Print

Print


For what it's worth, I found an obituary for this man, which confirms that he's a William and that gives us a death year, which can be used in the 100 and resolve the conflict with an existing record.  It appeared in the 40th Annual report of the Indian Rights Association (1922), page 46: Mr. William Alexander Brown:  Just as this report goes to press a sad and heavy loss has fallen upon us through the death of Mr. Wm. Alexander Brown, our vice-president and chairman of the Law Committee. ... "  The report covers "the year ending December 12, 1922" and has a 1922 publication date, so we may assume the death occurred late in 1922.  According to RDA, the $d will read   -1922 

---Ken Rockwell
   Cataloger
J. Willard Marriott Library
University of Utah

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Cuneo, Mary Jane
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 4:48 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] NACO record with occupational qualifier in 400 but not in 100

I agree, one shouldn't assume Wm. = William (there are also Wilhelm, Wim, Willem ...)


To refresh my memory I dug out the message John is referring to (about fuller form of personal name), which explains where the new policy statement resides until it can get added to the other ones.  Here it is:


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Reser, Dave
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Revised LC-PCC Policy for Fuller form of name (9.19.1.4, option)

Dear PCC members--

The policy related to the optional use of the RDA element "Fuller form of name" in authorized access points for persons (RDA 9.19.1.4, option) has been the subject of debate by more than one PCC Task Group, the PCC Policy Committee, and listservs such as PCCLIST.  LC and PCC have agreed to a new shared policy for this instruction (a change from the previous LC policy).  Because of the high level of interest in this topic, and the postponement of the February release of the RDA Toolkit where it would have been published (http://www.rdatoolkit.org/blog/517 ), we have taken the exceptional step of mounting the revised policy so that it may be applied immediately by catalogers.  Until it is published in the Toolkit, the policy will reside in the Section "Preliminary Publication of LC-PCC PS" at http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/lcps_access.html (the revised policy is also included below).
 
Training documentation will be updated to reflect the change in policy.
Thanks,
Becky Culbertson (PCC SCS chair) and Dave Reser (LC PSD)

LC‐PCC PS for 9.19.1.4, Option (Fuller form of name) New Authority Records LC practice/PCC practice for Optional addition: Apply the option to provide a fuller form of name if a part of the forename or surname used in the preferred name is represented by an initial or an abbreviation, if the cataloger considers it important for identification. Add unused forenames or surnames only if needed to distinguish one access point from another (see RDA 9.19.1.4).
Existing Authority Records
LC practice/PCC practice for Optional addition: Unless otherwise changing an existing heading (e.g., conflict), do not change an existing AACR2 or RDA heading merely to add or remove a fuller form of name.
[Updated for website posting February 13, 2013]

Mary Jane Cuneo  (mom of Wm.)
Serials cataloging and NACO
Information and Technical Services
Harvard Library


-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Hostage
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 6:13 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: NACO record with occupational qualifier in 400 but not in 100

It's not a problem that the fields are "mismatched," but I would echo the questions posed by Ben Abrahamse.
I have some other questions.  Aren't we supposed to document a source for expanding an abbreviated name?  There's not much else Wm. could stand for, but nevertheless, the 100 $q and 378 might have to go, and then the 400 would go too.
LC practice is not to add the 100 $q if there is no conflict.  I think it was announced that PCC would leave it to cataloger's judgment, though it's not showing in PS 9.19.1.4.  If you can't document what it stands for, I wouldn't add the qualifier.
The Wikipedia 670 seems more appropriate for the NAR of the association.  It doesn't say anything about Brown.

------------------------------------------
John Hostage
Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian // Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services // Langdell Hall 194 // Cambridge, MA 02138 [log in to unmask] 
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Long, Chris Evin
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 16:12
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [PCCLIST] NACO record with occupational qualifier in 400 but 
> not in
> 100
> 
> I'm trying to concoct a heading for this person and haven't 
> encountered this situation before.  The situation would be easy if I 
> had dates, but unfortunately I can't find any.  The issue arises in 
> the 400 because the fuller form of the name conflicts with an existing 
> name heading.  Per RDA 9.19.2.1, I can make an addition to the variant 
> name (see the Brown, Charlie
> (Composer) example there), but the $c isn't needed in the 100 field, 
> so now I have "mismatched" 100/400 fields.
> 
> 
> 100 1 Brown, Wm. Alexander $q (William Alexander)
> 373    Indian Rights Association $2 naf
> 375    male
> 377    eng
> 378    $q William Alexander
> 400 1 Brown, William Alexander $c (Native American rights activist)
> 667    Cannot identify with: Brown, William Alexander, n2002037927
> 670   Threatened exploitation of Pima Indians, 1920: $b p. 10 (Wm. Alexander
> Brown, vice-president and chairman Law Committee, I.R.A.)
> 670   Wikipedia, viewed Apr. 2, 2013 $b (The Indian Rights Association (IRA)
> was an American social activist group dedicated to the well being and 
> acculturation of Native Americans. Founded in Philadelphia in 1882, 
> the Indian Rights Associations (IRA) was highly influential in 
> American Indian policy through the 1930s and remained involved as an 
> organization until 1994)
> 
> Is this reasonable? Given that I have no other info, is there a better way?
> 
> Oh, and trying to devise an appropriate occupational term given the 
> info I could find was a whole other bag of fun.
> 
> Thanks for any suggestions,
> 
> **********************************
> Chris Long
> Catalog Librarian
> Ruth Lilly Law Library
> Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law
> 530 W. New York St.
> Indianapolis, IN 46202
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Phone: 317.274.1930
> Fax: 317.274.8825