Print

Print


I should have included the instruction number; I was referring to 6.27.2.2.

Robert

On Tuesday, April 30, 2019, Yang Wang <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Robert,
>
>
>
> Sorry, but I read it [RDA 6.2.2.9, Exception] differently. It seems to
> suggest that only when there’s no distinct section/part title present,
> then, use the numeric or alphabetic designation. Manṭiq, in this case,
> is a distinct title, not a general term. All examples under this
> “Exception” seem to confirm this. The keyword in the following RDA
> instruction is: *only*.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yang
>
>
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]
> OV] *On Behalf Of *Robert J. Rendall
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 30, 2019 12:31 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [PCCLIST] Question on distinguishing two works with same
> name
>
>
>
> But that instruction is followed by an exception for non-distinctive
> titles, and "Manṭiq" ("Logic") seems to be non-distinctive since it's the
> title of sections of two different works by the same author.
>
>
>
> Robert Rendall
>
> Principal Serials Cataloger
>
> Original and Special Materials Cataloging, Columbia University Libraries
>
> 102 Butler Library, 535 West 114th Street, New York, NY 10027
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=535+West+114th+Street,+New+York,+NY+10027&entry=gmail&source=g>
>
> tel.: 212 851 2449  fax: 212 854 5167
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:14 PM Adam L Schiff <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> That’s not what RDA says to do for parts.  It’s
>
>
>
> Tolkien, J. R. R. (John Ronald Reuel), 1892-1973. Two towers
>
>
>
> not
>
>
>
> Tolkien, J. R. R. (John Ronald Reuel), 1892-1973.  Lord of the rings. 2,
> Two towers
>
>
>
> Adam Schiff
>
> University of Washington Libraries
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on
> behalf of Kevin M Randall <[log in to unmask]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 30, 2019 8:59 AM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: Question on distinguishing two works with same name
>
>
>
> Would it be better to establish the titles as part titles? That is, the
> forms being proposed here as variants could instead be the AAPs?
>
>
>
> 100 0#  Avicenna, ǂd 980-1037. ǂt Shifāʼ. ǂn 1, ǂp Manṭiq
>
> 100 0#  Avicenna, ǂd 980-1037. ǂt Dānishnāmah-ʼi ʻAlāʼī. ǂn 1, ǂp
> Manṭiq
>
>
>
> Kevin M. Randall
>
> Principal Serials Cataloger
>
> Northwestern University Libraries
>
> Northwestern University
>
> www.library.northwestern.edu
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> 847.491.2939
>
>
>
> Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>*On
> Behalf Of *Yang Wang
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 30, 2019 8:45 AM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [PCCLIST] Question on distinguishing two works with same
> name
>
>
>
> Hi Jay,
>
>
>
> It seems to me that the qualifiers (Persian) and (Arabic) for the two
> works would still cause certain confusion to library users who have no
> direct access to the authority records. Even given as references, Mantiq
> (Persian) would still be mistakenly construe as “Mantiq. $l Persian” and
> Mantiq (Arabic) as “Mantique. $l Arabic).”
>
>
>
> So, as an alternative, perhaps you could also consider if the following
> would work:
>
>
>
> 100 0#  Avicenna, ǂd 980-1037. ǂt Manṭiq (Shifāʼ.1)
>
> 100 0#  Avicenna, ǂd 980-1037. ǂt Manṭiq (Dānishnāmah-ʼi ʻAlāʼī. 1)
>
>
>
> The current authority record (n  90647360) appears to have confused the
> two works as one. If so, based on your research and analysis, why not
> consider contributing two brand new name/title records, and mark the old
> record for deletion by LC [on the ground that you need to suppress this*undifferentiated
> title*]?
>
>
>
> The article on Avicenna’s works in Encyc. Iran. is very informative and
> helpful!
>
>
>
> Just my 2 cents. Do let us know what your final decision will be.
>
>
>
> Cheers!
>
>
>
> Yang
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]
> OV <[log in to unmask]>]*On Behalf Of *Shorten, Jay
> *Sent:* Monday, April 29, 2019 2:57 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* [PCCLIST] Question on distinguishing two works with same name
>
>
>
> I need input on a new authority record I need to create.
>
>
>
> I found that the authority record for
>
> n  90647360 Avicenna,ǂd 980-1037.ǂt Manṭiq
>
> has confused two separate works of the same name. One was originally
> written in Arabic, and was part 1 of his larger work Shifāʼ. Some of
> this was translated into Latin in the Middle Ages. The other was originally
> written in Persian, and was part 1 of his larger work Dānishnāmah-ʼiʻ
> Alāʼī. This was never translated into Latin. (Source:
> http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/avicenna-xi) The two are not
> translations of each other, though the Persian one has the same theme. (The
> other two extant parts of Dānishnāmah-ʼiʻAlāʼī are also in a similar
> situation.)
>
>
>
> After reading through RDA and the policy statements, I propose to keep“
> Manṭiq” for the more well-known Arabic work, and construct the authority
> record for the Persian work as
>
> Avicenna,ǂd 980-1037.ǂt Manṭiq (Persian)
>
> with variant access points for Risālah-i manṭiq  and Dānishnāmah-ʼiʻ
> Alāʼī.ǂn 1,ǂp Manṭiq .
>
>
>
> I also plan to add Manṭiq (Arabic) as a variant to Manṭiq, and will add
> 667“Do not confuse…”notes. Is there anything else that I should be
> thinking of?
>
>
>
> Jay Shorten
>
> Cataloger, Monographs and Electronic Resources
>
> Associate Professor of Bibliography
>
> Description & Access Department
>
> University Libraries
>
> University of Oklahoma
>
> Co-ordinator, Oklahoma (Tornado) NACO Funnel
>
> Co-owner, PERSNAME-L, the list about personal names in bibliographic and
> authority records
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Robert Rendall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Original and Special Materials Cataloging, Columbia University Libraries
102 Butler Library, 535 West 114th Street, New York, NY 10027
tel.: 212 851 2449  fax: 212 854 5167