According to the German RAK rules, a thesis note is also recorded if
there is no formal thesis statement, i.e. if it's not the "real" thesis
which was handed in for the degree, but a later publication of the text.
There is only a slight difference in the style of the notes:
Note for the "real" thesis (I translate):
Cologne, University, doctoral thesis, 2010
Note for the later publication without formal statement:
Also: Cologne, University, doctoral thesis, 2010
I know that the second case was treated differently under AACR2. You
wouldn't give a dissertation note (MARC 502), but a general note (MARC
500) saying something like "Originally presented as the author's thesis
As far as I know, this difference is still valid under RDA. Indeed
184.108.40.206 seems to make it clear that a formal statement is needed: "Treat
the work being described as a dissertation or thesis presented as part
of the requirements for an academic degree if it contains a statement
declaring that it is a dissertation or thesis." I assume that it
wouldn't count as a "statement" if e.g. the author only mentions this in
On the other hand, 7.9 supposedly is an *attribute of the work*, which
makes perfect sense: It certainly doesn't stop being a thesis when it's
published by a commercial publisher.
BUT: If it's an attribute of the work, shouldn't this information be
valid for *all expressions* and *all manifestations* of the work? So, in
a composite description, shouldn't 7.9 be *always* recorded - even if we
aren't cataloging the "real" thesis but a later publication? This would
be close to the German practice, and I think it would also be helpful
for our users. Do they care whether they read the thesis in its original
form or as a later publication? But they might still be interested to
get the full thesis information in a well-structured form in both cases.
OR: If we're supposed to record 7.9 only for the "real" thesis:
Shouldn't 7.9 be an attribute of the *manifestation* rather than an
attribute of the work? This would fit in much better with the
requirement of a formal statement, because the presence or absence of
this is certainly on manifestation level.
If you think about it, the wording in 220.127.116.11 is decidedly odd: Does the
work (the thesis) ever "contain" a formal dissertation statement? I'd
say that such a statement isn't part of the work. It's simply something
which is put on the title page, i.e. it's presented together with the work.
I don't want to challenge the usefulness of FRBR in general, but I think
RDA hasn't always been successful in FRBRizing AACR2.
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany