Systems Perspective of Subject Representation Architecture: S.R. Ranganathan's Model Revisited

The Dorking Conference on classification and information retrieval, 1957, affirmed the usefulness of adopting a faceted model in designing subject classification systems. This is illustrated in comparing the dynamism and stability of a monolithic hierarchic subject classification and one based on facet structure (modular structure) model vis a vis the need to modify and introduce new concepts into the scheme to meet the developments in the universe of knowledge. Analysis of a discourse with a view to subject summarization, subject representation, classification system designing, and such related tasks result in a number of unit concepts. Ranganathan, in his early work on the theory on which his Colon Classification was based, postulated that at the near-seminal level the innumerable concepts perceived at the phenomenal level coalesce into five types of facets (modules) (five Fundamental Categories). Domain or context-specifying element (Basic Subject) is placed as the first component in the linear subject representation. In the 1960s, concepts representing qualifiers to any of the components were identified (Speciators). Principles for arranging the component concepts in linear representation of a subject were formulated. It was also pointed out that such analysis and re-synthesis for summarization and representation of a subject (e.g. subject headings, and various subject index formulations) were independent of the scheme of classification used for assigning codes or class numbers In any discourse on a subject, general or specific, the Personality entity exists, whether a classification scheme explicitly indicates it or not in the subject representation in a given context. All other types of concepts (identified in the context of a subject) are associated with the Personality entity and taken together increase the specificity of the semantic content of the subject representation. A method for determining the manifestation of a component concept in a given subject context is discussed. The manifestation of a concept may be different in different subject contexts. A graphical representation of a subject architecture is illustrated.