Journal of Modern Chinese History 审稿状态变化-刊鹿论文编译

May Fourth in three keys: revolutionary, pluralistic, and scientific

Abstract:

If any topic in modern Chinese history has been “well done,” to the point of being possibly “overcooked,” it is the May Fourth Movement – by which I refer both to the demonstrations of 1919 and to the broader “New Culture” context in which they unfolded. I would suggest that one reason for May Fourth’s being so “well done,” if not in fact “overcooked,” is because intellectuals love to talk about themselves. The May Fourth-era intellectuals talked about themselves a great deal over the decades after 1919, and we intellectuals belonging to the generations that have followed can relate to those historical figures quite easily. And so we (especially contemporary Chinese intellectuals) have interpreted and narrated them at exhaustive length. Deeply attuned to diachronic process as historians are, it is axiomatic among us that the meaning of the past is always changing in light of the constantly unfolding present. Indeed, we might even say that this phenomenon is what keeps historians “in business.” We know well that the past forever needs remodeling and that somebody has got to do that work. The broad array of commemorative and academic events that have taken place in China and the West in honor of May Fourth’s centennial anniversary, not to mention the outpouring of articles and special issues of journals on the subject, make abundantly clear that, “well done” or “overcooked” though it may be, May Fourth’s value has not been exhausted. How then might we think about May Fourth’s ongoing and ever-replenishing meaningfulness? In pondering that question on the occasion of the centennial anniversary I find myself thinking about a book I assign to my college students in order to teach them about the concept of historiography. That book is Paul Cohen’s study of the Boxer Uprising, History in Three Keys: The Boxers as Event, Experience, and Myth. Cohen masterfully lays out the variety of kinds voices that write history – those of professional historians, of participants, and of mythologizers, the latter of whom are less interested in rigorous historical research than they are in the value of the past as a contemporary ideological and political resource. Cohen’s work on the “career” of the Boxer Uprising as a historical subject suggests ways that we may think about May Fourth’s post-1919 “career” as a historical subject. Cohen discusses the New Culture Movement of the late 1910s and early 1920s as a key phase in the history of the different narrations of the Boxer Uprising that unfolded during the twentieth century. With regard to the New Culture Movement,

Author Listing： Timothy B. Weston

Volume： 13

Pages： 319 - 324

DOI： 10.1080/17535654.2019.1688989

Language： English

Journal： Journal of Modern Chinese History

Journal of Modern Chinese History

J MOD CHIN HIST

影响因子：0.0

是否综述期刊：否

是否OA：否

是否预警：不在预警名单内

发行时间：-

ISSN：1753-5654

发刊频率：-

收录数据库：ESCI/Scopus收录

出版国家/地区：-

出版社：Taylor & Francis

期刊介绍

年发文量	8
国人发稿量	8
国人发文占比	100%
自引率	0.0%
平均录取率	-
平均审稿周期	-
版面费	-
偏重研究方向	HISTORY-
期刊官网	https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rmoh20/current
投稿链接	-

质量指标占比

研究类文章占比	OA被引用占比	撤稿占比	出版后修正文章占比
0.00%	3.70%	-	-

预警情况查看说明

时间	预警情况
2024年02月发布的2024版	不在预警名单中
2023年01月发布的2023版	不在预警名单中
2021年12月发布的2021版	不在预警名单中
2020年12月发布的2020版	不在预警名单中

JCR分区 WOS分区等级：Q4区

版本	按学科	分区
WOS期刊SCI分区 WOS期刊SCI分区是指SCI官方（Web of Science）为每个学科内的期刊按照IF数值排序，将期刊按照四等分的方法划分的Q1-Q4等级，Q1代表质量最高，即常说的1区期刊。（2021-2022年最新版）
	HISTORY	Q4

关于2019年中科院分区升级版（试行）

分区表升级版（试行）旨在解决期刊学科体系划分与学科发展以及融合趋势的不相容问题。由于学科交叉在当代科研活动的趋势愈发显著，学科体系构建容易引发争议。为了打破学科体系给期刊评价带来的桎梏，“升级版方案”首先构建了论文层级的主题体系，然后分别计算每篇论文在所属主题的影响力，最后汇总各期刊每篇论文分值，得到“期刊超越指数”，作为分区依据。

分区表升级版（试行）的优势：一是论文层级的主题体系既能体现学科交叉特点，又可以精准揭示期刊载文的多学科性；二是采用“期刊超越指数”替代影响因子指标，解决了影响因子数学性质缺陷对评价结果的干扰。整体而言，分区表升级版（试行）突破了期刊评价中学科体系构建、评价指标选择等瓶颈问题，能够更为全面地揭示学术期刊的影响力，为科研评价“去四唯”提供解决思路。相关研究成果经过国际同行的认可，已经发表在科学计量学领域国际重要期刊。

《2019年中国科学院文献情报中心期刊分区表升级版（试行）》首次将社会科学引文数据库（SSCI）期刊纳入到分区评估中。升级版分区表（试行）设置了包括自然科学和社会科学在内的18个大类学科。基础版和升级版（试行）将过渡共存三年时间，推测在此期间各大高校和科研院所仍可能会以基础版为考核参考标准。提示：中科院分区官方微信公众号“fenqubiao”仅提供基础版数据查询，暂无升级版数据，请注意区分。

中科院分区查看说明

版本	大类学科	小类学科	Top期刊	综述期刊
	人文科学 4区	HISTORY 历史学 4区	否	否
2021年12月升级版	人文科学 4区	HISTORY 历史学 4区	否	否
2020年12月旧的升级版	人文科学 4区	HISTORY 历史学 4区	否	否
2022年12月最新升级版	历史学 4区	HISTORY 历史学 4区	否	否