Print

Print


Just to clarify--"BFM" is "bib file maintenance", referring to the NACO
contributor's obligation to inform LC of cases where new authority work
will impact LC bib headings in ways that won't be handled automatically.  I
don't think there is a handy term for the work of changing related
authorities which use a main heading when a main heading is changed, but
that is also a NACO contributor's obligation. No one else is charged with
taking care of it.

And I second Bob Maxwell's pragmatic comments about this title.

Stephen

On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Gene Fieg <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Bob, you have stated my concerns well. Perhaps the RDA instruction should
> extend authoritative sources to usage.  For instance, the usage genitive
> plural form indicates that we should use the plural nominative in the AAP.
> Also how authoritative are AACR2 AAPs for RDA constructions?  Should we as
> a matter of course, double check, when necessary, the AACR2 construction
> for the work?  Especially for pre-1501 works.
>
> Gene Fieg
>
>
> On Tuesday, December 6, 2016, Robert Maxwell <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>> Gene,
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, when an AAP that other AAPs are based on is changed, all the
>> dependent AAPs must be changed as well. This is the case for expressions of
>> works; it is also the case for AAPs for works themselves (if the AAP for
>> the person changes, all the AAPs for name-title works change, too); etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> BUT, in this case, I suggest you and I talk off-line about it. Yes,
>> looking at the evidence of modern reference sources, the majority do refer
>> to this work as “Institutio oratoria”; however, “Institutiones oratoriae”
>> does have some evidence. I think technically you are right, the work is
>> commonly identified in modern reference sources as “Institutio oratoria”
>> (Oxford Classical Dictionary; Brill’s New Pauly), but given that this is a
>> pretty “big” work and would involve lots of BFM and given that there is
>> some evidence in modern reference sources for “Institutiones oratoriae”
>> (e.g. the Lewis & Short Latin dictionary) you might consider letting it go.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you do choose to change the AAP for the work, in answer to your
>> question in the followup e-mail “who will do all that BFM?” the answer is,
>> you will, at least in the authority file.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>
>> Robert L. Maxwell
>> Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
>> 6728 Harold B. Lee Library
>> Brigham Young University
>> Provo, UT 84602
>> (801)422-5568
>>
>> "We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine
>> ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow,
>> 1842.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> ov] *On Behalf Of *Gene Fieg
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 06, 2016 5:17 PM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* When AAP for work changes, what happens to expressions?
>>
>>
>>
>> If in working on new AAPs for expressions, one finds that the work AAP is
>> not correct according to RDA (if not AACR2), and he changes the work AAP,
>> should he also change all the other AAP expressions in the NAF?
>>
>>
>>
>> Example: Currently, a work by Quintilian is listed as Institutiones
>> oratoriae.  Expressions for that work also use that form; but the correct
>> form according to instructions for pre-1501 works is Institutio oratoria.
>>
>>
>>
>> So if the work AAP is changed, should I or anyone else change the
>> expressions of that work?
>>
>>
>>
>> Gene Fieg
>>
>


-- 
Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Data Management & Access, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428
ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242