Mark,
now that's an interesting point (I had to look up "monkeywrench", though).
The particular rule in the ISBD you mentioned seems to refer to a
special situation: "When it is not possible to give an appropriate
statement of responsibility after each title or other title information,
the statements of responsibility, if given, are given together following
the last parallel title or parallel other title information." Also, I
find it difficult to reconcile a grammatically incomplete s-o-r like
"mit Beiträgen von" with the options for the form of a s-o-r as given in
1.4.3 ISBD. True, 1.4.3.2 ISBD allows for a s-o-r to "consist of a
phrase without a name or designating an unnamed group when such a phrase
describes an intellectual contribution or is otherwise significant", but
the examples look rather different (e.g. "translated from the Swedish"
or "text taken from the Chester mystery plays and mediaveal poems").
But be that as it may: There is indeed an example for a grammatically
incomplete s-o-r in the ISBD (which was news to me), and this must give
us cause to think again (although of course we know that RDA deviates
from the ISBD sometimes).
But even in the light of the ISBD example, I'd find it hard to accept
"mit Beiträgen von" as a valid s-o-r in RDA for two reasons:
1. As the parallel s-o-r is not core, it would in theory be possible to
have only "mit Beiträgen von" in the s-o-r relating to title proper
element. I'd say that this is impossible in this case.
2. ISBD presentation is possible, but not necessary under RDA. We are
supposed to look at several s-o-r not as one text string to be viewed as
a whole, but as several separate elements, which could also be presented
quite differently, e.g. in the form of a table:
statement of responsibility: mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and 88
others]
different language version of statement of responsibility: with
contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others]
Again, I'd find it impossible to have only "mit Beiträgen von" as the
content of the first element in such a display.
Also, I believe there is no counterpart for RDA 1.7.7 in the ISBD (at
least I couldn't find one in the general chapter).
Heidrun
Am 01.04.2013 23:16, schrieb M. E.:
Benjamin A Abrahamse <babra...@mit.edu <mailto:babra...@mit.edu>> wrote:
When a resource has parallel statements of responsibility on its
chief source of information, but only the "connecting words" are
parallel, not the names themselves, how does one treat this under RDA?
Monkeywrench.
An example from ISBD 1.4.5.10.2:
8 capriccios : hegedüre, második hegedii kiséretével = für Violine,
mit Begleitung der zweiten Violine / Henryk Wieniawski ; átnézte és
ujjrenddel allátta = revidiert und mit Fingersatz versehen von Jenö Hubay
Note Wieniawski is mentioned only once, and Hubay only in the parallel
SOR, the primary SOR left incomplete. ISBD's transcription
instruction (1.4.5.1) simply reads: A statement of responsibility is
transcribed in the terms in which it appears on the resource.
Is doubling up on the names in the various SORs an application of RDA
1.7.7's "intended to be read twice" instruction?
--
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex
<http://www.minitex.umn.edu/>
--
---------------------
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
