Print

Print


Of course, to change the practice now to include these prefixes would immediately proliferate an inconsistency which one would have to explain to everyone, not just to new catalogers.  As you say, some thought is needed before we throw this practice out the window.  As it stands right now, I haven't noticed that folks are having trouble with it.  If they do  ....  we fix it and move on, right?


As for us, it isn't a minute point.   We're in the process of working through over 6,000 19th-century German titles as well as numerous volumes from Latin America.  Indeed, this is an every-day encounter here and no one seems to be troubled with it.


RCA


Richard C. Amelung, Ph. D., M.A.L.S.

Professor Emeritus of Legal Research

Vincent C. Immel Law Library

Saint Louis University School of Law

100 N. Tucker Blvd.

St. Louis, MO   63101-1930

Phone:  314.977.2743

Fax:   314.977.3966


________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Diana Slaughter <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 4:17:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Separable prefixes in fuller form qualifiers for given names

Continuing the old practice of leaving out the prefixes would keep the qualifier consistent across all the access points within an authority record. However, it's such a minute point that new catalogers may not learn of it, making it hard to maintain consistency between records if some omit them and some do not. Some thought is needed about which kind of consistency is more important. I'm on the fence.

Diana Slaughter
Law Library
The University of Michigan