Hello great catalogers,


I’ve got a problem that has me confused about our current understanding of what exactly a series is.


A while back, I created two series authority records for a pair of videocassette series:


Serie Video etnografico (no2005096548)

Serie Video etnografico. $l English (no2005094210)


The series were for parallel versions of ethnographic videos, one with soundtrack and titles in Spanish and one with soundtrack and titles in English.  The English versions had the series statement “Ethnographical video series,” but as it was essentially a translation, I created the series heading using the Spanish title as my base.  As I understood it, this was the correct way to make the series access points at the time.


In 2010, 9 (perhaps all) of the videocassettes were released on DVD, with the Spanish and English versions of each video combined into one disc.  (OCLC #694787185 is an example.)  They have twin series statements on the container:


Serie: Videos etnograficos / Series: Ethnographic videos


The Spanish statement obviously differs slightly from the authorized form on no2005096548, but it seems a minor title change.


Since series are no longer tied to manifestations, I don’t believe that we need new series authorities for the DVD versions. 


My questions are:


1.       Did I do the authority records right according to AACR2?

2.       Is it still correct in RDA that the Spanish and English versions of the videocassette series should get different authorized access points, each corresponding to an expression of the (single) work? 

3.       Should the record for each of the new combined DVD releases have two separate series AAPs, corresponding to the two expressions in each manifestation (which have previously been released separately)?


I hope this all makes sense.




Pete Wilson

Vanderbilt University