BibTex RIS Cite

Year 2015, Volume: 11 Issue: 19 - Volume: 11 Issue: 19, 37 - 54, 12.07.2016

Ülkü Özten

https://doi.org/10.23835/tasarimkuram.239588

Abstract

Makale mimari programın yirminci yüzyılın ikinci yarısı boyunca kavramsal evrimini izler. Mimari program nosyonunun mimarlık söylemindeki evrimini ve mimarlıktaki konumunu çeşitli kuramcıların farklı görüşler sunan çalışmalarında gözden geçirir. Analiz-sentez ve varsayım-yanlışlama olarak ifade edilen farklı iki ana paradigmatik epistemolojik pozisyon altında kategorize edilebilecek söz konusu yaklaşımları ilgili pozisyonlara referansla gözden geçirmek suretiyle tartışır. Makale dört ana bölüm altında yapısallaştırılır. Durumu ve problemi özetleyen giriş bölümünü takiben ikinci bölümde ilk paradigmatik pozisyon olan analiz-sentezin epistemolojik kökenleri belirtilerek dönemin program anlayışının söz konusu epistemolojik kökene referansla nasıl kavramsallaştığının yanı sıra program-geleneksel tasarım, program-programlama-hesaplama gibi temel tartışma alanları, problemi ele alan farklı kuramcıların çalışmalarına referansla tartışılır. Üçüncü bölümde, bir karşı paradigma olarak gündeme gelen varsayım-yanlışlama modeli epistemolojik kökenleri üzerinden incelenir ve farklı kuramcıların çalışmalarında mimari programın nasıl değişip dönüştüğü; analiz-sentez modelinin eleştirisi üzerine kurulan varsayım-yanlışlama modeli altında mimari program anlayışının nasıl evrimleştiği araştırılarak tartışılır. Sonuç bölümünde ise, makale, mimari programın yeniden kavramsallaştırılmasına yönelik mimarlık gündemindeki güncel “durumu” ortaya koyar.

Keywords

Mimari program Analiz-Sentez Varsayım Yanlışlama Mimari Epistemoloji

References

  • Alexander, C. 1973. Notes on the Synthesis of Form. seventh edition ed. London: Oxford University Press. (First published by Harvard University Press. in 1964)
  • Anay, H. 2012. (Epistemological) Formalism and its Influence on Architecture: A Concise Review. A|Z Journal of the ITU Faculty of Architecture, 9 (1).
  • Anderson, S. 1984. Architectural Design as a System of Research Programs. Design Studies, 5 (3).
  • Anderson, S. 1984. Architectural Research Programmes in the Work of Le Corbusier. Design Studies, 5 (3), pp. 151-158.
  • Andreotti, L. 1984. Conceptual and Artifactual Research Programmes in Louis Kahn’s Design of the Philips Exeter Academy. Design Studies, 5 (3).
  • Archer, B. 1965. Systematic Method for Designers. London: The Design Council.
  • Archer, B. 1970. An Overview of the Structure of the Design Process. In: G. T. Moore, ed. Emerging Methods in Environmental Design and Planning. Cambridge, Massachussets, and London, England: The MIT Press, pp. 285-307.
  • Archer, B. 1979. Design As a Discipline. Design Studies, 1 (1).
  • Archer, B. 1981. A View of The Nature of Design Research. In: Design:Science:Method. Guilford: Westbury House, pp. 30-47.
  • Archer, B. 1999. On Methods of Research. Ankara: METU Faculty of Architecture Press.
  • Bacon, F. 1905. Novum Organum. New York, P.F. Collier & Son. (First published in Latin in 1620)
  • Ball, L., Onarheim, B. & Christensen, B. T. 2010. Design Requirements, Epistemic Uncertainty and Solution Development Strategies in Software Design. Design Studies, 31 (6), pp. 567-589.
  • Bamford, G. 2002. From Analysis/Synthesis to Conjecture/ Analysis: A Review of Karl Popper’s Influence on Design Methodology in Architecture. Design Studies, May, 23 (3), pp. 245-261.
  • Bartley, W. W. 1965. How Is the House of Science Built? The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. AA Journal, pp. 213-218.
  • Bayazit, N. 2004. Investigating Design: A Review of Forty Years of Design Research. Design Issues, 20 (1), pp. 16-29.
  • Brawne, M. 1995. Research, Design and Popper. Architectural Research Quarterly, pp. 10-15.
  • Broadbent, G. 1969. Design Method in Architecture. In: G. Broadbent & A. Ward, eds. Design Methods in Architecture. New York: George Wittenborn Inc., pp. 15-21.
  • Broadbent, G. 1979. The Development of Design Methods - A Review. In: Design Methods and Theories. s. l.: s.n., pp. 41-45.
  • Broadbent, G. 1981. The Morality of Designing. Guilford, Westbury House.
  • Bunnin, N. & Yu, J. 2004. The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy. s. l.: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Burry, M. 2011. Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming. Chiscester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Cherry, E. 1999. Programming for Design: From Theory to Practice. s.l.: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Cowan, J. D. 1965. Some Principles Underlying the Mechanization of Thought Processes. AA Journal, pp. 251-257.
  • Coyne, R. 1995. Designing Information Technology in the Postmodern Age. Cambridge Mass.: The MIT Press.
  • Coyne, R. et al. 1990. Knowledge-Based Design Systems. s.l.: University of Sydney.
  • Coyne, R. & Snodgrass, A. 1995. Problem Setting within the Prevalent Methapors of Design. Design Issues, 11 (2), pp. 31-61.
  • Crilly, N. 2010. The Rules that Artefacts Play: Technical, Social and Aesthetic Functions. Design Studies, July, 31 (4).
  • Cross, N. 1979. Responsible Design. Design Studies, July, 1 (2), pp. 127-128.
  • Cross, N. 1994. Engineering Design Methods. Second edition ed. Chiscester: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Cross, N. 2001. Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline versus Design Science. Design Issues, Summer, 17 (3).
  • Cross, N. 2007. Forty Years of Design Research. Design Studies, 28 (1), pp. 1-4.
  • Darke, J. 1979. The Primary Generator and the Design Process. Design Studies, 1 (1), pp. 36-44.
  • Descartes, R. 1899. The Method, Meditations, and Selections from the Principles of Descartes. Edinburgh: Blackwood and Sons.
  • Dilnot, C. 1984. The State of Design History Part I Mapping the Field. Design Issues, 1 (1).
  • Dinç, P. 2002. Building Programming: From “Problem Seeking” to Architectural Values. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 17 (3), pp. 101-119.
  • Dorst, K. 2008. Design Research: A Revolution-Waiting-to- Happen. Design Studies, 29 (1), pp. 4-11.
  • Duerk, D. 1993. Architectural Programming: Information Management for Design. s.l.: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Eastman, C. 1980. Information and Databases in Design. Design Studies, January, 1 (3).
  • Feyerabend, P. 1993. Against Method. New York: Verso. (First published by New Left Books in 1975)
  • Fowles, R. A. 1979. Design methods in UK Schools of Architecture. Design Studies, July, 1 (1), pp. 15-16.
  • Friedman, Y. 1975. Toward a Scientific Architecture. Cambridge Mass.: The MIT Press.
  • Gero, J. 1980. Computer-Aided Design by Optimization in Architecture. Design Studies, 1 (4).
  • Gombrich, E. 1965. The Beauty of Old Towns. AA Journal, pp. 293-297.
  • Grant, D. 1972. Systematic Methods in Environmental Design: An Introductory Bibliography. Monticello, Illınois: The Council of Planning Librarians, Exchange Bibliography Number 302.
  • Gregory, S. 1979. Editorial: Design Studies - the New Capability. Design Studies, 1 (1).
  • Gregory, S. 1980. Structured Programming (book review). Design Studies, 1(3).
  • Gross, M. & Fleisher, A. 1984. Design as the Exploration of Constraints. Design Studies, 5 (3), pp. 137-138.
  • Hershberger, R. 1999. Architectural Programming & Predesign Manager. New York: McGraw Hill.
  • Hillier, B., Musgrove, J. & O’Sullivan, P. 1972. Knowledge and Design. Stroudsbourg, Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, pp. 69-83.
  • Jones, A. 1980. Ironic Principles (book review). Design Studies, 1 (3), pp. 179-181.
  • Jones, C. 1963. A Method of Systematic Design. In: Conference on Design Methods. Pergamon Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd.
  • Jones, J. C. 1970 . Design Methods: Seeds of Human Futures. 2nd 1992 ed. s.l.: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Kalay, Y. 2004. Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories and Methods of Computer-Aided Design. Cambridge Mass.: The MIT Press.
  • Kolarevic, B. 2005. Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing. New York: Taylor & Francis.
  • Kostelnick, C. 1989. Process Paradigms in Design and Composition: Affinities and Directions. College Composition and Communication, October, 40 (3), pp. 267-281.
  • Kumlin, R. 1995. Architectural Programming: Creative Techniques for Design Professionals. s.l.: McGraw-Hill.
  • Landau, R. 1965. The Context For Decision Making: 2. AA Journal, p. 251.
  • Landau, R. 1965. Towards a Structure for Architectural Ideas. AA Journal, pp. 7-11.
  • Lawrence, R. 1982. Trends in Architectural Design Methods- The “Liability” of Public Participation. Design Studies, 3 (2), pp. 97-103.
  • Lawrence, R., 1983. Architecture and Behavioural Research: A Critical review. Design Studies, April, 4 (2), pp. 76-82.
  • Liddament, T. 1999. The Computationalist Paradigm in Design Research. Design Studies, January, 20 (1).
  • Liu, Y.-T. 2002. Defining Digital Architecture: 2001 FEIDA Award. s.l.: Birkhauser.
  • Margolin, V. 1984. Editorial. Design Issues, 1 (1), p. 3.
  • Metallinou, V. 1984. Regionalism as an Architectural Research Programme in the Work of Dimitris and Susanna Antonakakis. Design Studies, 5 (3).
  • Oxman, R. 2006. Theory and Design in the First Digital Age. Design Studies, Volume 27, pp. 229-265.
  • Oxman, R. 2008. Digital Architecture as a Challenge for Design Pedagogy: Theory, Knowledge, Models and Medium. Design Studies, Volume 29, pp. 99-120.
  • Pena, W. & Parshall, S. 2001. Problem Seeking: An Architectural Programming Primer. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons. (First published by CBI Publishing Co Inc., in 1977)
  • Popper, K. 1957. Philosophy of Science: A Personal Report. In: British Philosophy in Mid-Century. London: Allen and Unwin.
  • Popper, K. 2005. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. s.l.: Taylor & Francis.(Logik der Forschung first published in German in 1935 by Verlag von Julius Springer, Vienna Austria; first English edition published by Hutchinson & Co. in 1959)
  • Rosenman, M. A. & Gero, J. S. 1998. Purpose and Function in Design: From the Socio-Cultural to the Technophysical. Design Studies, April, 19 (2).
  • Rowe, C. 1982/83. Program vs. Paradigm. The Cornell Journal of Architecture, Issue 3, pp. 9-19.
  • Ryd, N. 2004. The Design Brief as carrier of Client Information During the Construction Process. Design Studies, May, 25 (3).
  • Rzevski, G., Woolman, D. & Trafford, D. B. 1980. Validation of a Design methodology. Design Studies, 1 (6).
  • Sanoff, H. 1977. Methods of Architectural Programming. Stroudsburg Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross Inc.
  • Schön, D. 1984. Editorial: Design: A Process of Enquiry, Experimentation and Research. July, 5 (3).
  • Schön, D. 1984. Problems Frames and Perspectives on Designing. Design Studies, July, 5 (3), pp. 132-136.
  • Schön, D. 1991. The Reflective Practitioner. s.l.: Avebury The Avademic Publishing Group. (First published by Basic Books in 1983)
  • Steadman, P. 1979. The History and Science of the Artificial. Design Studies, 1 (1).
  • Steele, J. 2001. Architecture and Computers: Action and Reaction in the Digital Design Revolution. s.l.: Laurence King.
  • Summerson, J. 1957. The Case for a Theory of Modern Architecture. R.I.B.A. Journal.
  • Terzidis, K. 2006. Algorithmic Architecture. s.l.: Elsevier Ltd..
  • Webster’s Third New International Dictionary: Unabridged. 1993. Springfield Mass. Könemann.
  • Windelband, W. 1901. A History of Philosophy. New York: Macmillan.

CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY

Year 2015, Volume: 11 Issue: 19 - Volume: 11 Issue: 19, 37 - 54, 12.07.2016

Ülkü Özten

https://doi.org/10.23835/tasarimkuram.239588

Abstract

This paper traces the conceptual evolution of Architectural Program through the second half of the 20th century. It discusses the evolution of the notion and its place in the architectural discourse in the works of various scholars, while giving and reviewing essential views, with a particular focus on two paradigmatic epistemological positions under which these views could be categorized: analysis-synthesis and conjecture-refutations. Aiming towards a reconsideration of the notion, it concludes with presenting our present understanding and conception of the notion, namely the present “state” of architectural program in the architectural agenda.

Keywords

Architectural program Analysis-Synthesis Conjecture-Refutations Architectural epistemology

References

  • Alexander, C. 1973. Notes on the Synthesis of Form. seventh edition ed. London: Oxford University Press. (First published by Harvard University Press. in 1964)
  • Anay, H. 2012. (Epistemological) Formalism and its Influence on Architecture: A Concise Review. A|Z Journal of the ITU Faculty of Architecture, 9 (1).
  • Anderson, S. 1984. Architectural Design as a System of Research Programs. Design Studies, 5 (3).
  • Anderson, S. 1984. Architectural Research Programmes in the Work of Le Corbusier. Design Studies, 5 (3), pp. 151-158.
  • Andreotti, L. 1984. Conceptual and Artifactual Research Programmes in Louis Kahn’s Design of the Philips Exeter Academy. Design Studies, 5 (3).
  • Archer, B. 1965. Systematic Method for Designers. London: The Design Council.
  • Archer, B. 1970. An Overview of the Structure of the Design Process. In: G. T. Moore, ed. Emerging Methods in Environmental Design and Planning. Cambridge, Massachussets, and London, England: The MIT Press, pp. 285-307.
  • Archer, B. 1979. Design As a Discipline. Design Studies, 1 (1).
  • Archer, B. 1981. A View of The Nature of Design Research. In: Design:Science:Method. Guilford: Westbury House, pp. 30-47.
  • Archer, B. 1999. On Methods of Research. Ankara: METU Faculty of Architecture Press.
  • Bacon, F. 1905. Novum Organum. New York, P.F. Collier & Son. (First published in Latin in 1620)
  • Ball, L., Onarheim, B. & Christensen, B. T. 2010. Design Requirements, Epistemic Uncertainty and Solution Development Strategies in Software Design. Design Studies, 31 (6), pp. 567-589.
  • Bamford, G. 2002. From Analysis/Synthesis to Conjecture/ Analysis: A Review of Karl Popper’s Influence on Design Methodology in Architecture. Design Studies, May, 23 (3), pp. 245-261.
  • Bartley, W. W. 1965. How Is the House of Science Built? The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. AA Journal, pp. 213-218.
  • Bayazit, N. 2004. Investigating Design: A Review of Forty Years of Design Research. Design Issues, 20 (1), pp. 16-29.
  • Brawne, M. 1995. Research, Design and Popper. Architectural Research Quarterly, pp. 10-15.
  • Broadbent, G. 1969. Design Method in Architecture. In: G. Broadbent & A. Ward, eds. Design Methods in Architecture. New York: George Wittenborn Inc., pp. 15-21.
  • Broadbent, G. 1979. The Development of Design Methods - A Review. In: Design Methods and Theories. s. l.: s.n., pp. 41-45.
  • Broadbent, G. 1981. The Morality of Designing. Guilford, Westbury House.
  • Bunnin, N. & Yu, J. 2004. The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy. s. l.: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Burry, M. 2011. Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming. Chiscester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Cherry, E. 1999. Programming for Design: From Theory to Practice. s.l.: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Cowan, J. D. 1965. Some Principles Underlying the Mechanization of Thought Processes. AA Journal, pp. 251-257.
  • Coyne, R. 1995. Designing Information Technology in the Postmodern Age. Cambridge Mass.: The MIT Press.
  • Coyne, R. et al. 1990. Knowledge-Based Design Systems. s.l.: University of Sydney.
  • Coyne, R. & Snodgrass, A. 1995. Problem Setting within the Prevalent Methapors of Design. Design Issues, 11 (2), pp. 31-61.
  • Crilly, N. 2010. The Rules that Artefacts Play: Technical, Social and Aesthetic Functions. Design Studies, July, 31 (4).
  • Cross, N. 1979. Responsible Design. Design Studies, July, 1 (2), pp. 127-128.
  • Cross, N. 1994. Engineering Design Methods. Second edition ed. Chiscester: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Cross, N. 2001. Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline versus Design Science. Design Issues, Summer, 17 (3).
  • Cross, N. 2007. Forty Years of Design Research. Design Studies, 28 (1), pp. 1-4.
  • Darke, J. 1979. The Primary Generator and the Design Process. Design Studies, 1 (1), pp. 36-44.
  • Descartes, R. 1899. The Method, Meditations, and Selections from the Principles of Descartes. Edinburgh: Blackwood and Sons.
  • Dilnot, C. 1984. The State of Design History Part I Mapping the Field. Design Issues, 1 (1).
  • Dinç, P. 2002. Building Programming: From “Problem Seeking” to Architectural Values. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 17 (3), pp. 101-119.
  • Dorst, K. 2008. Design Research: A Revolution-Waiting-to- Happen. Design Studies, 29 (1), pp. 4-11.
  • Duerk, D. 1993. Architectural Programming: Information Management for Design. s.l.: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Eastman, C. 1980. Information and Databases in Design. Design Studies, January, 1 (3).
  • Feyerabend, P. 1993. Against Method. New York: Verso. (First published by New Left Books in 1975)
  • Fowles, R. A. 1979. Design methods in UK Schools of Architecture. Design Studies, July, 1 (1), pp. 15-16.
  • Friedman, Y. 1975. Toward a Scientific Architecture. Cambridge Mass.: The MIT Press.
  • Gero, J. 1980. Computer-Aided Design by Optimization in Architecture. Design Studies, 1 (4).
  • Gombrich, E. 1965. The Beauty of Old Towns. AA Journal, pp. 293-297.
  • Grant, D. 1972. Systematic Methods in Environmental Design: An Introductory Bibliography. Monticello, Illınois: The Council of Planning Librarians, Exchange Bibliography Number 302.
  • Gregory, S. 1979. Editorial: Design Studies - the New Capability. Design Studies, 1 (1).
  • Gregory, S. 1980. Structured Programming (book review). Design Studies, 1(3).
  • Gross, M. & Fleisher, A. 1984. Design as the Exploration of Constraints. Design Studies, 5 (3), pp. 137-138.
  • Hershberger, R. 1999. Architectural Programming & Predesign Manager. New York: McGraw Hill.
  • Hillier, B., Musgrove, J. & O’Sullivan, P. 1972. Knowledge and Design. Stroudsbourg, Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, pp. 69-83.
  • Jones, A. 1980. Ironic Principles (book review). Design Studies, 1 (3), pp. 179-181.
  • Jones, C. 1963. A Method of Systematic Design. In: Conference on Design Methods. Pergamon Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd.
  • Jones, J. C. 1970 . Design Methods: Seeds of Human Futures. 2nd 1992 ed. s.l.: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Kalay, Y. 2004. Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories and Methods of Computer-Aided Design. Cambridge Mass.: The MIT Press.
  • Kolarevic, B. 2005. Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing. New York: Taylor & Francis.
  • Kostelnick, C. 1989. Process Paradigms in Design and Composition: Affinities and Directions. College Composition and Communication, October, 40 (3), pp. 267-281.
  • Kumlin, R. 1995. Architectural Programming: Creative Techniques for Design Professionals. s.l.: McGraw-Hill.
  • Landau, R. 1965. The Context For Decision Making: 2. AA Journal, p. 251.
  • Landau, R. 1965. Towards a Structure for Architectural Ideas. AA Journal, pp. 7-11.
  • Lawrence, R. 1982. Trends in Architectural Design Methods- The “Liability” of Public Participation. Design Studies, 3 (2), pp. 97-103.
  • Lawrence, R., 1983. Architecture and Behavioural Research: A Critical review. Design Studies, April, 4 (2), pp. 76-82.
  • Liddament, T. 1999. The Computationalist Paradigm in Design Research. Design Studies, January, 20 (1).
  • Liu, Y.-T. 2002. Defining Digital Architecture: 2001 FEIDA Award. s.l.: Birkhauser.
  • Margolin, V. 1984. Editorial. Design Issues, 1 (1), p. 3.
  • Metallinou, V. 1984. Regionalism as an Architectural Research Programme in the Work of Dimitris and Susanna Antonakakis. Design Studies, 5 (3).
  • Oxman, R. 2006. Theory and Design in the First Digital Age. Design Studies, Volume 27, pp. 229-265.
  • Oxman, R. 2008. Digital Architecture as a Challenge for Design Pedagogy: Theory, Knowledge, Models and Medium. Design Studies, Volume 29, pp. 99-120.
  • Pena, W. & Parshall, S. 2001. Problem Seeking: An Architectural Programming Primer. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons. (First published by CBI Publishing Co Inc., in 1977)
  • Popper, K. 1957. Philosophy of Science: A Personal Report. In: British Philosophy in Mid-Century. London: Allen and Unwin.
  • Popper, K. 2005. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. s.l.: Taylor & Francis.(Logik der Forschung first published in German in 1935 by Verlag von Julius Springer, Vienna Austria; first English edition published by Hutchinson & Co. in 1959)
  • Rosenman, M. A. & Gero, J. S. 1998. Purpose and Function in Design: From the Socio-Cultural to the Technophysical. Design Studies, April, 19 (2).
  • Rowe, C. 1982/83. Program vs. Paradigm. The Cornell Journal of Architecture, Issue 3, pp. 9-19.
  • Ryd, N. 2004. The Design Brief as carrier of Client Information During the Construction Process. Design Studies, May, 25 (3).
  • Rzevski, G., Woolman, D. & Trafford, D. B. 1980. Validation of a Design methodology. Design Studies, 1 (6).
  • Sanoff, H. 1977. Methods of Architectural Programming. Stroudsburg Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross Inc.
  • Schön, D. 1984. Editorial: Design: A Process of Enquiry, Experimentation and Research. July, 5 (3).
  • Schön, D. 1984. Problems Frames and Perspectives on Designing. Design Studies, July, 5 (3), pp. 132-136.
  • Schön, D. 1991. The Reflective Practitioner. s.l.: Avebury The Avademic Publishing Group. (First published by Basic Books in 1983)
  • Steadman, P. 1979. The History and Science of the Artificial. Design Studies, 1 (1).
  • Steele, J. 2001. Architecture and Computers: Action and Reaction in the Digital Design Revolution. s.l.: Laurence King.
  • Summerson, J. 1957. The Case for a Theory of Modern Architecture. R.I.B.A. Journal.
  • Terzidis, K. 2006. Algorithmic Architecture. s.l.: Elsevier Ltd..
  • Webster’s Third New International Dictionary: Unabridged. 1993. Springfield Mass. Könemann.
  • Windelband, W. 1901. A History of Philosophy. New York: Macmillan.
There are 83 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA39RU48KS
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Ülkü Özten This is me

Publication Date July 12, 2016
Published in Issue Year 2015 Volume: 11 Issue: 19 - Volume: 11 Issue: 19

Cite

APA Özten, Ü. (2016). CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY. Tasarım + Kuram, 11(19), 37-54. https://doi.org/10.23835/tasarimkuram.239588
AMA Özten Ü. CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY. Tasarım + Kuram. July 2016;11(19):37-54. doi:10.23835/tasarimkuram.239588
Chicago Özten, Ülkü. “CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY”. Tasarım + Kuram 11, no. 19 (July 2016): 37-54. https://doi.org/10.23835/tasarimkuram.239588.
EndNote Özten Ü (July 1, 2016) CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY. Tasarım + Kuram 11 19 37–54.
IEEE Ü. Özten, “CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY”, Tasarım + Kuram, vol. 11, no. 19, pp. 37–54, 2016, doi: 10.23835/tasarimkuram.239588.
ISNAD Özten, Ülkü. “CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY”. Tasarım + Kuram 11/19 (July 2016), 37-54. https://doi.org/10.23835/tasarimkuram.239588.
JAMA Özten Ü. CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY. Tasarım + Kuram. 2016;11:37–54.
MLA Özten, Ülkü. “CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY”. Tasarım + Kuram, vol. 11, no. 19, 2016, pp. 37-54, doi:10.23835/tasarimkuram.239588.
Vancouver Özten Ü. CONCEPTUAL EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM THROUGH THE SECOND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY. Tasarım + Kuram. 2016;11(19):37-54.