LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCTG1 Archives


PCCTG1 Archives

PCCTG1 Archives


PCCTG1@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PCCTG1 Home

PCCTG1 Home

PCCTG1  March 2010

PCCTG1 March 2010

Subject:

Re: Peter's translation suggestion

From:

"D. Brooking" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:08:40 -0700

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (192 lines)

That sounds too circular, but it is what we really mean. How about,

"parallel non-Latin field should be in the language/script of the heading
itself"

or some way to avoid using the word "heading" twice.

Because we aren't talking about the language of the actual person or body,
they could have multiple languages. We are talking about the preferred
name that is chosen as the authorized heading, what language that thing is
in. (Whether or not it is systematically romanized...)




************
Diana Brooking (206) 685-0389
Cataloging Librarian (206) 685-8782 fax
Suzzallo Library [log in to unmask]
University of Washington
Box 352900
Seattle WA 98195-2900

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Fletcher, Peter wrote:

> No kidding.
>
> I think the problem with the statements:
>
> The headings must be in the language/script of the body,
> person, or title [...] and:
>
> In non-Latin parallel fields, cataloger-created qualifiers may be
> entered in a non-Latin form. The qualifiers must be in the
> language/script of the body, person, or title [...]
>
> is that what I meant to say is the language of the "heading" itself,
> which can be a body, person, or title (730, 240, 130). Would it be
> clearer to say "headings must be in the language of the heading itself"?
> This way you don't get confused about whether or not the script is taken
> from the piece at hand.
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Robert Rendall
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 2:19 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] Peter's translation suggestion
>
> Well, at least my assertion that "nobody does this" was wrong! I was
> waiting for someone to contradict me...
>
> I'm happy to start thinking in terms of wrapping up now rather than
> raising any more problems! It's been a long ride.
>
> R.
>
> D. Brooking wrote:
>> Well, this is just one library's practice in some of its non-Latin
>> units. So I wouldn't say you are "wrong."
>>
>> Part of the problem with these guidelines is that it is up to *us* to
>> suggest what is wrong and right now. But I think no one is up for
>> diverging too much from what is current practice, given the
>> uncertainties that we've already discussed in many places. But even
>> determining what is current practice is not straighforward at all!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ************
>> Diana Brooking (206) 685-0389
>> Cataloging Librarian (206) 685-8782 fax
>> Suzzallo Library [log in to unmask]
>> University of Washington
>> Box 352900
>> Seattle WA 98195-2900
>>
>> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Robert Rendall wrote:
>>
>>> If you get Arabic colleagues to supply Arabic-script parallel fields
>>> for your Cyrillic records, then I'm wrong and the text is fine as it
>>> is! I'm happy to let the issue rest.
>>>
>>> Robert.
>>>
>>> D. Brooking wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Robert said, "I think I would summarize current practice as: if a
>>>> non-Latin parallel heading is entered, the heading/qualifiers must
>>>> normally be in the script of the title being cataloged."
>>>>
>>>> I think this is why I didn't understand the issue. Because it's not
>>>> our current practice. Actually, our practice here for Cyrillic
>>>> anyway is to always supply the non-latin parallel heading in the
>>>> language/script of the heading entity itself. That's why we supply
>>>> nothing for English or Czech name headings in a record. And why we
>>>> supply Bulgarian for a Bulgarian name, even if the title being
>>>> cataloged is in Russian or French.
>>>>
>>>> But if we have a Hebrew name or an Arabic name heading in a record
>>>> for a title in Russian or Serbian, then the Cyrillic catalogers
>>>> usually don't supply a parallel heading at all! (Because we are
>>>> clueless in Hebrew and Arabic.) But there are those instances where
>>>> we get a colleague to supply what's necessary if we think it is
> vital.
>>>>
>>>> (I don't know what our CJK catalogers are up to, though, they have a
>
>>>> completely separate shop...)
>>>>
>>>> So to make a long story short, I would be comfortable with the
>>>> language that's in there now, because it mirrors our current
>>>> practice here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ************
>>>> Diana Brooking (206) 685-0389
>>>> Cataloging Librarian (206) 685-8782 fax
>>>> Suzzallo Library [log in to unmask]
>>>> University of Washington
>>>> Box 352900
>>>> Seattle WA 98195-2900
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Robert Rendall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> See below.
>>>>>
>>>>> D. Brooking wrote:
>>>>> See comments below,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Robert Rendall wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Where are we now with that phrase "The headings must be
>
>>>>> in the language/script of the body, person, or title"?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --> DB: I am sorry, I can't find this thread. Is it the
>>>>> presence of the phrase (appears in several places) that is the
> issue,
>>>>> or just the wording of the phrase? The wording does sound
>>>>> awkward. What does RDA say? the "entity"???
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The most recent draft says:
>>>>>
>>>>> Non-Latin data may be supplied in parallel fields for headings
>>>>> established in non-standard romanization or in a conventional
>>>>> Latin-script
>>>>> form. The headings must be in the language/script of the body,
>>>>> person, or title [...]
>>>>> and:
>>>>> In non-Latin parallel fields, cataloger-created qualifiers may be
>>>>> entered in a non-Latin form. The qualifiers must be in the
>>>>> language/script of the body, person, or title [...]
>>>>>
>>>>> That would cover:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) entering Hebrew-script parallel fields for Israeli corporate
>>>>> bodies appearing in Latin-script records for titles in English
>>>>> (current
>>>>> practice, at least occasionally or for some scripts)
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) entering Hebrew-script parallel fields for Israeli corporate
>>>>> bodies appearing in Cyrillic-script records for titles in Russian
> (not
>>>>> current practice for any scripts, as far as I know)
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I would summarize current practice as: if a non-Latin
>>>>> parallel heading is entered, the heading/qualifiers must normally
>>>>> be in the
>>>>> script of the title being cataloged. Except for bib. records for
>>>>> Latin-script titles, where the authorized form is already in the
> same
>>>>> script at the title cataloged and takes care of the need for a
>>>>> heading legible to the monolingual patron, so you can add a
> parallel
>>>>> heading in another script if you feel like it. But I don't know
>>>>> how much sense that makes as a general principle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
August 2019
July 2019
May 2019
April 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
October 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
December 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
June 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
July 2000

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager