Re: [RDA-L] Language of expression

Many thanks for your reply, Adam I actually found the example under RDA 6.11.1.4. If following the rule, record each of the languages (in authorized access points) for a motion picture with some dialogue in English, some dialogue in German, and some dialogue in Russian. There is also another examp

Re: [RDA-L] Qualifiers for "Laws, etc."

Thanks, John. From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of John Hostage Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2013 11:48 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Qualifiers for "Laws, etc." LC-PCC PS for 6.29.1.32.

Re: [RDA-L] Language of expression

For a film in which there are multiple languages spoken in a single expression, you would not use an expression access point at all. You would just use the access point for the work, but you would record the languages in 008 and 041 and 546 only. The example in RDA is Defiance: 041 0_ eng $

Re: [RDA-L] Qualifiers for "Laws, etc."

LC-PCC PS for 6.29.1.32. RDA generally separates instructions for recording elements like preferred title or preferred name from those for creating an authorized access point. -- John Hostage Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian // Harvard Library--

[RDA-L] Qualifiers for "Laws, etc."

Under the old LC Rule Interpretation 25.15A1, we always used a qualifier with the uniform title "Laws, etc.". I am having a hard time finding similar provisions in the LC/PCC PS or RDA, although LC and PCC seem to be using qualifiers with "Laws, etc." under RDA. For example, "Laws, etc. (Hyder

Re: [RDA-L] Language of expression

Many thanks. Trina. Yes, what I am talking about are authorized access points for expressions. Language is a part of them. I just realized that more than one expression contained in a manifestation should go primary relationships between Group 1 entities. It may not be covered by RDA 6.11. A mot

Re: [RDA-L] Relationship designators for related expressions, works etc for a music score

I agree with Andra that “Musical setting of (work)” is not appropriate because the Neruda poems have been used as an inspiration for the musical work but not actually set to music. A better designator would be “based on (work)” (in which case the access point(s) would not include the subfield $l