The use of more than one term for “records management”
Objective: To identify the diversity of existing terms to designate records management and to show up a terminological standardization necessity, even if there is already an interference of a habitus in its use within archival field. Methodology: The research, in terms of its objective, is descripti...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Recursos: | Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
| Repositorio: | Informação & Informação |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/43602 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/informacao/article/view/43602 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | Terminology Records management Habitus Archivology Terminología Gestión de documentos Archivología Terminologia Gestão de documentos Arquivologia |
| Resumo: | Objective: To identify the diversity of existing terms to designate records management and to show up a terminological standardization necessity, even if there is already an interference of a habitus in its use within archival field. Methodology: The research, in terms of its objective, is descriptive. This is a bibliographic and documentary research directed to collection procedures and sources of information. Results: The research reveals that, over the years, several forms of the term “records management” management have been used and that the terminological diversity is a reality in several countries, even when there is an internal intention of terminological standardization. Conclusions: It is difficult to standardize the term “records management” despite the necessity. Furthermore, it cannot be said that the use of these terms is erroneous, but it is a continuous use within what refers to Archivology and that can be revised for a unique construction, providing simpler mechanisms for understanding those who seek information. |
|---|