DR2 Open Peer Review

Do these records belong to a specific class of works (paper/book…) or to a peculiar timespan, or are they random records in the corpus?

Question about timespan making: are numbers relative to a span (let’s say the 80’s) to be referred only at the said span or are they comprehensive of previous works? In oder words: these numbers indicate works published during the timespan or works available during the timespan? In the first case, the stability of the percentage of “occasional” wittgensteinean authors could be interesting and would rise an interest towards percentage of other groups of authors (would it be useful to define classes other than the “occasional”one?).

I can’t understand the footnote on the tab “not including LW himself” referred to the number of authors with more than 3 publications  with “Wittgenstein” in the title in the 90’s.

The simpliest way to “weigh” data in fig. 8 (as in figs. 2a and 2b) could be to use percentage on authors active in the decades (and indexed by PI).

I don’t know how PI record indexing activity deals with translations, and it would be useful to have this matter made explicit. For example is it a possibility to find a situation in which a record from a publisher (let’s say a spanish one) is just a translation of an important work in english or german? Of course it would be an interesting datum that spanish publishers want to have a wittgensteinean and adjourned catalogue, but in a different sense from a scenario in which many academic books about Wittgenstein are written  in Spain (and originally in spanish).

On PI website dissertations are not mentioned as indexed, so this datum seems even more obscure. A possible explanation is that four dissertations with “Wittgenstein” in the title were published in one of the categories indexed (articles, books and e-books, dictionaries and encyclopedias, anthology and contributions to anthologies and book reviews), while keeping in their records that those were dissertations in the origin, but this hypothesis should be proved.

If I understood correctly, all the records of PI containing the tag “Wittgenstein” in the camp TITLE are collected here.

[there are other, more specialised “sources” devoted to LW (e.g. the Nordic Wittgenstein Review-NWR, official journal of the Nordic Wittgenstein Society-NWS; or Wittgenstein Studies-WS, a series established in 2010 by the International Ludwig Wittgenstein Society and “designed as an annual forum for Wittgenstein research.” At present only two volumes) and it is notewhorty they don’t figure in this list (indeed they figure very low in the ranking, NWR at 448 and WS at 150)]

It could be worthy to keep this fact in mind while doing distant reading on titles (in general): can we presume that papers meant to be published on journals specifically devoted to an author (or a topic) mentioned in the journal’s name are less likely to make explicit their being about that specific field? In other words: if someone writes a paper for the Nordic Wittgenstein Review we may assume that he will not need a title that makes explicit that the paper is about the Wittgenstein field. We could even think that papers contained in such journals and nevertheless using the name “Wittgenstein” in the title will be somehow peculiar if compared to others, in referring maybe to the man or to his ideas in contrast or continuity with other thinkers.

Per il futuro potresti essere interessati a usare philpapers come survey tool, è già stato fatto per capire quali siano le credenze dei filosofi…https://philpapers.org/surveys/index.html

An indicator for this might the bibliographical references in the paper instead of the title…