In many sciences (and the farther, the more actively), the principle is applied, which allows one to do without bibliographic notes and use only conceptual notes (controversy, reference, etc.). With this principle, the textual bibliography is designed so that the name of the author and the date of the first publication of the book or article are highlighted. I give below a choice of several models of such design: Etas Kompass Libri), pp. 304 In this type of bibliography, you get the opportunity, if the text speaks about something, to do without a ticker and notes under the line, and write this: In marketing research on market brands, “the number of focus groups is determined based on the specific objectives of the survey” Corigliano, 1969: 73). But the same Corigliano indicates that “the territory of the selection of respondents is appointed arbitrarily” (1969: 71).
The reader, naturally, looks at the bibliography at the end of the work and understands that “Corigliano, 1969: 73” means the page of the 73rd book of “Marketing and Whose Eggs.” Such a system makes the text incredibly easy and removes eighty percent of the notes. In addition, the output of a book (or a set of books) you have to rewrite only once, and not a hundred times. Therefore, this system is highly recommended when there is a need to endlessly quote many works or to refer all the time to the same work. The text will not replicate the pro 198 V.4. Footnotes with very small, small footnotes composed entirely of ibidem and op.cit. and leading to complete obstruction, for example, in the case of general reviews of the background: This problem was studied in depth by Pfumpf (1945: 88-100), Bubabue (1968), Kokokakkki (1969), Forlimpopoli (1978), Kolakkkki (1978), Podgibonsi 1982) and Grzybidzishevsky (1985); meanwhile, it is completely ignored by Barboso (1980), Cardoso (1978), Feijoa-i Pessoa (1987) and Ingrassia (1990).
If you would have to attach an exhibitor to each mentioned name and enter a note with the name of the work at the bottom of the page, the page would look like a crowded tram, and besides, the reader would not be able to see the evolution of scientists’ views in time and the change in their approach to the question. However, this system is effective only under certain conditions. a) The bibliography should be homogeneous and specialized, and prospective readers should be sufficiently informed in this branch of science. If the above passage correlates, say, with the topic of sexual behavior in bare toads (the theme is rather narrow), then the reader’s colleague is supposed to react to Ingrassia 1990 at first glance, remembering that this means “Self-limiting fertility in some species naked reptiles and in any case, the reader will be aware that this is the Ingrassia of the last period, that is, when his scientific views evolved in relation to his own, Ingracia, views in the seventies and eighties. But the one who writes a diploma, for example, on the European culture of the beginning of the century and considers both writers, poets, diplomats, politicians, and philosophers, cannot think that his reader is able to recognize all quoted works only by dates.
In a particular area, yes, but not in all areas at once. b) The bibliography should contain modern books, that is, no older than the last two centuries. When practicing Greek philosophy, you should not try to quote Aristotle by date 199 V. How to write the text of the first publication (I think it’s not necessary to explain the reasons for this). c) The bibliography should refer to scientific, academic publications. It is not customary to write “Moravia, 1929” to designate the novel “Indifferent”. If the data of your text corresponds to these characteristics and falls under these restrictions, it means that the author’s system can be recommended to you. Table 18 shows the same diploma page as Table 16, only it is designed differently. It is immediately obvious that the text has shortened: there is one footnote out of six. The corresponding bibliography (table No. 19) was slightly longer, but it became clearer. The sequence of works of each author is shown with complete clarity (by the way: when the author has two works of the same year, they are distinguished by adding letters of the alphabet to the dates).