Print

Print


Jessalyn, et al.

 

My main concern was whether NARs no2010053664 & no2010053666 had been formulated correctly (both use Kalaqinzuoyi … instead of Kalaqin Zuoyi …). I was ready to change both but thought I should check to be absolutely sure before changing them.

 

Thank you,

 

Wayne Richter

Asian Materials Specialist/PCC Liaison

The Libraries

Western Washington University

Bellingham, WA 98225-9103

ALCTS CC:AAM

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Zoom, Jessalyn
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 6:52 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Word division for Chinese place names

 

Wayne,

 

I think there are two points entailed here.  One is about word division and the other is on form of the name.

 

You are correct - the word division should be consistently applied in both place name authority records and corporate name NARs where place name is part of the corporate name. 

              

About form of the corporate name NAR - if the corporate name contains a place name and the place name has been established in the non-pinyin form according to GEOnet, that form should be used in the authority record for the corporate name, and the pinyin form should be provided as a cross-reference.  In the example given below, the corporate name NAR would look like this:

 

110  2    "Harqin Zuoyi Mongolzu Zizhixian gai kuang" bian xie zu

410  2    "Kalaqin Zuoyi Mengguzu Zizhixian gai kuang" bian xie zu      

 

But note in bibliographic record, in subfield $c statement of responsibility area of 245 field, the corporate name should be transcribed in pinyin form in its entirety according to ALA-LC Romanization Tables.   

 

I hope this helps.  

 

Thanks,

Jessalyn Zoom

Cooperative Programs Section

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wayne Richter
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 4:54 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] Word division for Chinese place names

 

Dear All,

 

This apparently isn’t covered sufficiently in the Chinese RT. My question is about word division for certain geographic entities which contain phrases equivalent to Left Banner, Front Banner, etc. The practice is clear in geographic place name headings but not when they occur in a descriptive context.  

For example:

喀喇沁左翼蒙古族自治 and 《喀喇沁左翼蒙古族自治县概况》编写组.

 

In descriptive cataloging (and in corporate body NARs) my contention is that these should be treated with respect to word division the same as the place name (Harqin Zuoyi Mongolzu Zizhixian) thus the two above examples should be romanized as Kalaqin Zuoyi Mengguzu Zizhixian  (not e.g. Kalaqinzuoyi Mengguzu Zizhixian) and “Kalaqin Zuoyi Mengguzu Zizhixian gai kuang” bian xie zu (and not “Kalaqinzuoyi Mengguzu Zizhixian gai kuang” bian xie zu).

 

Is this correct according to other people’s (and LC’s) views?

 

Thank you,

 

Wayne Richter

Asian Materials Specialist/PCC Liaison

The Libraries

Western Washington University

Bellingham, WA 98225-9103

ALCTS CC:AAM