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