 |
 |
One of the odd deficits in RDA is the lack of a place to record the original language of a Work as distinct from the language of an Expression. Accepting that language is not properly an attribute of the Work should not preclude naming the original language of a Work as an important piece of contextualizing information about it, as important as date, place of origin, and history. Original language of the Work should be a defined attribute with those others. Maybe LC and PCC could work on adding that to Work attributes in RDA 6 as a step toward more flexible, maybe even automated solutions to the task of naming Expressions differentiated by language. Stephen On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Scharff, Mark <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Interesting discussion. Is it too soon to speculate on whether or not it > would be possible to code field 377 in work authority records? I *think* I > understand that "Language of Work" is not an RDA attribute; but if there is > some sort of tacit understanding that a work authority record for a work > with a textual component also represents the original expression, encoding > the 377 for the original language would seem reasonable. BTW, I was on the > Expressions task group that Dave mentions, so I know how thorny all this is. > > Mark Scharff, Music Cataloger > Gaylord Music Library > Washington University in St. Louis > [log in to unmask] > > -----Original Message----- > From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > On Behalf Of Reser, Dave > Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 1:17 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: [PCCLIST] Distinction between the work and original expression > (was: NARs with ampersand in subfield $l - do not reuse LCCN) > > Hi Adam, > > As you noted, LC does not routinely make an additional NAR representing > the original language expression-- this has been the long-time practice in > the NACO file for general works, where the authority record for the work > also represents the original expression. For example, the access point > "Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet" represents Hamlet the work, as > well as the original (English) expression, and there is no authority record > for "Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. English." > > You are correct that the "Mail carrier = El cartero" example in the LC-PCC > PS for 6.27.3 illustrates this approach (an earlier version included "$l > English" in the first analytic added entry, but this was removed after > concerns were raised by the PCC/LC PSD RDA Policy Statements Task Group > about using different access points for the original work and original > expression in some cases). Comments on the final report of the PCC Access > Points for Expressions Task Group also raised this issue, and follow-up > activities on that report have been deferred by the PCC Policy Committee to > the PCC Standing Committee on Standards, which is planning a possible > questionnaire to get the sense of the PCC. The LC-PCC PS for 6.27.3 is > labeled as LC practice because there has been no resolution at this point > (there is a note in the PS that indicates the PCC has the topic under > discussion). [You also mentioned Appendix 1 to LC-PCC PS for 6.27.1.9-- I > wouldn't read too much 'RDA policy' into that statement considering the > first cautionary sentence "Note: This appendix is provisional until the > Program for Cooperative Cataloging has reviewed and revised it for RDA."] > The guidelines for when LC would make a title or name/title authority > record are in DCM Z1 (we generally wouldn't make an authority record for > the original expression in cases like this); great flexibility is extended > to PCC folks there as well-- "PCC practice: NACO participants may > contribute name authority records for works or expressions as needed for > cataloging." > > > This is a complicated issue given the impact on the legacy authority file > as well as bibliographic issues-- what one might do in a 'perfect' RDA > environment without this legacy would likely be different. You may know > that some (at least 1) PCC library has already started moving in this > direction and feels very strongly about this, so I can't advise you on what > is right or wrong at this point, but will say that for now LC will wait > until the issue is further discussed by the PCC, potential solutions > identified, and a plan for file maintenance is in place before changing its > practice. > > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 5:59 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: NARs with ampersand in subfield $l - do not reuse LCCN > > Ana, > > Will a $l with the original language of expression be included in the new > NAR, or are we to just create an NAR for the work and let that represent > the original expression? LC-PCC PS for 6.27.3 seems to indicate the latter > should be done (but it's not clearly labeled either as LC practice, PCC > practice, or both), and it doesn't actually deal with NARs, just access > points in bibliographic records. But the clear implication of the example > there is that we don't create a separate expression NAR for the original > language expression: > > 100 1# $a Macken, JoAnn Early, $d 1953- > 245 10 $a Mail carrier = $b El cartero / $c JoAnn Early Macken. > 700 12 $a Macken, JoAnn Early, $d 1953- $t Mail carrier. > 700 12 $a Macken, JoAnn Early, $d 1953- $t Mail carrier. $l Spanish. > > Also, Appendix 1 to LC-PCC PS for 6.27.1.9 has conflicting examples, since > the second example below does include the language of the original > expression in the access point: > > 730 02 $a To live and die in L.A. > 730 02 $a To live and die in L.A. $l French. > 730 02 $a To live and die in L.A. $l Spanish. > Original in English, dubbed in French and Spanish > > 730 02 $a Shichinin no samurai. $l English > 730 02 $a Shichinin no samurai. $l Japanese. > Subtitled version of a motion picture released under a different title > > --Adam > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > 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] > http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > On Fri, 31 May 2013, Cristan, Ana Lupe wrote: > > > Hello, > > Earlier there was a discussion on the RDA-list about NAR n 79084797 that > was changed incorrectly. I responded to that list but in reality this is > the audience I need to address. This is to remind catalogers not to reuse > LCCNs and how to untangle NARs with subfield $l that contain an ampersand. > > In July of 2012 PSD issued guidelines describing the changes made in > > Phase 1 and provided guidance for the handling of NARs that had the > > 667 note added to it. This document is at: > > http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/pdf/lcnaf_rdaphase.pdf > > > > > > See page 4, number 3 that states: > > > > "...AACR2 authority record with an ampersand in $l will be labeled with > a 667 field as needing review under RDA (about 13,000 authority records). > > What an RDA cataloger should do: If an authority record with an > ampersand in $l is encountered, create substitute RDA records for each > language expression represented in $l if they don't already exist (they > often will) and report the authority record with the ampersand for > deletion. Do not use 're-use' the authority record with an ampersand for a > single language expression...." > > > > In October of 2012 - Dave Reser created a PowerPoint with more detail > and this was added to the suite of documents in the table of Library of > Congress RDA Training Materials - labeled Special topics. This PowerPoint > called Changes to the LC/NACO Authority File< > http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/LC%20RDA%20Training/Authorities%20Presentations/RDA%20special%20topic_changes%20to%20lc-naco%20file.ppt> > also describes the changes made to the LC/NAF as a result of Phase 1 and > provides guidance as to what to do in each situation when a NAR with a 667 > note is encountered (specifically ppt slides 19 and 20 talk about uniform > title NARs with either polyglot or with the ampersand). > > > > Please take the time to review these documents. I will delete n > 79084797 and create a new NAR for the English expression and will add the > deprecated LCCN in a subfield $z. > > Thanks, > > Ana Lupe Crist?n > > Library of Congress > > Policy and Standards Division > > 101 Independence Ave. > > Washington, DC 20540-4305 > > Tel. +1.202.707.7921 > > fax +1.202.707.6629 > > Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> > > > > > > > -- Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist Technical Services, University Libraries University of Minnesota 160 Wilson Library 309 19th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55455 Ph: 612-625-2328 Fx: 612-625-3428