Response to Bataille et al.'s 'Technological differences between Kostenki 17/II (Spitsynskaya industry, Central Russia) and the Protoaurignacian: Reply to Dinnis et al. (2019)' [J. Hum. Evol. (2019), 102685].

导出 LinkOut

翻译打印收藏纠错

作者： Rob,Dinnis ^[1] ; Alexander,Bessudnov ^[2] ; Natasha,Reynolds ^[3] ; Abi,Pate ^[4] ; Mikhail,Sablin ^[5] ; Andrei,Sinitsyn ^[2]

作者单位： The British Museum, Franks House, 56 Orsman Road, London, N1 5QL, UK. Electronic address: rdinnis@britishmuseum.org. ^[1] Institute for the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences, Dvortsovaia Naberezhnaia 18, Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russia. ^[2] UMR 5199 PACEA, Université de Bordeaux, Bâtiment B8, Allée Geoffroy Saint Hilaire, CS 50023, Pessac Cedex, 33615, France. ^[3] Edinburgh, UK. ^[4] Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Universitetskaya Nab. 1, Saint Petersburg, 199034, Russia. ^[5]

关键词 Aquitaine model Arbreda Aurignacian Fumane Labeko Koba Lithic technology

主题词考古学(Archaeology);工业(Industry);俄罗斯(Russia);工艺学(Technology)

DOI 10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102792

PMID 32359721

发布时间 2021-07-27

翻译满意度评价：

准确一般字义偏差语意偏离译文作用小提交