiwan aboriginal do-main knowledge analysis is do-mainly based upon the dodo-main analysis method and related empirical studies currently adopted by the library and information science academia. Existing domain analysis methods are plenty—there are as many as 11 methods proposed by Hjørland alone in 2002. Basing upon the empirical studies of various domain analyses, the study categorizes the overall process of Taiwan aboriginal domain knowledge analysis into three stages. The first stage aims at confirming the scope of Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure. Be-sides making a knowledge inventory for Taiwan aboriginal domain specifically, the researcher compiled a list of resources and experts relevant to this topic. The second stage comprises the actual construction of Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure. This stage mainly focuses on the collection and categori-zation of concepts. In this stage, proper knowledge system types are selected and concrete steps are planned to present Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure. The third stage examines and evaluates Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure constructed in the second stage. In addition to question-naire surveys on the experts in the field of Taiwan aborigines, this stage also con-ducts interviews to further confirm their feedbacks and opinions.
In addition, to ensure that the construction method for Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure proposed in this study is actually applicable, in
http://joemls.tku.edu.tw the construction process, the researcher takes into considerations both the speci-ficity of aboriginal domain knowledge and the perspectives and principles of ex-perts (especially the aborigines themselves). Therefore, this study develops a list of basic perspectives, strategies and principles that the aborigines identified with regarding the construction of knowledge organization structure. And according to the list, this study modifies the first draft of the overall process of Taiwan aborigi-nal domain knowledge aaborigi-nalysis, the example principles being as follows: viewing aborigines as the subject of knowledge, constructing a de-colonialized structure of traditional knowledge, communicating through the medium of aboriginal languages and context of situations, establishing a multi-perspective knowledge organization structure, adopting studies conducted by aborigines, and making the benefits of the research community, aboriginal community, and aboriginal research community the priority concern.
This study proposes “construction process and concrete procedures for Tai-wan aboriginal knowledge organization structure”. The following procedures can be used as a reference for further studies:
1. Procedure 1: to construct an inventory for Taiwan aborigines’ knowledge;
2. Procedure 2: to draft word-choice principles for constructing Taiwan ab-original knowledge classification structure;
3. Procedure 3: to collect related vocabularies for Taiwan aboriginal knowl-edge classification structure;
4. Procedure 4: to employ facet analysis to construct Taiwan aboriginal knowledge classification structure;
5. Procedure 5: to confirm the hierarchy within the same domain in Taiwan aboriginal knowledge classification structure.
Lastly, general suggestions for further studies are summarized as follows:
1. It is suggested that future studies adopt one single aspect in the Taiwan ab-original traditional domain knowledge as the objective for test, analyze the sophisti-cation in the chosen aspect, and simulate the construction of knowledge organization structure in this study. Such empirical studies may further confirm the applicability of the “method of constructing Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure”
which is proposed in this study.
2. If a complete Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure is pur-sued in the future, it is suggested that the upper hierarchy be first concerned about.
One approach is to draft a knowledge organization upper hierarchy in collabora-tion with aboriginal scholars and experts to confirm the core of the structure, and to allocate the different thematic aspects of aboriginal knowledge to different special-ists. Such allocation of research labor can result in higher efficiency.
New findings and more constructive suggestions may be derived if in the
http://joemls.tku.edu.tw future, the study’s systematic method and procedures of structure construction are implemented directly by scholars and experts.
ROMANIZED & TRANSLATED REFERENCES FOR ORIGINAL TEXT
行政院原住民族委員會[Council of Indigenous Peoples Executive Yuan]（2006）。台灣原住 民族資訊資源網[Taiwan’s indigenous peoples portal]。上網日期：2008年11月25日 [Retrieved November 25, 2008]，檢自[from]：http://www.tipp.org.tw/formosan/index.
jspx
吳小穗[Wu, Xiao-Sui] （1999）。關鍵詞的擇詞原則與標引方法研究[Guanjianci de zeci yu-anze yu biaoyin fangfa yanjiu]。現代情報[Modern Information]，6，26-27。
李瑛主持[Lee, Ying]（2002）。原住民知識體系之建構：以卑南族為例的探討[Yuanzhumin zhishi tixi zhi jiangou：Yi beinanzu weili de tantao]（國科會專題研究計畫成果報告 [NSC project report]，NSC 89-2413-H-003-096）。台北市：國立台灣師範大學社會教 育學系[Taipei：Department of Adult and Continuing Education, National Taiwan Nor-mal University]。
汪明輝[Wang, Ming-Hui]（2007）。原住民族知識論的建構及其意涵[Yuanzhumin zhishilun de jiangou ji qi yihan]。在台灣大學圖書館專題演講[Speech in National Taiwan Uni-versity Library]，台北市[Taipei]。
阮明淑[Yuan, Ming-Shu]（2007）。知識產業與知識管理：公部門農產業之研究[Knowledge industry and knowledge management: Gongbumen nongchanye zhi yanju]。台北市：文 華[Taipei: Mandarin]。
林國強 、陳麥麟屏[Lin, Guo-Qiang, Chen, Mai-Lin-Bing]（2001）。美國國會圖書館與主題編 目[American library of congress and subject cataloging]。台北市：三民[Taipei: SanMin]。
孫大川主編[Sun, Ta-Chuan ed.]（2006）。台灣原住民族歷史語言文化大辭典網路版[Taiwan yuanzhuminzu lishi yuyan wenhua dacidian wangluban]。上網日期：2008年10月28日 [Retrieved October 28, 2008 ]，檢自[from]：http://134.208.27.115/index.asp
浦忠成[Pasuya Poiconu]（2005，5月）[May, 2005]。從部落出發：原住民族發展的根本 做法[Cong buluo chufa: Yuanzhuminzu fazhan de genbenzuofa]。在[In]南華大學非營 利事業管理研究所 、中華非營利組織管理學會主辦[Department of Nonprofit Orga-nization Management of Nanhua University, Chinese Association Nonprofit OrgaOrga-nizations Management]，第六屆非營利組織管理研討會：非營利組織與社區總體營造[Diliujie feiyinglizuzhi guanli yantaohui: Feiyinlizuzhi yu shequ zongtuyingzao]，嘉義縣[Chiayi]。
國立中央圖書館編目組編訂[National Central Library Cataloguing Section Eds.]（1995）。中 文圖書標題表（修訂版）[Chinese subject headings （Revised version）]。台北市：國立 中央圖書館[Taipei: National Central Library]。
國家圖書館編目組[National Central Library Cataloguing Section]（2006）。中文主題詞表 [Chinese subject headings]。上網日期：2008年10月28日[Retrieved October, 28]，檢 自[from]：http://catweb.ncl.edu.tw/sect-2.htm
國家圖書館編目組[National Central Library Cataloguing Section]（2007）。中文圖書分類法 [New classification scheme for Chinese libraries tables]（2007年版）[2007 ban]。台北市：
國家圖書館[Taipei: National Central Library]。
張培倫主持[Chang, Pei-Lun]（2008）。建構台灣原住民族知識體系之規劃研究企劃書
http://joemls.tku.edu.tw [Jianguo Taiwan Yuanzhuminzu zhishitixi zhi guihua yanjiu qihuashu] （行政院原住民族 委員會委託研究計畫）[Council of Indigenous Peoples Executive Yuan weituo yanjiuji-hua]。宜蘭縣：佛光大學[Yilan: Foguang University]。
莊芳榮 、陳昭珍 、葉建華[Juang, Fang-Rung, Chen, Chao-Chen, Yeh, Jian-Hua]（2005）。知 識分類架構研究計畫[Zhishi fenlei jiagou yanjiujihua]（行政院委託研究計畫）[Execu-tive Yuan weituo yanjiujihua]。台北市[Taipei]。
陳奕璇 、阮明淑[Chen, Yi-Hsuan, Yuan, Ming-Shu]（2006）。領域分析之方法學研究[The methodological study of domain analysis]。在[In]美國資訊科學與技術學會台北分 會主辦[American Society for Information Science and Technology Taipei Chapter]，
Workshop of Recent Advances in Library and Information Science, Autumn2006，台北市 [Taipei]。
陳國強主編[Chen, Guo-Qiang Ed.]（2002）。文化人類學辭典[Dictionary of cultural anthro-pology]。台北市：恩楷[Taipei: Enkai]。
農業科學資料服務中心[Agricultural Science Information Center]（1994）。索引典理論與實 務[Suoyindian lilun yu shiwu]。台北市：美國資訊科學學會台北分會[Taipei: Ameri-can Society for Information Science and Technology Taipei Chapter]。
Barnhardt, R., & Kawagley, A. O. (2005). Indigenous knowledge systems and Alaska native ways of knowing. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36(1), 8-23.
Beghtol, C. (1995). “Facets” as interdisciplinary undiscovered public knowledge: S. R. Ranga-nathan in India and L. Guttman in Israel. Journal of Documentation, 51, 194-224.
Centre for Indigenous Knowledge Systems (CEFIKS). (n.d.). Akan (fantse): English dictionary project. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from http://www.cfiks.org/fantse_dictionary.htm Centre for Indigenous Knowledge Systems (CEFIKS). (n.d.). Centre for indigenous knowledge
systems, CEFIKS. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from http://www.cfiks.org/
Emeagwali, G. T. (1997, December 20). African indigenous science and knowledge systems.
Retrieved November 19, 2008, from http://www.africahistory.net/
Foley, D. (2003). Indigenous epistemology and indigenous standpoint theory. Social Alterna-tives, 22(1), 44-52.
Grenier, L. (1998). Working with Indigenous Knowledge. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-9310-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
Haykin, D. J. (1951). Subject headings: A practical guide. Washington, DC: Government Print-ing Office.
Hjørland, B. (2002). Domain analysis in information science: Eleven approaches – traditional as well as innovative. Journal of Documentation, 58(4), 422-462.
Hodge, G. (2000). System of knowledge organization for digital libraries: Beyond traditional authority files. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub91/
contents.html
Jagerman, E. J. (2006). Creating, maintaining and applying quality taxonomies. Zoetermeer: E. J. Jagerman.
Kang, K. C., Cohen, S. G., Hess, J. A., Novak, W. E., & Spencer Peterson, A. S. (1990). Fea-tured- Oriented Domain Analysis (FODA) feasibility study (CMU/SEI-90-TR-21 ESD-90-TR-222). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
Library of Congress. (2008, August 22). Library of congress classification outline. Retrieved
http://joemls.tku.edu.tw October 28, 2008, from http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/
Library of Congress. (2009, July 7). Subject headings. Retrieved July 9, 2009, from http://www.
loc.gov/aba/cataloging/subject/
Nielsen, M. L. (2000). Domain analysis, an important part of thesaurus construction. Methodol-ogies and approaches. In D. Soergel, P. Srinivasan, & B. Kwasnik, (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th ASIS&T SIG/CR classification research workshop. Maryland: American Society for Information Science and Technology.
Rigney, L. I. (1999). The first perspective: Culturally safe research practices on or with indig-enous peoples. In 1999 Chacmool Conference Proceedings. University of Calgary, Al-berta, Canada.
Rigney, L. I. (2000). A first perspective of Indigenous Australian participation in science: Fram-ing indigenous research towards indigenous Australian intellectual sovereignty. In Second National Indigenous Researchers Forum, Symposium held at the Aboriginal Research Institute University of South Australia, Adelaide.
Semali, M (1999). What is indigenous knowledge? Voices from the academy. New York: Falmer Press.
Shahjahan, R. A. (2005). Mapping the field of anti-colonial discourse to understand issues of in-digenous knowledges: Decolonizing praxis. McGill Journal of Education, 40(2), 213-240.
Shiva, V. (1995). Monocultures of the mind. London: Zed Books.
Simpson, L. R. (2004). Anticolonial strategies for the recovery and maintenance of indigenous knowledge. American Indian Quarterly, 28(3/4), 373-384.
Smith, L. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous people. London: Zed Books.
Thiongo, N. W. (1986). Decolonising the mind: The politics of language in African literature.
London: James Currey.
Tudhope, D., Koch, T., & Heery, R. (2006). Terminology services and technologies JISC state of the art review. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/terminology/
JISC-review2006.html
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2003). Local and indigenous knowledge system, LINKS. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from http://portal.unesco.
org/science/en/ev.php-URL_ID=1945&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html Vickery, B. C. (1960). Faceted classification. A guide to the construction and use of special
schemes. London: ASLIB.
Zins, C., & Guttmann, D. (2000). Structuring web bibliographic resources: An exemplary sub-ject classification scheme. Knowledge Organization, 27(3), 143-159.
Zins, C., & Guttmann, D. (2003). Domain analysis of social work: An exemplary of an inte-grated methodological approach. Knowledge Organization, 30(3/4), 196-212.
Zins, C. (2007a). Conceptions of information science. Journal of the American Society for In-formation Science and Technology, 58(3), 335-350.
Zins, C. (2007b). Conceptual approaches for defining data, information, and knowledge. Jour-nal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(4), 479-493.
Zins, C. (2007c). Knowledge map of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(4), 526-535.
Zins, C. (2007d). Classification schemes of information science: Twenty-eight scholars map the field.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(5), 645-672.