No, because the difference between the two is at the work level, not the expression level, so the qualifier needs to be to the work portion of the AAP.
I think Yang’s two qualifiers are good suggestions. Or you could use “(Extended)” as a qualifier for the longer one (at the WORK level, e.g. “Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise (Extended)”, but I’m always in favor of qualifiers are as informative as possible of the differences.
Since we presumably don’t know which version the two existing AACR2 NARs for a Catalan and an English translation represent, I suggest you create two new RDA work-level NARs for the two collections and then base the expression NARs on one or the other of them as appropriate. Let those who need access points for the Catalan and English translations referenced in the existing NARs figure out which one they have and update the records if necessary.
Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
Thank you, Yang.
Prompted by a helpful off-list exchange yesterday I ended up changing my view of the situation. I believe what I have are two aggregate works with the same title. The simplest way to distinguish them seems to be to leave the one that already exists in the naf to represent the 14-story collection (by far the most common, and the basis for all of the translations) and to create a new one to represent the 10-story collection:
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise (1993)
The original German translation (which I don't have in hand) would be
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise. $l German
and the 15-story translation would be
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise. $l German $s (Extended)
Does this seem reasonable?
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [[log in to unmask]]
on behalf of Yang Wang [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2019 12:11 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Astérix et la rentrée gauloise
Based on what you have described here, it seems to me that it would be best to establish two work-level records first. Instead of “10-story version” (“version,” at least in my mind, has a strong connotation of expression and variation), you could perhaps use a different phrase such as “10-story series” or “10-story compilation” and put it after the preferred title:
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise (10-story series)
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise (14-story series)
To these, you could then add $l [language] and $s [version].
Just a thought.
Astérix et la rentrée gauloise is no. 32 in the long-running series of stories by René Goscinny and Albert Uderzo, but it didn’t start as part of that collection.
It first appeared under that title in 1993 to accompany Astérix VHS tapes from Gaumont Vidéo (and a print run of 500,000!). The title page of that version is headed “Goscinny et Uderzo présentent dix mini histoires d’Astérix” and on the front cover appears “Dix histoires courtes”, with “Ne peut être vendu séparément” on the back cover. [copy of this version in hand]
It next appeared in 2003 with nine of the original ten stories and five new ones, still not one of the numbered volumes, with the title page headed “Goscinny et Uderzo présentent quatorze histoires complètes d’Astérix” and on the front cover “14 histoires complètes”. In 2006 it finally entered the collection as no. 32. [copy of a 2017 printing of this version in hand]
To distinguish between these two I am proposing to set up
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise. $s 10-story version
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise. $s 14-story version
(There are currently two non-rda headings in the naf:
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise. $l Catalan
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise. $l English )
As with all of the Astérix volumes, this one has been translated into multiple languages. The first two printings of the translation into German are of the 14-story version, so it would be reasonable to use
Goscinny, $d 1926-1977. $t Astérix et la rentrée gauloise. $s 14-story version. $l German
But then the German publishers added a story not found in the original French or apparently in any of the other translations of Astérix et la rentrée gauloise, and this is made clear on both the title page
“Goscinny et Uderzo präsentieren fünfzehn Kurzgeschichten von Asterix”
and on the front cover
“15 Kurzgeschichten” [copy of this version in hand]
What heading would be appropriate for this extended German translation? Using the proposed heading above would suggest to users that it is identical to the first two printings of the German translation, and that it contains nothing more than a translation of the French 14-story version. Would something like this be too confusing?:
Astérix et la rentrée gauloise. $s 14-story version. $l German $s (Extended)
I’ve avoided using dates in the headings because Astérix titles all go through many printings (the 2017 reprint of the French original in hand is “Édition 18”) and these reprints often have other copyright dates that could confuse things (the German translation in hand, a 2016 reprint, has both ©2003 and ©2016, and the note “Erste Veröffentlichung in deutscher Sprache: Egmont Ehapa Verlag GmbH, 2003”, which isn’t technically accurate, given the presence of the 15th story). A good example of this is OCLC record 670436326 for the French original with ©1996, but the pagination of the 2003 14-story version – possibly a cataloging error, but impossible to say for sure without seeing it.
Your suggestions, recommendations and guidance would be welcome.