Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Well, let’s wait and see what Chris Oliver has come up with. I gather the rest of the reworded chapters should appear soon in the Toolkit (by the way, wasn't it announced that chapters 2 and 3 should be published in February?). They were indeed scheduled to come out in February. http://www.rdatoolkit.org/blog/488 These and remaining chapters are delayed until May. http://www.rdatoolkit.org/blog/526 -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: 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). There is also this instruction to consider under ISBD A.3.2.9: When a single statement (e.g. a statement of responsibility) is given partly in one language or script and partly in more than one language or script, the several linguistic forms are transcribed together; equals signs or other punctuation symbols are used as appropriate. 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). I had no luck too. ISBD 1.1.5.1 describes transcribing titles exactly as to wording, so there is likely no equivalent to RDA 1.7.7 to be found there. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
[RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
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? E.g., what I see on the t.p.: Mit Beiträgen von/With contributions by ... hg. von/ed. by ... Is simply transcribing what I see enough, or should the / be replaced with = ? Mit Beiträgen von = With contributions by ... ; hg. von = ed. by Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
Ben, I think the / should indeed be replaced by a = according to 1.7.3, as it obviously is a case of parallel statements of responsibility (i.e. two different RDA elements). But I'd find it odd to have only Mit Beiträgen von as one of these statements of responsibility. As this is only an introductory phrase, it somehow seems to miss the point. I wonder if we could solve this problem by making use of RDA 1.7.7 Lettersor Words Intended to Be Read More Than Once: If a letter or word appears only once but the design of the source of information makes it clear that it is intended to be read more than once, repeat the letter or word. Perhaps we could argue that on these title pages, the names are intended to be read twice, once with the German introductory phrase, and a second time with the English introductory phrase. Then you'd have: mit Beiträgen von X, Y, Z = with contributions by X, Y, Z ; hg. von A = ed. by A Does that make sense? Heidrun On 01.04.2013 19:36, Benjamin A Abrahamse 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? E.g., what I see on the t.p.: Mit Beiträgen von/With contributions by ... hg. von/ed. by ... Is simply transcribing what I see enough, or should the / be replaced with = ? Mit Beiträgen von = With contributions by ... ; hg. von = ed. by Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
I agree with Heidrun that you could apply 1.7.7 Letters or Words Intended to Be Read More Than Once If a letter or word appears only once but the design of the source of information makes it clear that it is intended to be read more than once, repeat the letter or word. Notice that this instruction is in 1.7, which is the general guidelines on transcription, so it applies to the Statement of Responsibility. So: / mit Beiträgen von ; hg. von = with contributions by ... ; ed. by (assuming that the abbreviations are on the resource) The order of the statements (keeping the terms in the same language together) is from ISBD2007 p. 91 Deborah - - - - - - - - Deborah Fritz TMQ, Inc. mailto:debo...@marcofquality.com debo...@marcofquality.com http://www.marcofquality.com www.marcofquality.com From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 2:12 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility Ben, I think the / should indeed be replaced by a = according to 1.7.3, as it obviously is a case of parallel statements of responsibility (i.e. two different RDA elements). But I'd find it odd to have only Mit Beiträgen von as one of these statements of responsibility. As this is only an introductory phrase, it somehow seems to miss the point. I wonder if we could solve this problem by making use of RDA 1.7.7 Letters or Words Intended to Be Read More Than Once: If a letter or word appears only once but the design of the source of information makes it clear that it is intended to be read more than once, repeat the letter or word. Perhaps we could argue that on these title pages, the names are intended to be read twice, once with the German introductory phrase, and a second time with the English introductory phrase. Then you'd have: mit Beiträgen von X, Y, Z = with contributions by X, Y, Z ; hg. von A = ed. by A Does that make sense? Heidrun On 01.04.2013 19:36, Benjamin A Abrahamse 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? E.g., what I see on the t.p.: Mit Beiträgen von/With contributions by ... hg. von/ed. by ... Is simply transcribing what I see enough, or should the / be replaced with = ? Mit Beiträgen von = With contributions by ... ; hg. von = ed. by Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
It makes sense, but it's actually the outcome I was hoping to avoid as this also happens to be a t.p. with an extensive list of contributors (over 80 of them) on the t.p. (And yes, the abbreviations are on the source.) So it would end up looking like this: Mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] = with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] ?? --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 2:12 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility Ben, I think the / should indeed be replaced by a = according to 1.7.3, as it obviously is a case of parallel statements of responsibility (i.e. two different RDA elements). But I'd find it odd to have only Mit Beiträgen von as one of these statements of responsibility. As this is only an introductory phrase, it somehow seems to miss the point. I wonder if we could solve this problem by making use of RDA 1.7.7 Letters or Words Intended to Be Read More Than Once: If a letter or word appears only once but the design of the source of information makes it clear that it is intended to be read more than once, repeat the letter or word. Perhaps we could argue that on these title pages, the names are intended to be read twice, once with the German introductory phrase, and a second time with the English introductory phrase. Then you'd have: mit Beiträgen von X, Y, Z = with contributions by X, Y, Z ; hg. von A = ed. by A Does that make sense? Heidrun On 01.04.2013 19:36, Benjamin A Abrahamse 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? E.g., what I see on the t.p.: Mit Beiträgen von/With contributions by ... hg. von/ed. by ... Is simply transcribing what I see enough, or should the / be replaced with = ? Mit Beiträgen von = With contributions by ... ; hg. von = ed. by Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bihttp://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
I'm afraid so, only I think it should start with mit instead of Mit (mit being a preposition which is not ordinarily capitalized). What a lovely example - I'm thrilled ;-) If you really were to transcribe all the 89 names (not once, but twice), I wonder whether there might be technical problems with the maximum field length for 245. Or is there no such limit in American library systems? I know that in Germany there are library systems which - at least at the moment - wouldn't be able to cope with statements this long. Deborah is right about keeping together statements in the same language according to ISBD. Is there also a parallel title? Then it would look marginally nicer: Title proper : other title information / mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] ; hg. von X = Parallel title proper : parallel other title information / with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] ; ed. by X Heidrun On 01.04.2013 20:17, Benjamin A Abrahamse wrote: It makes sense, but it's actually the outcome I was hoping to avoid as this also happens to be a t.p. with an extensive list of contributors (over 80 of them) on the t.p. (And yes, the abbreviations are on the source.) So it would end up looking like this: Mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] = with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] ?? --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 *From:*Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] *On Behalf Of *Heidrun Wiesenmüller *Sent:* Monday, April 01, 2013 2:12 PM *To:* RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca *Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility Ben, I think the / should indeed be replaced by a = according to 1.7.3, as it obviously is a case of parallel statements of responsibility (i.e. two different RDA elements). But I'd find it odd to have only Mit Beiträgen von as one of these statements of responsibility. As this is only an introductory phrase, it somehow seems to miss the point. I wonder if we could solve this problem by making use of RDA 1.7.7 Lettersor Words Intended to Be Read More Than Once: If a letter or word appears only once but the design of the source of information makes it clear that it is intended to be read more than once, repeat the letter or word. Perhaps we could argue that on these title pages, the names are intended to be read twice, once with the German introductory phrase, and a second time with the English introductory phrase. Then you'd have: mit Beiträgen von X, Y, Z = with contributions by X, Y, Z ; hg. von A = ed. by A Does that make sense? Heidrun On 01.04.2013 19:36, Benjamin A Abrahamse 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? E.g., what I see on the t.p.: Mit Beiträgen von/With contributions by ... hg. von/ed. by ... Is simply transcribing what I see enough, or should the / be replaced with = ? Mit Beiträgen von = With contributions by ... ; hg. von = ed. by Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi http://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
No parallel title, just the s-o-r's. And certainly the mit should not be capitalized (and isn't on the piece) that was my mistake. I don't know if there's a character limit in OCLC or not. But there is a character limit to my brain, so I'm going to use the optional omission. :) Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:07 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility I'm afraid so, only I think it should start with mit instead of Mit (mit being a preposition which is not ordinarily capitalized). What a lovely example - I'm thrilled ;-) If you really were to transcribe all the 89 names (not once, but twice), I wonder whether there might be technical problems with the maximum field length for 245. Or is there no such limit in American library systems? I know that in Germany there are library systems which - at least at the moment - wouldn't be able to cope with statements this long. Deborah is right about keeping together statements in the same language according to ISBD. Is there also a parallel title? Then it would look marginally nicer: Title proper : other title information / mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] ; hg. von X = Parallel title proper : parallel other title information / with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] ; ed. by X Heidrun On 01.04.2013 20:17, Benjamin A Abrahamse wrote: It makes sense, but it's actually the outcome I was hoping to avoid as this also happens to be a t.p. with an extensive list of contributors (over 80 of them) on the t.p. (And yes, the abbreviations are on the source.) So it would end up looking like this: Mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] = with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] ?? --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 2:12 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.camailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility Ben, I think the / should indeed be replaced by a = according to 1.7.3, as it obviously is a case of parallel statements of responsibility (i.e. two different RDA elements). But I'd find it odd to have only Mit Beiträgen von as one of these statements of responsibility. As this is only an introductory phrase, it somehow seems to miss the point. I wonder if we could solve this problem by making use of RDA 1.7.7 Letters or Words Intended to Be Read More Than Once: If a letter or word appears only once but the design of the source of information makes it clear that it is intended to be read more than once, repeat the letter or word. Perhaps we could argue that on these title pages, the names are intended to be read twice, once with the German introductory phrase, and a second time with the English introductory phrase. Then you'd have: mit Beiträgen von X, Y, Z = with contributions by X, Y, Z ; hg. von A = ed. by A Does that make sense? Heidrun On 01.04.2013 19:36, Benjamin A Abrahamse 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? E.g., what I see on the t.p.: Mit Beiträgen von/With contributions by ... hg. von/ed. by ... Is simply transcribing what I see enough, or should the / be replaced with = ? Mit Beiträgen von = With contributions by ... ; hg. von = ed. by Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bihttp://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bihttp://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
Hm, now I'm getting confused. 2.4.2.4 applies to a statement of responsibility relating to title proper [that] appears on the source of information in more than one language. But the scope statement to 2.4.3 defines parallel statement of responsibility as a statement of responsibility relating to title proper (see 2.4.2.1) in a language and/or script that differs from that recorded in the statement of responsibility relating to title proper element. Is it just me, or do they seem to be talking about the same thing? Or is 2.4.3ff limited to cases where you already have parallel titles AND parallel s-o-r's? (On a closer look, it's not--2.4.3.2 says, If there is no corresponding parallel title proper, take parallel statements of responsibility relating to title proper from the same source as the title proper so clearly it also applies to situations where there is no parallel title proper, only parallel statements of responsibility.) So, what's going on here?? --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Arakawa, Steven Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:36 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility If you have a single title proper and statements of responsibility in multiple languages, I think 2.4.2.4. applies: If a statement of responsibility relating to title proper appears on the source of information in more than one language or script, record the statement in the language or script of the title proper. If this criterion does not apply, record the statement that appears first. The examples are helpful. Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training Documentation Catalog Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edumailto:steven.arak...@yale.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:06 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility No parallel title, just the s-o-r's. And certainly the mit should not be capitalized (and isn't on the piece) that was my mistake. I don't know if there's a character limit in OCLC or not. But there is a character limit to my brain, so I'm going to use the optional omission. :) Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:07 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.camailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility I'm afraid so, only I think it should start with mit instead of Mit (mit being a preposition which is not ordinarily capitalized). What a lovely example - I'm thrilled ;-) If you really were to transcribe all the 89 names (not once, but twice), I wonder whether there might be technical problems with the maximum field length for 245. Or is there no such limit in American library systems? I know that in Germany there are library systems which - at least at the moment - wouldn't be able to cope with statements this long. Deborah is right about keeping together statements in the same language according to ISBD. Is there also a parallel title? Then it would look marginally nicer: Title proper : other title information / mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] ; hg. von X = Parallel title proper : parallel other title information / with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] ; ed. by X Heidrun On 01.04.2013 20:17, Benjamin A Abrahamse wrote: It makes sense, but it's actually the outcome I was hoping to avoid as this also happens to be a t.p. with an extensive list of contributors (over 80 of them) on the t.p. (And yes, the abbreviations are on the source.) So it would end up looking like this: Mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] = with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] ?? --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 2:12 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.camailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility Ben, I think the / should indeed be replaced by a = according to 1.7.3
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
And a related question for those of us in Anglophone countries : would it be mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] or mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [und 88 andere] ? *Geoffrey Hooker * http://geoffreyhookermls.blogspot.com/ *It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.* -Voltaire (1694-1778) On 1 April 2013 14:06, Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.edu wrote: No parallel title, just the s-o-r's. And certainly the mit should not be capitalized (and isn't on the piece) that was my mistake. ** ** I don't know if there's a character limit in OCLC or not. But there is a character limit to my brain, so I'm going to use the optional omission. :) ** ** Thanks, Ben ** ** Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 ** **
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
In this case, and despite the complexities it has raised, I do think statements in both languages should be recorded. Because, while the title is English, the book itself is bilingual (not German and English in parallel, but actually just some German and some English. It's mainly poetry and images. We can always rely on poets and artists to muck up our neat categorizations of the world, can't we.) --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:57 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility Quite, but that doesn't mean that you cannot record the other statements of responsibility as well - and Ben obviously wanted to. 2.4.2.4 only gives guidance as to which of the statements should be chosen as the primary one. Other statements of responsibility can then be recorded as parallel statements of responsibility according to 2.4.3.3. I think the wording should be clearer in 2.4.2.4. When you read _record_ the statement in the language or script of the title proper, you might indeed be lead to believe that you can _only_ record this statement and have to discard the other ones. It would be better to have a similar wording as in 2.3.2.4 Title in more than one language or script: If the source of information for the title proper bears a title in more than one language or script, _choose_ as the title proper the one in the language or script of the main written, spoken, or sung content of the resource. Heidrun On 01.04.2013 21:36, Arakawa, Steven wrote: If you have a single title proper and statements of responsibility in multiple languages, I think 2.4.2.4. applies: If a statement of responsibility relating to title proper appears on the source of information in more than one language or script, record the statement in the language or script of the title proper. If this criterion does not apply, record the statement that appears first. The examples are helpful. Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training Documentation Catalog Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edumailto:steven.arak...@yale.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:06 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility No parallel title, just the s-o-r's. And certainly the mit should not be capitalized (and isn't on the piece) that was my mistake. I don't know if there's a character limit in OCLC or not. But there is a character limit to my brain, so I'm going to use the optional omission. :) Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:07 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.camailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility I'm afraid so, only I think it should start with mit instead of Mit (mit being a preposition which is not ordinarily capitalized). What a lovely example - I'm thrilled ;-) If you really were to transcribe all the 89 names (not once, but twice), I wonder whether there might be technical problems with the maximum field length for 245. Or is there no such limit in American library systems? I know that in Germany there are library systems which - at least at the moment - wouldn't be able to cope with statements this long. Deborah is right about keeping together statements in the same language according to ISBD. Is there also a parallel title? Then it would look marginally nicer: Title proper : other title information / mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] ; hg. von X = Parallel title proper : parallel other title information / with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] ; ed. by X Heidrun On 01.04.2013 20:17, Benjamin A Abrahamse wrote: It makes sense, but it's actually the outcome I was hoping to avoid as this also happens to be a t.p. with an extensive list of contributors (over 80 of them) on the t.p. (And yes, the abbreviations are on the source.) So it would end up looking like this: Mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] = with contributions by Fernando Aguiar [and eighty-eight others] ?? --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
As I just said: It's really not well presented. But now I see that it's even worse than I thought. I still believe that 2.4.2.4 is all about deciding which statement(s) is/are the normal ones, when you're confronted with statements in different languages. Once you've managed that, you can go on to 2.4.3 to handle the others. But 2.4.2.4 makes it sound as if _all_ the statements are statements of responsibility relating to title proper, so one wonders why they can't be all recorded in the statement of responsibiity relating to title proper element. But according to 2.4.3.1 we find that only one of them can be recorded in this element, whereas the others have to be recorded as parallel statement of responsibility relating to title proper. I've just read 2.4.3.1 again, veeerrry slowly: A parallel statement of responsibility relating to title proper is a statement of responsibility relating to title proper (see 2.4.2.1) in a language and/or script that differs from that recorded in the statement of responsibility relating to title proper element. So now: Is such a thing a statement of responsibility relating to title proper??? Well, it seems that it is and it isn't. Curiouser and curiouser... Heidrun Ben wrote: Hm, now I'm getting confused. 2.4.2.4 applies to a statement of responsibility relating to title proper [that] appears on the source of information in more than one language. But the scope statement to 2.4.3 defines parallel statement of responsibility as a statement of responsibility relating to title proper (see 2.4.2.1) in a language and/or script that differs from that recorded in the statement of responsibility relating to title proper element. Is it just me, or do they seem to be talking about the same thing? Or is 2.4.3ff limited to cases where you already have parallel titles AND parallel s-o-r's? (On a closer look, it's not--2.4.3.2 says, If there is no corresponding parallel title proper, take parallel statements of responsibility relating to title proper from the same source as the title proper so clearly it also applies to situations where there is no parallel title proper, only parallel statements of responsibility.) So, what's going on here?? --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 *From:*Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] *On Behalf Of *Arakawa, Steven *Sent:* Monday, April 01, 2013 3:36 PM *To:* RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca *Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility *If you have a single title proper and statements of responsibility in multiple languages, I think 2.4.2.4. applies: *If a statement of responsibility relating to title proper appears on the source of information in more than one language or script, record the statement in the language or script of the title proper. If this criterion does not apply, record the statement that appears first. The examples are helpful. ** Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training Documentation Catalog Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edu mailto:steven.arak...@yale.edu ** ** *From:*Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] *On Behalf Of *Benjamin A Abrahamse *Sent:* Monday, April 01, 2013 3:06 PM *To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA *Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility No parallel title, just the s-o-r's. And certainly the mit should not be capitalized (and isn't on the piece) that was my mistake. I don't know if there's a character limit in OCLC or not. But there is a character limit to my brain, so I'm going to use the optional omission. :) Thanks, Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 *From:*Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] *On Behalf Of *Heidrun Wiesenmüller *Sent:* Monday, April 01, 2013 3:07 PM *To:* RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca *Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility I'm afraid so, only I think it should start with mit instead of Mit (mit being a preposition which is not ordinarily capitalized). What a lovely example - I'm thrilled ;-) If you really were to transcribe all the 89 names (not once, but twice), I wonder whether there might be technical problems with the maximum field length for 245. Or is there no such limit in American library systems? I know that in Germany there are library systems which - at least at the moment - wouldn't be able to cope with statements this long. Deborah is right about keeping
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
I think that the abridgment is a cataloger's decision. So it should be in the cataloging language, the language of the bibliographic record being created. Is that right? Joan Wang Illinois Heartland Library System On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Geoffrey Hooker hook...@gmail.com wrote: And a related question for those of us in Anglophone countries : would it be mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [and 88 others] or mit Beiträgen von Fernando Aguiar [und 88 andere] ? *Geoffrey Hooker * http://geoffreyhookermls.blogspot.com/ *It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.* -Voltaire (1694-1778) On 1 April 2013 14:06, Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.edu wrote: No parallel title, just the s-o-r's. And certainly the mit should not be capitalized (and isn't on the piece) that was my mistake. ** ** I don't know if there's a character limit in OCLC or not. But there is a character limit to my brain, so I'm going to use the optional omission. :) ** ** Thanks, Ben ** ** Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 ** ** -- Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D. Cataloger -- CMC Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office) 6725 Goshen Road Edwardsville, IL 62025 618.656.3216x409 618.656.9401Fax
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
Taking both rules into account, I think what it's saying is to identify the statement of responsibility for the title proper when there are statements of resp. in multiple languages by choosing the statement of responsibility in the same language as the title proper. The remaining statements of responsibility in the other languages then become the parallel statements of responsibility. But remember that only the one statement of responsibility identified in 2.4.2.4. is core; the parallel statements of responsibility are optional. Whew! Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training Documentation Catalog Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edumailto:steven.arak...@yale.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 4:12 PM To: rd...@listserv.lac-BAC.G Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility As I just said: It's really not well presented. But now I see that it's even worse than I thought. I still believe that 2.4.2.4 is all about deciding which statement(s) is/are the normal ones, when you're confronted with statements in different languages. Once you've managed that, you can go on to 2.4.3 to handle the others. But 2.4.2.4 makes it sound as if _all_ the statements are statements of responsibility relating to title proper, so one wonders why they can't be all recorded in the statement of responsibiity relating to title proper element. But according to 2.4.3.1 we find that only one of them can be recorded in this element, whereas the others have to be recorded as parallel statement of responsibility relating to title proper. I've just read 2.4.3.1 again, veeerrry slowly: A parallel statement of responsibility relating to title proper is a statement of responsibility relating to title proper (see 2.4.2.1) in a language and/or script that differs from that recorded in the statement of responsibility relating to title proper element. So now: Is such a thing a statement of responsibility relating to title proper??? Well, it seems that it is and it isn't. Curiouser and curiouser... Heidrun Ben wrote: Hm, now I'm getting confused. 2.4.2.4 applies to a statement of responsibility relating to title proper [that] appears on the source of information in more than one language. But the scope statement to 2.4.3 defines parallel statement of responsibility as a statement of responsibility relating to title proper (see 2.4.2.1) in a language and/or script that differs from that recorded in the statement of responsibility relating to title proper element. Is it just me, or do they seem to be talking about the same thing? Or is 2.4.3ff limited to cases where you already have parallel titles AND parallel s-o-r's? (On a closer look, it's not--2.4.3.2 says, If there is no corresponding parallel title proper, take parallel statements of responsibility relating to title proper from the same source as the title proper so clearly it also applies to situations where there is no parallel title proper, only parallel statements of responsibility.) So, what's going on here?? --Ben Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Arakawa, Steven Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:36 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.camailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility If you have a single title proper and statements of responsibility in multiple languages, I think 2.4.2.4. applies: If a statement of responsibility relating to title proper appears on the source of information in more than one language or script, record the statement in the language or script of the title proper. If this criterion does not apply, record the statement that appears first. The examples are helpful. Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training Documentation Catalog Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edumailto:steven.arak...@yale.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:06 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility No parallel title, just the s-o-r's. And certainly the mit should not be capitalized (and isn't on the piece) that was my mistake. I don't know if there's a character limit in OCLC or not. But there is a character limit to my brain, so I'm going to use the optional
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
Benjamin A Abrahamse 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/
Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility
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
