政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/34425
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 109948/140897 (78%)
造访人次 : 46093503      在线人数 : 988
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧:
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号",以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻,建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段,可获得较完整数据
  • 进阶搜寻


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/34425


    题名: 台灣工運領袖類型分析
    作者: 徐國淦
    Hsu,Kuo-Kan
    贡献者: 王惠玲
    徐國淦
    Hsu,Kuo-Kan
    日期: 2003
    上传时间: 2009-09-18 10:14:35 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 台灣自1980年代以後,進入急遽轉變的時代,工會運動也在這個時候展現力量,但曇花一現,很快就沉寂下來。2000年3月18日台灣總統大選,民主進步黨取得執政權;2004年3月20日再次執政。以弱勢代言角色自居的民進黨,執政後為何被部分勞工領袖批評與工人愈走愈遠,原因為何?另方面,許多曾在街頭抗爭的工運領袖,近年來也紛紛走入體制內,或入國會殿堂、或在行政官僚,但整體觀察台灣工人處境並未見大幅改善,癥結何在?
    本文藉由當事人對從事工運的歷史「回顧」,佐以相關資料驗證,分析工運領袖的類型,並嚐試釐出台灣未來勞工運動發展的可能方向之處。本研究探討二大主軸:第一、為什麼台灣工運發展不能有效主導政治力量,從國民黨執政時期至民進黨執政,都可發現從事工運往往成了政治人物的政治跳板而非目的 ,工運團體也常被政黨吸收成了附庸,原因為何?第二、台灣工運難以自主發展的問題癥結為何?制度上有那些問題?領導者又為何各擁山頭,各有政黨屬性?並依此進一步探究勞工出路在那裡?
    本研究發現,台灣工運發展與工運領袖作為,無法脫離政經結構性的限制。以中小型企業為主的台灣經濟,受限工會法場廠及區域性單一工會的限制,相對地也弱化了工會集體組織與集體行動的可能性;再加上,台灣社會文化充滿「黑手變頭家」的幻覺,促使階級意識薄弱。另外,近年來政治人物操弄下的「外來政權」與「本土政權」的衝擊,又使族群意識凌駕階級意識。
    研究也發現,以體制外自主工會為主體的工運領袖,大部分都是從政治啟蒙走上勞工運動,也就是「政治人到階級人」,相對地也因政治覺醒較早,往往容易落入「先政治、後階級」的行動思考吊詭;體制內工會則普遍是受黨國政治裁培,難以避免地受制於黨政包袱。另有些工運領袖雖有較明晰的階級意識,卻受限於勞動法令及黨國體制的壓制,難有突破之舉。
    從工運領袖出身背景分析,可發現工運領袖普遍出身窮困家庭,且大都是農工家庭。工運領袖雖以貧困出身占多數,但他們的學經歷相當多元,工作經驗也不盡相同,出自民營企業,下場是「解雇」,成了職場「黑名單」。國公營事業部分,工作並未發生問題,有人甚至工、仕兩得意,「工運領袖」的桂冠也讓他們享有一定的聲望。
    值得注意的是,本研究也發現台灣工運發展出現世代交替後繼者難尋的困境。新世代的工運領袖,大都沒有工作場域的實戰經歷,僅在各工運系統中擔任秘書職務,雖然清楚自我選擇,但也看清工運現實,妥協性相對高些,過去因工作場域自覺意識而扛起工運大旗者已愈來愈難尋。
    Since the 1980s, Taiwan has entered an era of rapid transformation, and the labour-union movement has also gained its momentum since then, but it has not lasted for long and died down soon. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) rose to power by winning the presidential election of March 18, 2000. Four years later, the DPP won for the second time in the presidential election. Regarding itself as the voice of the underprivileged and the minority, the DPP has been accused by some labour leaders of increasingly distancing itself from the working class since it came to power, why has it been the case? On the other hand, many labour movement leaders who used to struggle in the streets have joined the making of policy, the parliament, or worked as administrative officials, but, in retrospect, the state of Taiwanese labour has not changed very much, what is the problem?

    Verified by the data concerned, this research seeks to categorize the labour leaders and to clarify the possible directions of the future development of Taiwan’s labour movement by the historical ‘reviews’ of those who participated in the labour movement. The research centers on two main axes: First, why could the de- velopment of the labour movement in Taiwan not effectively dominate the political forces, and it is found that, from the age of the KMT rule to that of the DPP rule, joining in labour movements becomes a ladder for, rather than a humanitarian purpose of, some political figures that the labour movement groups are often absorbed by the political parties as their dependents, what would be the cause? Secondly, what would be the key problem that makes things difficult for the development of Taiwan’s labour movement to gain autonomy? What would be the institutional problems? Why would the labour leaders polarize their power as well as activity and develop different political orientations? Further, it would be followed by the inquiry concerning, if any, the prospect of Taiwanese labour.

    The research observes that the development of Taiwan’s labour movement and the conduct of its leaders are straitjacketed by politico-economic structures. Based on the small-medium-size enterprises, the Taiwanese economy is bound by the Labor Union Laws and the unitary trade union in a given area, which relatively weaken the potential of the collective organization and action of trade unions; in addition, the society of Taiwan sees the prevalent illusion of being ‘a self-made tycoon,’ which also weakens class consciousness. Moreover, political figures manipulate the images of ‘foreign regime’ and ‘indigenous regime’ by which ethnic consciousness prevails over class consciousness.

    The research also reveals that most of the labour movement leaders fighting mainly through the autonomous trade unions outside the system start from political enlighten- ment towards the labour movement, that is, ‘from the political man to the class man.’ Because of an earlier awakening of political consciousness, they are prone to fall into the paradox of thinking and practicing ‘politics first, class later’; and the trade unions within the system are generally brought over by party-state politics, inevitably conditioned by the political parties. Although some of the movement leaders have subtle class consciousness, they are conditioned by the labour-relative laws and the repression of party-state polity that no breakthrough could easily be made by them.

    Analyzing the background of the labour movement leaders, it is found they are from poor families in general, and most of them are sons or daughters of the peasantry. Most of them arise from obscurity, nonetheless their education backgrounds and work experiences are quite diverse. Some of them who used to work in the private sector have been ‘laid off’ and entitled to the ‘blacklist’ of workplace, while the others who have worked in state-run enterprises have no problem with their job, some of those are even quite successful in assuming their double roles as an employee of the state-run enterprise and a leader of the trade union that the laurel of ‘the labour movement leader ’ enables them to establish a certain degree of reputation.

    Noteworthy, the research shows a dilemma of the alternation of generations facing Taiwan’s labour movement. While being self-absorbed and clear about the reality facing the labour movement, most of the new generation leaders have no real workshop experience and only work as secretary staff in the labour movement system. As such, they are more easily to make compromise as compared to their predecessors. Finally, it becomes more difficult to find the paradigmatic figures whose workshop self-consciousness drives them to be the champion of the labour movement.
    參考文獻: 中文書目
    丁仁方(1999)。《威權統合主義─理、發展、與轉型》,台北:時英出版。
    中國勞工運動史續編編纂委員會(1984)。《中國勞工運動史〈一〉、〈二〉》,台北:文大勞研所理事會。
    王世榕(1985)。<工會與政黨互動關係>,《勞工研究季刊》,第81期。
    王世榕(1998)。《勞動話題》,台北:勞工研究資料中心。
    王素琴(1981)。<台灣省產職業工會聯合會組織研究>,台北:文大勞研所碩士論文。
    王政憲(1997)。<台灣勞工集體行動>,台中:東海大學政治所碩士論文。
    王振寰(1996)。《誰統治台灣?轉型中的國家機器與權力結構》,台北:巨流圖書公司。
    王振寰(1993)。<工人階級形成的分析>,《台灣社會研究叢刊-04》,頁163-188。
    王惠玲(1999)。<勞資關係之反思與再造>,《思與言》,第37巷第3期,頁101-118。
    王琴心(1992)。<台灣工會積極行動者的階級意識>,新竹:清華大學社會人類學研究所碩士論文。
    王淑芬、李建昌、鍾維達編(1993):《工運叢書第五冊:台灣工運經驗》,台北:前衛出版社。
    王義雄(1989)。《不流血的社會革命─我為什麼要倡組工黨》,台北:久博圖書公司。
    王慧君(1981)。<台灣地區產業工會組織研究>,台北:文化大學勞工研究所碩士論文。
    尤勰等譯(2000)。《改變歷史的領袖》,台北:貓頭鷹出版社。
    尹沅譯(1989)。Reynaud,J.D.著,《勞工衝突社會觀》,台北:遠流出版社。
    朱柔若(1996)。《政經發展與工運變遷之跨國分析》,台北:華泰書局 。
    朱柔若(1998)。《社會變遷中的勞工問題》,台北︰揚智文化事業有限公司。
    何學政(2002)。<我國工會與政黨關係之研究>,台北:政大政研所碩士論文。
    李允傑(1992)。《台灣工會政策的政治經濟分析》,台北:巨流圖書公司。
    李允傑(1999)。《台灣工會政策的政治經濟分析》,台北:商鼎文化出版社。
    李長貴(1986)。《社會運動學》,台北:水牛圖書出版有限公司。
    李培元(1997)。《政治商品化理論》,台北:揚智文化事業股份有限公司。
    李劍農(1947)。《中國近百年政治史》,台北:台灣商務印書館。
    汪立峽、張曉春(1987)、<工會與工運>,聯合月刊70期,頁85-86。
    沈宗瑞(1994)。<台灣工會的角色與發展─國家組合主義角度的分析>,台北:台大三研所博士論文。
    吳家駟譯(1991)。《資本論第一卷》。台北:時報出版社。
    洪金珠、許佩賢譯(若林正丈著)(1994)。《台灣─分裂國家與民主化》,台北:月旦出版社。
    洪哲勝、劉格正編譯(1993)。《工運叢書第三冊:群眾自救的組織法》,台北:前衛出版社。
    洪鐮德(1996)。<紀登士評歷史唯物論>,《美歐月刊》,第十一巻第七期。
    洪鎌德(1997)。《馬克思社會學說之析評》,台北:揚智文化事業有限公司。
    南民(1988)。<一聲動員令、個個作先鋒─國民黨的外圍組織>,《新新聞》,第43期,頁23-26。
    俞行健(1977)。<中國國民黨與中國工會組織>,台北:文大勞研所碩士論文。
    徐正光(1987)。<統合政策下的台灣勞工>,第一屆勞資關係研討會。
    徐正光、宋文里編(1989)。《解嚴前後台灣新興社會運動》,台北;巨流圖書公司。
    夏林清(1993)。《由實務取向到社會實踐---有關台灣勞工的生活的調查報告(1987-1992)》,台北:張老師出版社。
    范雲,(2000),<從政治人到階級人:台灣政治轉型過程中的工運領導>,出自《台灣的社會福利運動》,蕭新煌、林國明編。台北;巨流圖書公司。
    高安邦(1993)。《馬克斯經濟思想》,台北:巨流圖書公司。
    馬康莊譯,理查、海曼著(1988)。《勞工運動》。台北:桂冠圖書公司。
    陳永昇(1998)。<我國工會聯合組織之研究>,台北:政治大學勞工研究所碩士論文。
    陳麗君(1997)。<體制外工運團體實施勞工教育之分析---以台灣勞工陣線為例>,台北:國立中正大學勞工研究所碩士論文。
    陳淑玲(1994)。<台灣的利益團體政治─ 1980年代迄今之工會運動>,台中:東海大學政治所碩士論文。
    陳怡仲(1994)。<台灣組合體制的形成與轉化>,台中:東海大學政治所碩士論文。
    陳耀宗(1993)。《經濟發展與勞動思想之探討---勞動者經社地位的歷使觀察》,台北:國立政治大學勞工研究所碩士論文。
    黃越欽(2000)。《勞動法新論》,台北:翰蘆出版公司。
    黃振華、張興健譯,Weber,M.著(1991)。《社會科學方法論》,台北:時報文化出版企業有限公司。
    黃毅志(2002)。《社會階層、社會網絡與主觀意識:台灣地區不公平社會階層體系之延續》台北:巨流圖書公司。
    許嘉猶主編(1994)。《階級結構與階級意識比較研究論文集》,台北:中研院歐美所。
    許嘉猶著(1992)。《社會階層化與社會流動》,台北:三民書局。
    游伯龍(1987)。《行為的新境界─理論與應用》,台北:聯經出版社。
    馮景源(1987)。《馬克思異化理論研究》,北京:中國人民大學出版社發行。
    張茂桂(1989)。《社會運動與政治轉化》,台北:國家政策研究中心。
    張天開(1987)。《現代工會運動》,台北:文化大學出版社。
    傅立葉(1993)。<台灣社會保險制度的社會控制本質>,《台灣社會研究季刊》第十五期,頁51-52。
    溫世仁(1999)。《領袖》,台北:大塊文化出版社。
    莊耀喜編譯(1991)。《馬斯洛─人本心理學之父》,台北:桂冠出版社。
    趙剛(1998)。《告別妒恨》,台北:唐山出版社。
    楊幼蘭譯(1994)。《逆領導思考:傾聽追隨族的工作哲學》,台北:時報文化出版有限公司。
    董安琪譯(1984)。Olson,M.著,《集體行動邏輯》,台北:允晨出版社。
    鄭太朴譯,Weber,M.著(1991)。《社會經濟史》(Wirtschaftsgeschichte),台北:台灣商務印書館。
    鄭陸霖(1987)。<台灣工運發展的結構困境>,中國論壇279期, 頁35-37。
    瞿海源(1991)。《社會心理學新論》,台北:巨流圖書公司。
    錢乘旦等譯(2001)。《英國工人階級的形成》,南京:譯林出版社。
    簡惠美譯(1994)。《資本主義與現代社會理論》,台北:遠流出版社。
    謝秋和(1997)。<體制外勞工組織的興起、角色及功能之研究>,台北:中國文化大學勞工研究所碩士論文。
    謝國雄(1997)。《純勞動:台灣勞動體制諸論》,台北:中央研究院社會研究所。
    龐建國(1990)。<我國勞工運動之發展趨勢及其因應措施之研究>,行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究。
    蕭全政(1989)。《台灣地區的新重商主義》,台北:國家政策研究資料中心。
    蕭全政〈1988〉。<權力與利益---政治與經濟整合基礎>,《公共政策學報》,第十期,頁66-90。
    鯨鯤˙和敏(1999)。《政治:論權勢人物的成長、時機和方法》,台北:時報文化出版企業股份有限公司。
    龔宜君(1998)、《「外來政權」與本土社會─改造後國民黨政權社會基礎的形成(1950-1969)》,台北:稻香出版社。
    龔宜君(1988)。<台灣與南韓勞工運動之比較>,《中國論壇》,第301期,頁 110。
    聯經出版公司主編(1988):《思想》,台北:聯經出版事業公司。
    聯合報(2002;4;8)<勞委會補助工會款、全總批評綁椿明顯>新聞。
    Marx.K中譯本(1975)。《政治經濟學的形而上學<哲學的貧困>第二章》,馬恩選集第一卷,北京:人民出版社。
    英文書目
    Arendt, H.(1958).The human condition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    Bain, G.(1979).A bibliography of British industrial relations .N. Y.: Cambridge University Press.
    Berreman, G. (1972).Race, caste , and other invidious distinctions. Social stratification, Race, 13:4.
    Block,F.(1979).The ruling class does not rule.in Richard,Q.(Ed.)Capitalist society.Illinois:The Dorsey Press.
    Block, F.(1980).Beyond relative autonomy: State managers as historical subjects. in The Socialist Register.London :Merlin Press.
    Bonacich, E. (1980).Class approaches to ethnicity and race, Insurgent Sociologist, 10 :2.
    Bottmore, T.(1985).Theories of modern capitalism. London: George Allen & Unwin.
    Bourdieu, P.(1984) .Reproduction in education, society, culture , Beverly Hills: Sage.
    Brand, K.W. (1990).Cyclical aspects of new social movements: waves of cultural criticism and mobilization cycles of new middle class radicalism, in Dalton., Russell .J. & Manfred Kuechler(Eds.)Challenging the political order: New social movements in western democracies, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.
    Broyles, A.(1963). The John Birch society: A movement of social protest of the radical right, Journal of Social Issues, 19:51-62.
    Coates, K. & Topham, T. (1972). The new unionism. London :Owen.
    Cohen, Y. (1982). The Benevolent Leviathan; political consciousness among Urban workers under state corporatism, The American Political Science Review, 76:46-59.
    Collins, R. (1979). The credential society, an historical sociology of education and stratification, N. Y .: Academic Press.
    Cottrell, A. (1984). Social classes in Marxist theory , London: Routledge and Kegan
    Crompton , R. & Gubbay, J. (1977). Economy and class structure. London: Macmillan.
    Dahl , R.(1961).Who governs?New Haven, CT :Yale University Press.
    Deyo, F.(1987).State and labor: Modes of political exclusion in east Asian deveiopment. in Frederic C. Deyo (Eds.) ,pp.183-185, The political economy of the new Asian industrialism . Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
    Gartman , D. (1991). Culture as class symbolizatio or mass reification? A critique of Bourdieus distinction, American Journal of Sociology,97(2):421-447.
    Geertz, A.(1963).The integrative revolution:primodial sentiments and civil politics in C. Geertz(Eds.)Old societies and New state, N.Y.: Free Press.
    Giddens, A. (1973).The class structure of the advanced societies, N.Y.: Harper & Row.
    Giddens,A.(1979).Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and constradiction in social analysis. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    Giddens, A.(1987).Social theory and modern sociology. California: Standford University Press.
    Heaton, T. B.(1987) .Objective status and class consciousness, Social Science Quarterly,68(3),611-620.
    Hoffman, J.(1984) .The Gramsaian challenge: Coercion and consent in Marxist political theory, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    Horowitz, D. (1985). Ethic groups in conflict ,Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    Jackman, M. & Jackman, R. (1983). Class awareness in the United States, Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Jessop , B.(1990). State theory: putting capitalist states in their place .Cambridge: Polity Press.
    Kohn, M.L. (1969). Class and conformity: A study in values, I.L.: Dorsey Press.
    Lindolf , T. R. (1995). Qualitative communication research methods, USA: Sage.
    Logan, J.R. (1987). Afflence,class structure,and working-class conciousness in modern Spain, AJS, 83(2):386-402.
    Luka’cs, G..(1971).History and class consciousness, trans.by R. Livingstone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Ma, Li-Chen & Smith, K. (1990). Social class, parental values, and child-reading practice in Taiwan, Sociological-Spectrum,10(4):577-589.
    Mann, M.(1973).Consciousness and action the western working class ,London: Macmillan.
    Marx, K.(1975).Economic and philosophical manuscripts of 1844 early writing, trans. by R. Livingstone & G. Benton.
    McGrew, A.(1992). The state in advanced capitalist societies .In J. Allen, P. Braham and P. Lewis(Eds.)Political and economic forms of modernity ,pp.66-111. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    Meszaros, I. (1971). Contingent and necessary class consciousness, in I. Meszaros(Eds.)Aspects of histioy and class consciousness, pp.85-127, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
    Mills, C.(1956).The power elite. N.Y.: Oxford University Press.
    Miliband, R.(1969). The state in capitalist society. N. Y.: Basic Books.
    Nordlinger, E.(1981).On the autonomy of the democratic state. Cambridge,Mass.: Harvard University Press.
    Ollman, B.(1972). Toward class consciousness next time: Marx and the working class, Politics & Society 3(1):1-24.
    Ollman,B.(1987).How to Study Class Ciousness,And Why We Should,14(1).
    Pammett, J.H.(1987).Class voting and class conciousness ,Canada Review of Sociology and Anthropology ,24(2):267-290.
    Paul ,E. J. (1985). Making sense of Marx, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Parkin, F. (1971).Class inequality and political order, London; MacGibbon and Kee.
    Parkin, F. (1978).Social stratification, in T.Bottomore and R.Nisbet(Eds.), pp.599-632, A history of sociological analysis, London: Heinemann
    Parkin, F. (1979). Marxism and class theory ,a bourdeois critique, London: Tavistock.
    Parkin, F. (1982). MarxWeber,Chichester, London: Tavistock.
    Poulantzas, N. (1974).Political power and social classes. London: New Left Books.
    Poulantzas, N.(1980).State, power and socialism. London: New Left Books.
    Przeworski , A. (1985). Capitalism and social democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Schmitter, P.(1979).Trends toward corporatist intermediation. London: Sage.
    Stepan, A.(1978).The state and society: Peru in comparative perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    Stephens, J.D. (1979).Class formation and class consciousness: A theoretical and empericial analysis with reference to Britain and Sweden, British Journal of Sociology,30(4):389-414
    Thompson, E.P. (1966). Class conciousness in the making of the English working class, N.Y.: Vintage.
    Touraine, A. (1985). An introduction to the study of social movements, Social Research,Vol,52(4):749-748.
    Tumin, M.M. (1985). Social stratification, N.J. : Prentice-Hall.
    Valenzuela, J.S & Goodwil. J. (1979).Labor Movements under Authoritarian Regimes, Cambridge: Mass.Harvard University.
    Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class, N.Y.: Macmillan.
    Weber, M.(1978). Economy and society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Wiarda, H.J.(1982). Corporatism and national in Latin America,Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.
    Wiarda, H.J.(1994). Dismantling corporatism, World Affairs,Vol. 156(4),199-203.
    Wiarda, H.J.(1997).Corporatism and comparative politics: The other great “Ism.” Armonk , N.Y.: M. E .Sharpe.
    Wright, E.O.(1985). Classes, London:Verso Press.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    勞工研究所
    87262017
    92
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0087262017
    数据类型: thesis
    显示于类别:[勞工研究所] 學位論文

    文件中的档案:

    档案 描述 大小格式浏览次数
    26201701.pdf40KbAdobe PDF21076检视/开启
    26201702.pdf87KbAdobe PDF21029检视/开启
    26201703.pdf34KbAdobe PDF21072检视/开启
    26201704.pdf61KbAdobe PDF21121检视/开启
    26201705.pdf259KbAdobe PDF21344检视/开启
    26201706.pdf301KbAdobe PDF22352检视/开启
    26201707.pdf339KbAdobe PDF28907检视/开启
    26201708.pdf409KbAdobe PDF26121检视/开启
    26201709.pdf534KbAdobe PDF25523检视/开启
    26201710.pdf370KbAdobe PDF23237检视/开启
    26201711.pdf144KbAdobe PDF22601检视/开启
    26201712.pdf151KbAdobe PDF21517检视/开启


    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回馈