Print

Print


Everyone, 

 

The LC-PCC Task Group on Aggregates in Beta RDA Toolkit is addressing these issues as part of its work and acknowledges the inconsistent application of cataloging instructions and policies for describing aggregate works in the current environment. 

 

The task group's final report will document this situation and propose a more consistent approach. 

 

The final report will be submitted to the PCC Policy Committee this month. 


Nancy Lorimer
Paul Frank
Co-Chairs, PCC Task Group on RDA Aggregates in the Beta Toolkit

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Matthew C. Haugen <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 4:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Authorized access point to an expressions (NACO Training Module 6, RDA 6.27.3 and RDA 6.11.1.3)
 
Hi, I am wondering about the choice of relationship designators for these examples, in light of trying to understand how they may be handled in the new RDA's treatment of aggregates and representative expressions. "Container of (expression)" and its reciprocal "Contained in (expression)" are defined in RDA Appendix J as whole/part relationship between expressions. And in the new RDA, it looks like these will will become "part expression" and "part of expression."

contained in (expression): An expression of a larger work of which the expression is a discrete component.
Reciprocal relationship: container of (expression).
 
container of (expression): An expression of a work that is a discrete component of a larger expression.
Reciprocal relationship: contained in (expression).

So this seems to express relationships like: "Miller's tale" is contained in "Canterbury tales. English", or "Milleres tale" is contained in "Canterbury tales. $l English (Middle English)" or 'Erzählung des Müllers' is contained in "Canterbury tales. German," but not the relationship between a manifestation and the two expressions that are manifested or embodied by it. Though LC-PCC PSs indicate RDA Chapter 17 isn't applied in the current implementation scenario, I suppose that this "primary" relationship between the manifestation and expression is implied by MARC coding (700 12 in this case)? So I think I would record these as follows:

700 12 $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l English (Middle English)
700 12 $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l English.

Meanwhile, in new RDA we will have an aggregate manifestation that embodies the two language expressions (along with embodying the aggregating expression), not "containing" them. 

In a MARC implementation of the new RDA, perhaps that might look like:

700 12 $i Expression manifested: $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l English (Middle English)
700 12 $i Expression manifested: $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l English.

It appears that the new RDA also establishes a relationship between the aggregating expression and the individual aggregated expressions, e.g. an aggregating expression that realizes editorial work and also "aggregates" individual English and Middle English expressions (as a "shortcut relationship" through the shared relationship to the manifestation that embodies them), but that is still not a "whole/part" relationship. 

And I also have a preference for the "practice #2" described by Yang, recording the language of the "original" expression rather than letting the work AAP do double duty. I suppose the new RDA's "representative expression" elements might come into play in representing these expressions and reconciling mixed practice.

Matthew

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 4:30 PM Stephen Early <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Yang,

 

                Just to clarify what you’re asking even further, what about a bilingual version of Chaucer that includes both the modern English and the Middle English? What would your preferred 700’s look like?

 

Stephen T. Early (he/him/his)

Cataloger

Technical Services

Center for Research Libraries

6050 S. Kenwood Ave. • Chicago, IL 60637  USA

773.955.4545 x326 (main office) • 219.713.3492 (cell)

cid:<a href=[log in to unmask]" data-outlook-trace="F:1|T:1" src="cid:173eecdff954cff311">

The Center for Research Libraries is an international consortium of university, college, and independent research libraries collectively building, stewarding, and sharing a wealth of resource materials from all world regions to support inspired research and teaching. CRL's deep and diverse collections are shaped by specialists at major U.S. and Canadian research universities, who work together to identify and preserve collections and content, to ensure its long-term integrity and accessibility to researchers worldwide.

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yang Wang
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 3:17 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] Authorized access point to an expressions (NACO Training Module 6, RDA 6.27.3 and RDA 6.11.1.3)

 

Hi,

 

Sometimes when a pair of expressions of a work (e.g., a bilingual edition) is needed in a bib, one witness see two different practices, 1) LC’s way of using the work-level authority record as a substitute, and 2) PCC’s way of minting a new expression-level authority record. It is quite clear that PCC catalogers, other than those at LC, are encouraged to follow Practice#2. But I also realize, and I have witnessed often, that some PCC institutions prefer following LC’s own “cost-cutting” practice, since no library, not even LC, gets FED’s helicopter money! Regardless, this is what we have been doing under RDA.  

 

For a bilingual edition of Chaucer’s Canterbury tales, following Practice#1, one would give a pair of 700s like this:

 

700 12 $i Container of (expression): $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales.

700 12 $i Container of (expression): $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l German.

 

Those who follow Practice#2 would give:

 

700 12 $i Container of (expression): $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l English.

700 12 $i Container of (expression): $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l German.

 

Or perhaps like this*:  

 

700 12 $i Container of (expression): $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l English (Middle English)

700 12 $i Container of (expression): $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, ‡d -1400. ‡t Canterbury tales. $l German.

 

*“For the early form of a modern language that is found in an inverted form, use the early form in direct order within parentheses following the modern language (e.g., for "French, Old (ca. 842-1400)," use "French (Old French)")”--LC/PCC PS on RDA 6.11.1.3.

 

I would like to know which language qualifier is preferable, English or English (Middle English). The former or the latter?

 

Any clarification of this will be much appreciated. Also, would be possible to add a footnote to Slides 170 or 171 of NACO training module#6, with a reference to LC/PCC PS 6.11.1.3 (“Recording language of expression)? I know the training modules get used/download often and are being updated constantly.

 

Thanks for your time!

 

Yang

 

 

 

 

 



--
Matthew C. Haugen
Rare Book Cataloger | Columbia University Libraries
[log in to unmask] | 212-851-2451 | he/him/his