Agreed, Trina. As long as the text of the regular print and large print is identical, they are the same expression, but different manifestations. In my particular case, the original regular print from 2003 had about 500 pages, while the large print had over 700. Different places of publication, publishers, years. But they are identical in content otherwise. Hence, same expression, different manifestations. If “reprint of (manifestation)” is not the appropriate relationship designator to use (anyone want to comment on this?), then we need something else, like perhaps “large print manifestation of” or something similar.
Adam Adam Schiff University of Washington Libraries Seattle, WA From: Trina Pundurs Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2013 7:48 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] reprint relationships Well, I stepped in it on this one. Rereading the FRBR report (http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf) I see that regular-print and large print can most certainly be the same expression. So that brings us back around to Adam's original question. It would seem some tweaking of Appendix J is needed no matter what! Trina On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Trina Pundurs <tpund...@library.berkeley.edu> wrote: On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Adam L. Schiff <asch...@u.washington.edu> wrote: In RDA Appendix J "reprinted as" and "reprint of (manifestation)" are listed hierarchically under "reproduced as" and "reproduction of (manifestation)". I have a 2010 large print edition of a book originally published in 2003. The manifestation in hand says "This optimized ReadHowYouWant edition contains the complete, unabridged text of the original publisher's edition. Other aspects of the book may vary from the original edition." I was considering including a 775 field in the RDA record for the large print with the relationship designator "reprint of (manifestation)" and a description of the 2003 edition. However large print editions are not reproductions, so the placement of "reprinted as (manifestation)" hierarchically under "reproduction of (manifestation)" seems suspect to me. Reprints are clearly equivalent manifestations, but not necessarily reproductions. Shouldn't "reprinted as" and "reprint of (manifestation)" be taken out of the reproduction hierarchies in Appendix J? Hi Adam, I believe the problem here is the mighty misleading wording of the definition of "reprint of (manifestation)" in App. J--in particular, the choice of the phrase "same content". If you look at the definition of the reciprocal term, "reprinted as", you will see that reprints must be the *same expression*. And since editions are different expressions, then your large print edition is not a reprint, even if the content is the same. It is a different expression, but the same work, as the original book; the relationship of the large print edition to the regular-print original would be captured by the AAP for the work (100+245, or however it pans out for this particular resource). That's my take on it, anyway. Trina Trina Pundurs Serials Cataloger Library Collection Services University of California, Berkeley tpund...@library.berkeley.edu http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/ Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1990
