I too disagree with the suggestion to make cross references from non-nominative forms of names. This is not just a question of Latin-- many language groups have inflected forms, including Slavic and Finno-Ugric. I would think it would suffice to record the inflected form as usage in the 670. Unlike some others, I would actually be horrified if I saw an authority record with an inflected form in a 400 field; it would suggest to me that the cataloger was not familiar with the language of the item being cataloged.
Sent from my iPad
On May 16, 2012, at 5:40 PM, "Adam L. Schiff" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Except that many of the rest of us are pretty ignorant about Latin forms of name and might not realize that a form is inflected. The reference directs them to the proper form.
> Adam L. Schiff
> Principal Cataloger
> University of Washington Libraries
> Box 352900
> Seattle, WA 98195-2900
> (206) 543-8409
> (206) 685-8782 fax
> [log in to unmask]
> On Wed, 16 May 2012, Joachim Jr, Martin D wrote:
>> I disagree with making a reference from an inflected form of a name. A ref. from ?Channing, Johannis?
>> makes no more sense than a ref. from ?Shakespeare?s, William? when the t.p. has: William Shakespeare?s Hamlet.
>> Marty Joachim (ret.)
>> Indiana University Libraries
>> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gary L Strawn
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 12:05 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Latin question on personal name
>> You are absolutely correct. In this context, "Iohannis Channing" is in the genitive case, and needs to be expressed
>> in the nominative when constructing the authority 100.
>> It's well known that if you go looking for something, you're likely to find it; so adventures concerning headings
>> that appear to have been constructed in the genitive come as no real surprise. I wouldn't bark, though, at a 400
>> for a non-nominative form.
>> Gary L. Strawn, Authorities Librarian, etc.
>> Northwestern University Library, 1970 Campus Drive, Evanston IL 60208-2300
>> e-mail: [log in to unmask] voice: 847/491-2788 fax: 847/491-8306
>> Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit. BatchCat version: 2007.22.416
>> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ted P Gemberling
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 10:48 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [PCCLIST] Latin question on personal name
>> I ran into something that I think is probably an error, but I wanted to make sure before changing it. nr 91024583 is
>> set up as Channing, Johannis, with a 400 for an English form. I found some dates that can be added to it.
>> I am cataloging a book with this 245 information: Rhazes De variolis et morbillis, arabice et latine : ?bcvm aliis
>> nonnvllis eivsdem argvmenti / ?ccvra et impensis Iohannis Channing ...
>> So it?s a work by the medieval Arab writer Rhazes, edited (and translated?) by John Channing. The date is 1766. The
>> person who set up the authority for Channing saw the usage Johannis for the given name and set the heading up with
>> it. But doesn?t ?cvra et impensis Iohannis Channing? mean ?at the care and expense OF John Channing?? So Johannis seems to be
>> a genitive form, and the nominative would most likely be Johannes, even though it?s unattested as far as I know. I
>> realize that Johannis does occur as an undisputable part of some names, as apparently n 88028405 (Hardenbergh,
>> Johannis G., for a Dutch-American farmer.) But for most writers who wrote in Latin, it seems incorrect.
>> Another example of this sort of error might be nb2010007680. Johannis is used in the 100 and Johannes in the 400.
>> The 670 doesn?t give us enough information about the occurrence of Johannis, but from the bib record it may be from,
>> OCLC # 751733627, it?s clear that it should be understood as a genitive.
>> I noticed another thing: sometimes a name heading is set up with Johannes in the 100 and Johannis in the 400. An
>> example is nr 93031760. Is that necessary, since the ?is form is a grammatical ending? And there is so little
>> difference between ?Johannes? and ?Johannis? that it seems there is no access issue involved. It?s not like someone would fail
>> to find the name if you didn?t include Johannis.
>> Thanks for any thoughts or information you might have on these matters.
>> Ted Gemberling
>> UAB Lister Hill Library