Print

Print


You can do either.  LC will use the work access point for the original language expression.  But you could be more true to RDA by adding Sanskrit for that particular expression.  

Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900




On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:57 AM -1000, "Ian Fairclough" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

PCCLIST readers,

 

OCLC 946975293 "Materials towards the study of Vasubandhuʼs Viṁśikā : ǂb Sanskrit and Tibetan critical editions of the verses and autocommentary, an English translation and annotations ..." currently has:

1000 Vasubandhu, ǂe author.

24010Viṃśatikāvijñaptimātratāsiddhi. ǂl Polyglot

 

I 'm in process of replacing field 240 with:

 

70002ǂi Container of (work): ǂa Vasubandhu. ǂt Viṃśatikāvijñaptimātratāsiddhi.

70002ǂi Container of (expression): ǂa Vasubandhu. ǂt Viṃśatikāvijñaptimātratāsiddhi. ǂl Tibetan.

70002ǂi Container of (expression): ǂa Vasubandhu. ǂt Viṃśatikāvijñaptimātratāsiddhi. ǂl English.

 

The first of these represents not only the work but the original expression, in Sanskrit.  I didn't put:

 

70002ǂi Translation of: ǂa Vasubandhu. ǂt Viṃśatikāvijñaptimātratāsiddhi.

70002ǂi Container of (expression): ǂa Vasubandhu. ǂt Viṃśatikāvijñaptimātratāsiddhi. ǂl Sanskrit.

 

because my understanding is that an expression in the original language is represented by the access point for the work. 

 

I'd appreciate any comments.  Particularly on how the relationship designator "Container of (work)" is being used in place of not only a work but an expression in the original language.  It seems odd to me, and given a free choice I'd sooner see the first 700 field with expression and subfield l Sanskrit.  At least the three fields for the expressions would correspond to each other.

 

Sincerely - Ian

 

Ian Fairclough

Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian

George Mason University

703-993-2938

[log in to unmask]