原文

Specialization can be seen as a response to the problem of an increasing accumulation of scientific knowledge. By splitting up the subject matter into smaller units, one man could continue to handle the information and use it as the basis for further research. But specialization was only one of a series of related developments in science affecting the process of communication. Another was the growing professionalization of scientific activity.

No clear-cut distinction can be drawn between professionals and amateursin science: exception can be found to any rule. Nevertheless, the word “amateur” does carry a connotation that the person concerned is not fully integrated into the scientific community and, in particular, may not fully share its values. The growth of specialization in the nineteenth century, with its consequent requirement of a longer, more complex training, implied greater problems for amateur participationin science. The trend was naturally most obvious in those areas of science based especially on a mathematical or laboratory training, and can be illustratedin terms of the development of geology in the United Kingdom.

A comparison of British geological publications over the last century and a half reveals not simply an increasing emphasis on the primacy of research, but also a changing definition of what constitutes an acceptable research paper. Thus, in the nineteenth century, local geological studies represented worthwhile research in their own right; but, in the twentieth century, local studies have increasingly become acceptable to professionals only if they incorporate, and reflect on, the wider geological picture. Amateurs, on the other hand, have continued to pursue local studies in the old way. The overall result has been to make entrance to professional geological journals harder for amateurs, a result that has been reinforced by the widespread introduction of refereeing, first by national journals in the nineteenth century and then by several local geological journals in the twentieth century. As a logical consequence of this development, separate journals have now appeared aimed mainly towards either professional or amateur readership. A rather similar process of differentiation has led to professional geologists coming together nationally within one or two specific societies, whereas the amateurs have tended either to remain in local societies or to come together nationally in a different way.

Although the process of professionalization and specialization was already well under way in British geology during the nineteenth century, its full consequences were thus delayed until the twentieth century. In science generally, however, the nineteenth century must be reckoned as the crucial period for this change in the structure of science.

译文

专业化是随着科学知识不断增长和积累形成的。把学科内容细分成更小的单位，科学家就能不断地掌握信息，并以此为基础进行进一步研究。但是，专业化只是一系列与影响交流过程相关的科学发展结果之一。另一个结果便是科研活动的职业化。

在科学上专业人员与业余科研人员之间并没有明确的分界线：任何规则总存在例外。然而，“业余”这个词的确有这样一个含义，即相关人员接受长期而复杂的专业训练，这给从事科研的业余人员带来了更大的问题。这种趋势在那些特别依赖数学或实验室的学科领域中，自然十分明显。我们可以用英国的地质学发展过程的例子来认识这种趋势。

比较过去一个半世纪英国地质学刊物可以看出，地质学界不仅越来越强调科研的至高无上，而且对什么是可接受的科研论文的界定也不断地变化。因此，19世纪，局部地质学研究本身就是有价值的科学研究；但到了20世纪，只有当这种局部研究涉及并思考了更大范围的地质学问题时，这种局部性的地质学研究才能为专业人员所接受。另一方面，业余科研人员继续以旧有方式从事局部性研究，其总体结果是，业余人员的论文更难进入专业地质学学刊，而学刊审计制度的广泛引入使论文发表难度进一步加大。这一审计制度是在19世纪由全国学刊首先采用的，到了20世纪又被几家地方地质学刊采用。这导致一个自然的结果是，不同的学刊面向不同的主体读者群，要么是专业人员，要么是业余人员。地质科研人员中也发生了相似的分化现象，这使得全国专业地质人员逐渐形成了一两个特定的科研协会，而业余科研人员往往要么呆在地方协会中，要么组成一个不同的全国性协会。

虽然职业化、专业化在19世纪的英国地质界进行得相当深入，然而其全部效应直至20世纪才体现出来。但是，就总体的科学研究而言，19世纪应被视为科研结构发生变化的关键时期。

看完了阅读，一起来记单词吧！>>