Print

Print


Indeed, both ǂc and ǂd are often added together under AAPs for Chinese personal names.  When they are, LC and PCC cataloguers follow the provision in this regard:

DCM, Z1, 100, Subfield instructions, 1)
Subfield $d (date) should always be the last element in a 100 string unless the term (Spirit) is being added to the name.  ...

===========================================================
Hideyuki Morimoto
Japanese Cataloger
C.V. Starr East Asian Library
300 Kent Hall, mail code 3901
Columbia University                 Voice:  +1-212-854-1510
1140 Amsterdam Ave.                 Fax:    +1-212-662-6286
New York, NY  10027-7034
U.S.A.                Electronic Mail:  [log in to unmask]
===========================================================




On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 2:41 PM Hostage, John <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
While I agree that there should have been just one $c, I think (Writer on on industrial laws and legislation) would have been sufficient.  (Law teacher) provides no added value.

Another issue is the order of subfields when a name requires the addition of both a date and an occupation.  This happens frequently with Chinese names, and in fact there are a number of people named Wang Wei with both, but they have the date after the occupation.  I think the occupation should come last, like we do with (Spirit).


------------------------------------------
John Hostage
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Harvard Law School Library
Cambridge, MA 02138
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI
0000 0000 4028 0917


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Adam L Schiff <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 14:11
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Multiple Professions/Occupations/Fields of Activity in Personal Name Access Point
 

Ed,


Subfield $c is not repeated when the fields would be adjacent to each other.  That LC authority is incorrectly formulated and probably should be revised to:


Wang, Wei ǂc (Law teacher and writer on industrial laws and legislation)


"Writer on industrial laws and legislation" would be considered either an occupation or an other distinguishing characteristic.  The field of activity would just be Industrial laws and legislation.


Subfield $c is repeated when something else is in between the two subfields, as in the AACR2 example Black Foot, $c Chief, $d d. 1877 $c (Spirit)  or this RDA one: Lodge, Oliver, ǂc Sir, ǂd 1851-1940 ǂc (Spirit)


The MARC 21 format itself specifies that you don't use two consecutive subfield $c's.  See https://www.loc.gov/marc/authority/adx00.html, where it says:


Multiple adjacent titles or words associated with a name are contained in a single subfield $c. Subfield $c is repeated only when words associated with a name are separated by subelements contained in other subfields.


Adam Schiff

University of Washington Libraries


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Ed M. Kazzimir <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 10:23:10 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Multiple Professions/Occupations/Fields of Activity in Personal Name Access Point
 

When it is necessary to identify a person by two professions or fields of activity in a qualifier, are these terms entered into a single $c or in separate subfields?

 

For example, there is this name authority record by LC, where the two :

     040  DLC ǂb eng ǂe rda ǂc DLC
     100  1_ Wang, Wei ǂc (Law teacher) ǂc (Writer on industrial laws and legislation)

 

Are there separate $c subfields because "Law teacher" is technically an occupation and "Writer on ..." is a field of activity?

 

There are a lot of existing authority records where the professions/occupations/etc. are enclosed in a single subfield, such as:


     100  1_ Smith, Simon ǂc (Teacher and poet)

 

The MARC authority format allows for repeated $c subfields, but the example given shows different types of usage (different types of titles and other terms):

 

      100

0_ $a Black Foot, $c Chief, $d d. 1877 $c (Spirit)

 

I cannot find instructions guiding us to a preferred method.  I do not see an example in RDA (and LC-PCC PS) 9.19.1.6.  Should the Smith example above be?

 

     100  1_ Smith, Simon ǂc (Teacher) ǂc (Poet)

 

 

 

Ed Kazzimir

ARLIS