This tipping point is interesting. I think having the language in two fields has value. But it impacts productivity to fully transcribe.
Margaret Maurer Editor, TechKNOW | Head, Catalog & Metadata | Associate Professor Kent State University Libraries | 370 Library, P.O. Box 5190 | Kent, Ohio 44242-0001 330.672.1702 | mbmau...@kent.edu<mailto:mbmau...@kent.edu> On Oct 28, 2013, at 3:52 PM, "LISIUS, PETER" <plis...@kent.edu<mailto:plis...@kent.edu>> wrote: Dear all, I’d like an opinion on something relating to language expression access points in RDA. If, when copy cataloging AACR2 bibrec, you have an item representing two or more language expressions, are you able to apply RDA principles (in terms of the access points) WITHOUT fully upgrading the bibrec to RDA? Or, is this is a significant enough change to warrant fully converting the AACR2 bibrec to an RDA bibrec? I’m looking at some of the hybrid record policies on both the PCC and OCLC sites and this is not completely clear to me. For example, under AACR2 if you had a film in original language version dubbed into French, you would have had one access point representing both the original language and dubbed versions: 130 0 Sunset Blvd. (Motion picture). $l French & English Under RDA, you’d have two different access points—one for the original, the other for the dubbed French version (and no 130): 730 0 Sunset Blvd. (Motion picture) 730 0 Sunset Blvd. (Motion picture). $l French. Thanks, Peter Peter H. Lisius, M.L.S., M.A. Music and Media Catalog Librarian Associate Professor Kent State University Libraries P.O. Box 5190 Kent, OH 44242-0001 (330) 672-6316 plis...@kent.edu<mailto:plis...@kent.edu>
