Foundations of Digital Humanities | 数字人文基础

Foundations of Digital Humanities

Introduction: The Computational Turn in Humanistic Inquiry

The emergence of digital humanities represents one of the most significant epistemological transformations in the history of humanistic scholarship. What began as specialized computational work undertaken by individual humanists in the mid-twentieth century has evolved into a global academic movement that challenges fundamental assumptions about the nature of humanistic inquiry itself. This transformation is not merely methodological—adding new tools to an established repertoire—but rather ontological, reshaping what counts as evidence, what constitutes an argument, and what kinds of knowledge humanists can legitimately produce. The computational turn in humanistic inquiry demands that we reconsider the very foundations upon which the humanities have been built.

数字人文的出现代表了人文研究历史上最重大的认识论转型之一。从二十世纪中叶个别的人文主义者从事的专业计算工作，演变至今已成为一个全球性的学术运动，挑战着人文研究基本假设。这一转变不仅仅是方法论层面的——在既定方法库中添加新工具——而是本体论层面的，重塑了什么是证据、什么构成论证、以及人文主义者可以合理产生何种类型的知识。人文研究中的计算转向要求我们重新审视人文学科建立的根本基础。

To understand digital humanities fully, one must appreciate both its continuity with traditional humanistic scholarship and its revolutionary potential. Digital humanities is neither simply the application of computing tools to humanistic questions nor a complete break from established humanistic traditions. Rather, it exists in productive tension between these poles, drawing intellectual resources from both while forging new paths that neither parent discipline could have anticipated alone. This chapter examines this productive tension in detail, tracing the historical evolution that gave rise to digital humanities, exploring the theoretical debates that continue to shape its identity, and articulating the distinctive epistemological contributions that computational methods offer to humanistic inquiry.

要全面理解数字人文，必须认识到它与传统人文学术研究的连续性及其革命性潜力。数字人文既不仅仅是将计算工具应用于人文问题，也不是与传统人文传统的彻底决裂。恰恰相反，它存在于这些极点之间的张力之中，从两者中汲取知识资源，同时开辟出无论是计算学科还是传统人文学科都无法独自预见的新道路。本章详细探讨这种建设性张力，追溯导致数字人文产生的历史演变，剖析继续塑造其身份认同的理论争论，并阐述计算方法为人文研究所提供的独特认识论贡献。

Defining the Field: Terminology, Scope, and Identity

From Humanities Computing to Digital Humanities

The terminology surrounding this field reveals much about its intellectual history and current tensions. The term "humanities computing" (*Humanities Computing*) emerged in the 1960s and 1970s to describe computational work applied to humanistic questions. This earlier designation emphasized computing as a tool employed by humanists—it was humanistic work that happened to use computers, not a fundamentally new mode of inquiry. Scholars such as Father Roberto Busa, whose Index Thomisticus project represented one of the earliest large-scale applications of computing to humanistic scholarship, understood themselves primarily as humanists who had found computational methods useful for their research questions.

围绕这一领域的术语揭示了其知识历史和当前张力。“人文学科计算”（Humanities Computing）一词出现于二十世纪六七十年代，用以描述应用于人文问题的计算工作。这一较早的称谓强调计算是人文主义者使用的工具——这是碰巧使用计算机的人文研究，而非一种全新的探究模式。以罗伯托·布萨神父为代表的一批学者，其托马斯索引项目是计算机应用于人文研究的早期大规模尝试之一，他们主要将自己理解为发现了计算方法对其研究问题有用的人文主义者。

The shift to "digital humanities" (*Digital Humanities*) as the preferred designation began in the early 2000s and accelerated after 2004 with the founding of the Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations (ADHO) and the journal *Digital Humanities Quarterly*. This terminological change was not merely cosmetic; it signaled a fundamental reconceptualization of the field's identity. "Digital humanities" suggested that the relationship between the digital and the humanistic was no longer simply instrumental—one applying tools to problems—but rather constitutive, with the digital transforming the very nature of humanistic inquiry.

向“数字人文”（Digital Humanities）这一首选称谓的转变始于2000年代初期，并在2004年数字人文组织联盟（ADHO）成立和《数字人文季刊》创刊后加速发展。这种术语变化不仅仅是表面上的；它标志着该领域身份的根本性重新概念化。“数字人文”表明，数字化与人文之间的关系不再是简单的工具性关系——一方将工具应用于问题——而是构成性的，数字化改变了人文探究的本质。

However, this terminological evolution remains contested. Scholars such as Steven Jones argue that "digital humanities" risks fetishizing the digital at the expense of the humanistic, suggesting that the field has become more interested in technology than in humanistic questions. Others contend that "humanities computing" better captures the actual practice of most humanists who employ computational methods. The ongoing debate over terminology reflects deeper tensions within the field regarding its disciplinary identity, methodological priorities, and future direction.

然而，这种术语演变仍存在争议。史蒂文·琼斯等学者认为，“数字人文”存在将数字化物化而牺牲人文化的风险，暗示该领域对技术的兴趣已超过对人文学科问题的关注。其他人则认为“人文学科计算”更好地捕捉了大多数使用计算方法的人文主义者的实际实践。关于术语的持续争论反映了该领域更深层的张力：学科身份、方法论优先事项和未来方向。

The Scope of Digital Humanities

Digital humanities encompasses an extraordinarily diverse range of activities, projects, and scholarly approaches. This diversity makes simple definition challenging but also represents one of the field's greatest strengths. At its broadest, digital humanities includes any humanistic inquiry that engages with digital methods, tools, materials, or perspectives. This inclusive definition captures projects as varied as:

数字人文包含了极为多样的活动、项目和学术方法。这种多样性使得简单的定义变得困难，但同时也代表了该领域最大的优势之一。从最广义上讲，数字 humanities包括任何使用数字方法、工具、材料或视角进行的人文探究。这个包容性定义涵盖了以下各类项目：

Text and Language Analysis represents one of the largest and most established areas of digital humanities. Projects in this domain employ computational methods to analyze large corpora of texts, including stylometry, sentiment analysis, topic modeling, named entity recognition, and network analysis of textual relationships. The Stanford Literary Lab, led by Franco Moretti, represents a prominent example of this approach, developing quantitative methods for the study of literary history and form.

文本与语言分析是数字人文最大、最成熟的领域之一。该领域的项目使用计算方法分析大规模文本语料库，包括文体计量学、情感分析、主题建模、命名实体识别和文本关系网络分析。由弗兰科·莫雷蒂领导的斯坦福文学实验室是这种方法的一个重要代表，开发用于文学史和形式研究的定量方法。

Historical Informatics applies computational methods to historical questions, including quantitative analysis of historical data, GIS (Geographic Information Systems) mapping of historical phenomena, and the computational study of historical networks and social structures. The Hypermedia Studio at Harvard and various national digital humanities centers have pioneered approaches to historical visualization and analysis.

历史信息学将计算方法应用于历史问题，包括历史数据的定量分析、地理信息系统（GIS）对历史现象的地图绘制、以及历史网络和社会结构的计算研究。哈佛大学的超媒体工作室及各国数字人文中心开创了历史可视化和分析的方法。

Cultural Analytics examines large-scale patterns in cultural production and consumption through computational analysis of digital cultural artifacts. The Cultural Analytics group at UC San Diego, led by Ted Underwood and Jordan Sellers, has developed methods for studying the evolution of literary forms, the geography of cultural production, and the dynamics of cultural markets over time.

文化分析通过计算分析数字文化制品来审视文化生产和消费的大规模模式。加州大学圣地亚哥分校的文化分析小组，由特德·安德伍德和乔丹·塞勒斯的领导，开发了研究文学形式演变、文化生产地理分布以及文化市场动态的方法。

Digital Archives and Editions focuses on creating, curating, and analyzing digital collections of cultural heritage materials. Projects such as the Digital Public Library of America, Europeana, and various national digitization initiatives have created unprecedented access to primary source materials, while born-digital scholarly editions offer new possibilities for editorial scholarship.

数字档案与版本专注于创建、策展和分析文化遗产材料的数字集合。美国数字公共图书馆、Europeana以及各国数字化计划等项目创造了前所未有的获取原始资料的机会，而born-digital学术版本则为编辑学术研究提供了新的可能性。

Digital Media and Interactive Humanities explores the intersection of humanistic inquiry with interactive media, game studies, virtual reality, and digital storytelling. These projects often emphasize experiential and embodied approaches to humanistic questions, engaging with questions of aesthetics, representation, and cultural meaning through digital media forms.

数字媒体与互动人文探索人文探究与互动媒体、游戏研究、虚拟现实和数字叙事的交叉领域。这些项目通常强调人文问题的体验性和具身化方法，通过数字媒体形式参与美学、表征和文化意义的探讨。

This diversity of approaches reflects the funda