[yul-naco] FW: Order of subfields in RDA NARs for personal names
Arakawa, Steven
steven.arakawa at yale.edu
Tue Feb 19 13:58:29 EST 2013
From this morning’s PCC list.
Steven Arakawa
Catalog Librarian for Training & Documentation
Catalog & Metadata Services, SML, Yale University
P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240
(203)432-8286 steven.arakawa at yale.edu
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Frank, Paul
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:20 AM
To: PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV
Subject: Re: Order of subfields in RDA NARs for personal names
Richard, Nancy, Chuck, and other curious PCC list readers,
This question and various permutations on it have been asked many times already, so in the April 2013 DCM Z1 update, the following statement will appear in the 100 Heading - Personal Name section, and today I will add a Personal Name FAQ on this as well:
*****
Order of subfields in 100 field
There is no prescribed MARC order for the subfields beyond subfield $a in the X00 fields. RDA 9.2.2.9.5 provides guidance for the placement of words indicating relationship (e.g., Jr.) and MARC defines subfield $q as “fuller form of name.” When providing multiple additions to the name generally follow these guidelines:
1) Subfield $d (date) should always be the last element in a 100 string unless the term
(Spirit) is being added to the name. Add $c (Spirit) as the last element in a 100
string.
Example:
100 0# $a Elizabeth $b I, $c Queen of England, $d
1533-1603 $c (Spirit)
2) Generally add subfield $c before subfield $q when also adding words, numerals, etc.
indicating relationship. (See RDA 9.2.2.9.5 for treatment of Portuguese names)
Example:
100 1# $a McCauley, Robert H., $c Jr. $q (Robert
Henry), $d 1913-1979
BUT
100 1# $a M. Alicia $q (Mary Alicia), $c Sister,
S.C.N.
3) For exceptional situations, such as when subfield $a contains only a surname or only a
forename or the name includes a prefix, etc. consult LC-PCC PS 1.7.1, section Access
points for persons in name authority and bibliographic records, paragraph 3c.
*****
Paul
Paul Frank
Cooperative Programs Section
Cooperative and Instructional Programs Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20540-4230
202-707-1570
pfrank at loc.gov<mailto:pfrank at loc.gov>
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV]<mailto:[mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV]> On Behalf Of Moore, Richard
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 10:52 AM
To: PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV<mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Order of subfields in RDA NARs for personal names
Charles
I think that "in that order" in 9.19.1.1 refers to an intended order of precedence for single qualifiers that might be added to distinguish, rather than to the order in which multiple qualifiers might be added to one name. The corresponding LC-PCC-PS (9.19.1.1 : Differentiating Authorized Access Points for Persons) parses the rule but countermands the order of precedence ("add one of the following (not listed in priority order)".
I don't know whether there might be a difference in the placing of an occupation in relation to a date, depending on whether the occupation was added following 9.19.1.2 e), or 9.19.1.6 ...
Regards
Richard
________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Herrold, Charles
Sent: 18 February 2013 15:11
To: PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV<mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Order of subfields in RDA NARs for personal names
I’ve done one somewhat like this—not very tidy—and perhaps incorrectly:
010 n 2003080212 ǂz no2005069223
040 DLC ǂb eng ǂe rda ǂc DLC ǂd DLC ǂd PPi-MA
046 ǂf 1975
1000 KJ-52 ǂc (Rapper), ǂd 1975- [changed from KJ52 (Rapper)]
374 Rap musicians ǂ2 lcsh
375 male
4000 KJ52 ǂc (Rapper), ǂd 1975-
4001 Sorrentino, Jonah, ǂd 1975-
670 KJ52 (Rapper). 7th Avenue, p2000: ǂb label (KJ52)
670 His It's pronounced five two [SR] p2003: ǂb label (KJ-52)
670 Behind the musik, 2005: ǂb insert (KJ-52)
670 All music guide WWW site, 05-08-03 ǂb (KJ-52; b. Jonah Sorrentino; Christian rapper)
670 U.S. copyright file, Dec. 19, 2012 ǂb (Sorrentino, Jonah Kirsten Carlin, 1975- )
670 KJ-52 WWW site, Dec. 19, 2012 ǂb (KJ-52)
670 Facebook, Dec. 19, 2012 ǂb (KJ-52)
The reasoning was as follows: 9.19.1.2 says: Add to the name one or more of the following elements (in this order), as applicable:
e) the profession or occupation (see 9.16[Description: http://access.rdatoolkit.org/images/rdalink.png]<http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp9&target=rda9-5314#rda9-5314>) for a person whose name consists of a phrase or appellation not conveying the idea of a person.
Since I also knew the birth date, I then added that.
9.19.1.1, the general guidelines, has:
Make additions to the name as instructed at 9.19.1.2<http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp9&target=rda9-5569#rda9-5569>–9.19.1.6[Description: http://access.rdatoolkit.org/images/rdalink.png]<http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp9&target=rda9-5694#rda9-5694>, in that order, as applicable.
9.19.1.3, date, precedes 9.19.1.6, profession.
In AACR2, I frequently constructed headings of this sort by using a birth date only, assuming the presence of that would be enough to clarify that the name was that of a person. In this case, KJ-52, $d 1975- is what I would have done. Perhaps that approach could be used in RDA. It would avoid making a decision on the order of these additions, but maybe it was wrong in AACR2 to begin with (e.g., compared with the references in n 93086906, to Shakur, Tupac … which have $c (Musician), $d 1971-1996) I cannot find an example in RDA that includes both of these additions. I don’t believe AACR2 has one either.
So, do the general guidelines take precedence over the specific case of 9.19.1.2:
KJ-52, $d 1975- $c (Rapper)
Chuck Herrold
Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 3:24 AM
To: PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV<mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Order of subfields in RDA NARs for personal names
Nancy
I think the assumptions in your first paragraph are correct.
Putting $c (Spirit) after $d [date] feels right, because the entity is (putatively) the spirit of the person who had those dates.
The case with date and occupation is a new situation, and I'm not sure if there are examples in the documentation, or precedents to follow. If we are saying "there are two people called Ian Roberts, both born in 1952, and one needs the additional qualifer Actor", then it's probably correct to put the "additional" qualifer afterwards:
Roberts, Ian, $d 1952- $c (Actor)
I must admit that I too would be tempted to omit the date from the access point for the actor, if it was not already present, in the interests of tidiness - though as you say, the PS suggests otherwise.
Regards
Richard
_________________________
Richard Moore
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806
E-mail: richard.moore at bl.uk<mailto:richard.moore at bl.uk>
________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Nancy Sack
Sent: 16 February 2013 01:11
To: PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV<mailto:PCCLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
Subject: [PCCLIST] Order of subfields in RDA NARs for personal names
Aloha,
We're hoping for some clarification about the order of subfields in RDA NARs for personal names. Is it correct that subfield $c follows subfield $d for cataloger additions--occupation terms and also "Spirit"--that are recorded in parentheses but that subfield $c precedes $d when we record terms considered part of the name (such as Jr. or III) or associated titles (such as Countess), or--in the near future--terms of address, honor, office, and rank (such as Sir, Captain, Rev.)? In other words, does $c comes after $d when it contains parentheses but before $d when it does not?
Here's a real-live example: We are updating and recoding NAR no2009160736 (Roberts, Ian, $c actor). The year of birth is known (1952) but another individual is already using the heading Roberts, Ian, $d 1952. Which of these is correct?
Roberts, Ian, $d 1952- $c (Actor)
Roberts, Ian $c (Actor), $d 1952-
Or is it better not to record the date in the 100 field at all (in violation of the LC-PCC PS at 9.19.1.3) and leave the heading with the unique string Roberts, Ian $c (Actor)? After all, that's what the Phase 2 program would do...
Thanks.
Nancy
--
Nancy Sack
Cataloging Department
University of Hawaii at Manoa
2550 McCarthy Mall
Honolulu, HI 96822
phone: 808-956-2648
fax: 808-956-5968
e-mail: sack at hawaii.edu<mailto:sack at hawaii.edu>
This email message and any files transmitted with it are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by anyone other than the intended individual or entity is prohibited without prior approval. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/yul-naco/attachments/20130219/385b452d/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 743 bytes
Desc: image001.png
Url : http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/yul-naco/attachments/20130219/385b452d/attachment-0001.png
More information about the YUL-NACO
mailing list