Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 110, Issue 3, pp 1505–1521 | Cite as

Emergence of modern scientific discourse in the American continent: knowledge claims in the discovery of Erythronium/Vanadium in Mexico (1802–1832)

  • Francisco Collazo-Reyes
  • María Elena Luna-Morales
  • Jane M. Russell
  • Miguel Ángel Pérez-Angón
Article

Abstract

In the present paper, we study the discovery of the chemical element number 23, Erythronium/Vanadium (E/V), as an early example of the modern process of validating knowledge claims in México. We examined the published work between 1802 and 1832 of Andrés Manuel del Río (AMR) in the Royal Mining Seminar of México and contrasted the styles of argument and forms of certification between his teaching and experimental writings concerning his claim to the paternity of E/V discovery. We also analyze the respective papers of European authors that replicated, rediscovered and certified AMR’s finding. We use a combination of bibliometric, sociotechnical network and literary critical analysis in order to show that the certification of E/V spawned an emerging mode for producing and validating new knowledge in the American continent and particularly in México. In turn, this approach supports AMR’s claim to the discovery of E/V from the production process of the lead brown ore in Zimapán, México.

Keywords

Modern science-America Andrés Manuel del Río Erythronium Vanadium Knowledge claims Science history-Mexico 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge support from CONACYT (México); we also appreciate the collaboration of Gerardo Herrera in translating the German texts.

References

  1. Ayers, G. (2008). The evolutionary nature of genre: An investigation of the short texts accompanying research articles in the scientific journal Nature. English of Specific Purposes, 27, 22–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barton, D., & Papen, U. (2010). The anthropology of writing: writing as social and cultural practice. What is the anthropology of writing? The anthropology of writing. Understanding textually-mediated worlds (pp. 1–33). London: Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 978-1441108852.Google Scholar
  3. Bazerman, C. (1984). Modern evolution of the experimental report in physics—Spectroscopic articles in physical-review, 1893–1980. Social Studies of Science, 2(14), 163–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bazerman, C. (1988a). Shaping written knowledge. The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bazerman, C. (1988b). Physicists reading physics. Schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema. Shaping written knowledge. The genre and activity of the experimental article in science (pp. 235–253). Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bazerman, C. (1988c). Reporting the experiment. The changing account of scientific doings in the philosophical transactions of the royal society, 1665–1800. Shaping written knowledge. The genre and activity of the experimental article in science (pp. 59–79). Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bazerman, C. (1988d). Theoretical integration in experimental reports in twentieth-century physics. Spectroscopy articles in physical review, 1893–1980. Shaping written knowledge. The genre and activity of the experimental article in science (pp. 153–186). Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bazerman, C. (2008). Theories of the middle range in historical studies of writing practices. Written Communication, 25(3), 298–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berzelius, J. J. (1831a). A new metal discovered. Extracted of a letter from M. Berzelius to M. Dulong, read before the Academy of Natural Sciences, Paris. Philosophical Magazine, 10(July–December), 151–152.Google Scholar
  10. Berzelius, J. J. (1831b). On Vanadium. Philosophical Magazine, 10(November), 321–337.Google Scholar
  11. Berzelius, J. J. (1831c). Traité de Chimie. Vanadium Addition aux volumes II et III. Paris: Firmin Didot Freres.Google Scholar
  12. Berzelius, J. J. (1831d). New metal Vanadium. Extracted of a letter from M. Dulong, read before the Academy of Natural Sciences. American Journal of Science and Arts, 20(July), 386.Google Scholar
  13. Berzelius, J. J. (1832). New metal Vanadium. Extracted of a letter from M. Berzelius to M. Dulong, read before the Academy of Natural Sciences. The Journal of the Royal Institution of Great Britain, 1(May), 562.Google Scholar
  14. Bourdieu, P. (2003). El oficio de científico. Ciencia de la ciencia y reflexividad. Barcelona: Anagrama.Google Scholar
  15. Castillo-Matos, M. (2005). Creadores de la ciencia moderna en España y América. Ulloa, los Delhuyar y del Río descubren el platino, el wolframio y el vanadio. Sevilla: Muñoz Moya Editores Extremeños.Google Scholar
  16. Caswell, L. R. (2003). Erythronium and oryctognosy: The life and works of Andrés Manuel Del Río. Abstracts of Papers of the American Chemical Society, 219: U710-U710, Part: 1, Meeting Abstract: 36-HIST.Google Scholar
  17. Ceccarelli, L. (2001). Rhetorical criticism and the rhetoric of science. Western Journal of Communication, 65(3), 314–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Collazo-Reyes, F., Luna-Morales, M. E., & Vélez-Cuartas, G. (2010). Rise of the scientific practices of collaboration in the Mexican science with cover in the international indices. REDES, 19, 143–167.Google Scholar
  19. Collazo-Reyes, F., Luna-Morales, M. E., Russell, J. M., & Pérez-Angón, M. A. (2011). Emergence and convergence of scientific communication in a developing country: México 1900–1979. In Proceedings of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. Durban, South Africa, July 4–8, pp. 155–162.Google Scholar
  20. Collet-Descotils, H. (1805). Analyse de la mine brune de plomb de Zimapán, dans le royaume du Mexique, et dans laquelle M. Del Río dit avoir decouvert un noveau metal. Annali di Chimica, 53, 268–271.Google Scholar
  21. Cueto, M. (1989). Excelencia científica en la periferia. Lima: Grade-Concytec.Google Scholar
  22. Dear, P. (1985). Totius in verba. Rhetoric and authority in the Early Royal Society. ISIS, 76, 145–161.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fahnestock, J., & Secor, M. (1991). The rhetoric of literacy criticism. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions. Historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities (pp. 76–96). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  24. Fairclough, N. (1999). Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  25. Fa-ti, F. (2012). The global turn in the history of science. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An international Journal, 6, 249–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ferris, T. (2002). On scientific writing. Physics in Perspective, 4, 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Finnegan, D. A. (2008). The spatial turn: Geographical approaches in the history of science. Journal of the History of Biology, 41, 369–388. doi: 10.1007/s10739-007-9136-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Galindo, S., & Rodríguez-Meza, M. A. (2011a). Buenaventura Suárez, SJ (1679–1750). Part 1: Telescope maker, Jovian satellites observer. Revista Mexicana de Física E, 57(2), 121–133.Google Scholar
  29. Galindo, S., & Rodríguez-Meza, M. A. (2011b). Buenaventura Suárez, SJ (1679–1750). Part 2: His book, lunario. Revista Mexicana de Física E, 57(2), 144–151.Google Scholar
  30. Gilbert, G. N. (1976). The transformation of research findings into scientific knowledge. Social Studies of Science, 6, 281–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gunn, S. (2001). The spatial turn: Changing history of space and place. In Simon Gunn & Robert J. Morris (Eds.), Identities in space: contested terrains in the Western city science 1850 (pp. 1–14). New Jersey: Ashgate Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  32. Holmes, F. L. (1987). Scientific writing and scientific discovery. ISIS, 78(2), 220–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hunter, M. C. W. (1995). Science and shape of orthodoxy: Intellectual change in late seventeenth-century Britain. New York: Boydell & Brewer Inc.Google Scholar
  34. Hyland, K., & Salager-Meyer, F. (2009). Scientific writing. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 42(1), 297–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jacob, J. R., & Jacob, M. C. (1980). The anglican origins of modern science: The Metaphysical Foundations of the Whig Constitution. ISIS, 71, 251–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnston, J. F. W. (1831). Some notices regarding Vanadium. Edinburgh Journal of Science, 5(April–October), 318–323.Google Scholar
  37. Kauffman, G. B. (1998). Jons Jacob Berzelius—A man of influence. Chemistry & Industry, 24, 1027.Google Scholar
  38. Kreimer, P. (1998). Understanding scientific research on the periphery: Towards a new sociological approach. EASST Review, 17(4), 13–21.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  39. Luna-Morales, M. E., Collazo-Reyes, F., Russell, J. M., & Pérez-Angón, M. A. (2009). Early patterns of scientific production by Mexican Researchers in Mainstream Journals: 1900–1950. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 60(7), 1337–1348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Marshall, J. L., & Marshall, V. R. (2014). Rediscovery of the elements: The second discovery of Vanadium. Indianapolis, Indiana, pp 46–50. UNT Digital Library. Available in http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc111200/
  41. Myers, G. (1989). Texts as knowledge claims: The social constructions of two biological articles. Social Studies of Science, 15(4), 593–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Patricio, A. A. L. (2004). Suárez a father of South American Astronomy. Physics Today, 57, 18.Google Scholar
  43. Pickstone, J. V. (2011). A brief introduction to ways of knowing and ways of working. History of Science, xlix, 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pontille, D. (2002). La Signature Scientifique. Authentification et Valeur Marchande. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, 2(141), 72–78.Google Scholar
  45. Pontille, D. (2003). Format´s D´Ecriture Et Mondes Scientifiques: Le Cas de la Sociologie. Questions Communications, 3, 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pontille, D., & Torny, D. (2015). From manuscript evaluation to article valuation: The changing technologies of journal peer review. Human Studies, 38, 57–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ramírez, S. (1891). Biografía del Sr. D. Andrés Manuel del Río: primer catedrático de Mineralogía del Colegio de Minería. México: Imp Del Sagrado Corazón de Jesús.Google Scholar
  48. Richardson, L. (2000). New writing practices in qualitative research. Social of Sport Journal, 17(1), 5–20.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sandoval-Vallarta, M., & Arnáiz y Freg, A. (1947). The name of element 23. Nature, 160(4057), 163–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sefstrom, G. N. (1831). Ueber das Vanadin, ein Neues Metall, gefunden im Stangeneisen von Eckershalm, ainer Eisenhutte, die ihr Erz von Taberg in Sinaland bezieth. Annalen der Physik, 97(1), 43–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shapin, S. (1984). Pump and circumstance: Robert Boyle’s literary technology. Social Studies of Science, 14(4), 481–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shapin, S., & Schaffer, S. (1985). Leviathan and the air-pump. Hobbes, Boyle and the experimental life (p. 448). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Sigusch, V. (2008). The birth of sexual medicine: Paolo Mantegazza as pioneer of sexual medicine in the 19th century. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5(1), 217–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sollaci, L. B., & Pereira, M. G. (2004). The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: A fifty-year survey. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 92(3), 364–371.Google Scholar
  55. Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Taylor, P. J., Hoyler, M., & Evans, D. M. (2008). A geohistorical study of the rise of modern science: Mapping scientific practice through urban networks, 1500–1900. Minerva, 46, 391–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Upton, T. A., & Cohen, M. A. (2009). An approach to corpus-based discourse analysis: The move analysis as example. Discourse Studies, 11(5), 585–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Uribe-Salas, J. A. (2006). Labor de Andrés Manuel del Río en México: profesor en el Real Seminario de Minería e innovador tecnológico en minas y ferrería. Asclepio. Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia, 58(2), 231–260.Google Scholar
  59. Uribe-Salas, J. A., & Cortes-Zavala, M. T. (2006). Andrés Del Río, Antonio Del Castillo and José G. Aguilera en el desarrollo de la ciencia mexicana del siglo XIX. Revista de Indias, 66(237), 491–518.Google Scholar
  60. Vande-Kopple, W. J. (2002). From the dynamics style to the synoptic style in spectroscopic articles in the physical review. Written Communication, 19(2), 227–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Van-Dijk, T. (2001). Critical discourse analysis. In Deborah Tannen & Heidi E. Hamilton (Eds.), Deborah Schiffrin (pp. 352–371). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
  62. Vélez-Cuartas, G. (2010). Las redes de sentido de las redes sociales: un estudio cienciométrico. Dc Sci. Tesis, Universidad Iberoamericana Santa Fe. Available in http://revista-redes.rediris.es/webredes/novedades/tesis.pdf
  63. Zappen, J. P. (1991). Scientific rhetoric in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions. Historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities (pp. 145–167). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  64. Zhang, L. (2012). Grasping the structure of journal articles: Utilizing the functions of information units. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 63(3), 469–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco Collazo-Reyes
    • 1
  • María Elena Luna-Morales
    • 2
  • Jane M. Russell
    • 3
  • Miguel Ángel Pérez-Angón
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de FísicaCentro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del IPNMexico CityMexico
  2. 2.Servicios Bibliográficos, Unidad de Indicadores BibliométricosCentro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del IPNMexico CityMexico
  3. 3.Instituto de Investigaciones Bibliotecológicas y de InformaciónCiudad Universitaria, UNAM (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México)Mexico CityMexico

Personalised recommendations