Print

Print


Thanks again Gary.
 
A cursory look suggests that there is a lot to be said for inserting terms from a controlled vocabulary, and in not typing them at all...
 
Regards
Richard 


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gary L Strawn
Sent: 23 October 2012 15:07
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] terms for occupations in field 374

Barring need for more detail, here's reports on the 372 and 380 fields.  Field 12.42 just arrived, so I included that one as well.

 

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 Moore, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 1:27 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] terms for occupations in field 374

 

Thanks Gary, that's really useful. It certainly highlights the need for spell-checking in cataloging software!

 

Would there be any possibility of doing the same for activity terms in 372, please?

 

Regards

Richard

_________________________

Richard Moore

Authority Control Team Manager

The British Library

                                                                       

Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806                            

E-mail: [log in to unmask]                                   

 

 

 


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gary L Strawn
Sent: 22 October 2012 21:14
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] terms for occupations in field 374

I had a program run through LC/NACO 2012 weekly issues 1-41 (all received so far) and total up the uses of stuff in the 374 field.  In the attached, the first column is the $2 code (or "***" if no $2), the second column is the text from $a, and the third column is the count of occurrences.

 

The program found 22,576 374 fields, with a total of 30,444 occurrences of subfield $a.  These boiled down to 4,685 distinct combinations of $a+$2.

 

Make of it what ye will.

 

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 Brueck, Vicki
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 8:44 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] terms for occupations in field 374

 

I was on vacation last week and so am coming to this discussion late.  Since the discussion has centered on using LCSH plural terms versus uncontrolled singular terms I wanted to add to the discussion that I have been experimenting with using $2 onet terms (http://www.onetonline.org/) in field 374.  There is still the problem of plural terms but it does usually yield much more specific occupation titles.  For example a search for a controlled term for a civil engineering professor in LCSH would be “College teachers” or “College science teachers” but in onet you can use “Engineering Teachers, Postsecondary”.

 

In regards to time spent adding the additional 3XX fields I have taken the course of adding anything that I find in the course of cataloging the item, or in the search of verification that my person either is or is not the person represented by an already created authority record.  So the only part that really takes additional time is searching for a controlled term in 372/374.  Time will tell if controlled terms are worth the additional time spent.

 

I must say that I have been frustrated by old authority records which had minimal information with the statement “Do not confuse with …” without giving you any information to help you in keeping the two people separated.  Based on those experiences I am more willing to spend another minute or two on an authority record and record the additional information that I find during the course of cataloging the work.

 

Thanks,

Vicki

 

 

Vicki Brueck

Senior Cataloger

Resource Management Services Branch

State Library of North Carolina

4641 Mail Service Center

Raleigh, N.C.  27699-4641

[log in to unmask]

Office: (919) 807-7451  Fax: (919) 733-1843

 

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law "NCGS.Ch.132" and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized state official.

 

dcr-200px-logoState-Library-200-200px

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Charles Croissant
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] terms for occupations in field 374

 

We recently completed our RDA NACO training at my library, and during that experience, one issue came up that we would like to see more discussion on:

 

Should terms used in the 374 field of authority records to express a person’s occupation be in the plural or singular?

 

In our training, we saw examples of both singulars and plurals being used in 374.

 

Since such terms, in this context, pertain to an individual, it seems sensible to use singular nouns, such as Engineer (see NAR nb2012014836).

 

As I understand it, one reason for including such terms in the 374 is that they could be used as needed to break a conflict with another individual of the same name, by being placed in a subfield c of the 100. In such a case, they would necessarily be used in the singular.

 

On the other hand, catalogers like to draw on controlled vocabularies, and some catalogers have started drawing on the class-of-persons terms in the Subject Authority File. Such class-of-persons terms are in the plural (Engineers, Architects, Educators), so if they were ever needed for placement in a subfield c of a 100 field, they would have to be modified.

 

The DCM Z1 for the 372 field contains a nice example contrasting 372 with 374, using singular forms in the 374:

 

Example: 372 ## $a Poetry $a Education

Occupation used in 374: 374 ## $a Poet $a Educator

 

Some of us feel this would be the preferable practice.

 

But this is contradicted, it seems, in the DCM Z1 for the 374, which states:

 

“Prefer controlled vocabulary, such as LCSH or MeSH, recording the source in subfield $2.  For consistency, capitalize the first term in each subfield $a.  When terms do not come from a controlled vocabulary, use a singular form.”

 

This gives catalogers permission to use plurals (drawn from LCSH). Another consequence of this statement is that it will lead to a mix of plural and singular forms in the 374 – this seems like a less-than-optimal solution.

 

Is LCSH the best controlled vocabulary to use for terms for occupations? There may be other controlled vocabularies available that are better suited to this task, in that they use singular forms of the term.

 

Is there a PCC Task Force that dealt with this issue, and concluded that using plural forms of occupational terms is best practice? If so, perhaps someone from that group could summarize their reasoning (it’s really hard to keep up with the large number of documents being issued on RDA/NACO-related subjects-- )


Charles Croissant
Senior Catalog Librarian
Pius XII Memorial Library
Saint Louis University
St. Louis, MO 63108