I wonder if that means, then, that if we created expression records for some of those languages (it looks like there’s a Hebrew and a Slavic one in the 430’s), we would remove those language forms from the Work record? The English and Latin would need to stay because they are how we refer to the work in English. But it hardly seems like it would be worth the effort to do this until someone actually needs to create an expression record for his/her catalog.

 

Ted

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amy Turner
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 6:38 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] What RDA are we following, again expression with original language

 

And it has been in the online file since 1980 with a LCCN of n  50004878, so it predates all of this work/expression terminology by decades.

 

I remember at Duke we used to make cross references like these in the subject catalog, while in the author-title catalog, cross references in a certain language were only made to what we would now call authorized access points for  expressions.

 

The common thread through the decades is that applying these rules has been a source of puzzlement for catalogers, leading me to wonder how these mind games are benefitting the users.

 

 

Amy

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 7:25 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] What RDA are we following, again expression with original language

 

You ARE right.  It is the work record.  The only real indication of that is the list of 430s.

 

 

Gene

 

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Gemberling, Ted P <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Gene,

Thanks. Are you sure the authority isn’t for the work? I notice there are a number of authorities for expressions with languages in $l.

 

Ted Gemberling

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 2:05 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] What RDA are we following, again expression with original language

 

It is in NAF,

 

Gene

 

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Gemberling, Ted P <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Gene,

I don’t get that work when I search for OCLC 40450. Did you leave out some digits? I would not want to try looking it up under the title, because there are probably many bib records with that title.

 

Ted Gemberling

UAB Lister Hill Library

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 1:15 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] What RDA are we following, again expression with original language

 

Please see the following OCLC record *40450 for Scriptores Augustae historiae.  

After having many discussions on these lists, I was led to believe that the 1## line in the AAP should have the language, in this case $l Latin, since it is an expression.

 

This record is coded as RDA and updated by DLC among others.  Why is not $l Latin not included?

 

Gene Fieg