Of possible interest. ________________________________ From: SACO Cataloging Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Berthoud, Heidy I <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, May 5, 2025 3:37 PM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: [SACOLIST] SACO Shorts: When to include related terms (RTs) in proposals (common problem)
Related terms (RTs) are coded in the 5XX fields of subject authority records. The relevant instructions for RTs can be found in H 370 Broader Terms, Narrower Terms, Related Terms<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/FreeSHM/H0370.pdf__;!!IBzWLUs!T5ik_GaydWju09EcbeE9_LZovEji7jtJExyPNL6jDabhbt3gKuhKva1i4EqIrBuAl3t9B70vDw7rdRgGCYw$>. RTs are used sparingly, and this is by design. H 370 point 2 “Related term references” states, “In order to focus emphasis on hierarchical references, simplify future special projects to revise references in the subject authority file, and reduce the size and complexity of Library of Congress Subject Headings, restrictive rules are in effect for making related term references with the intended effect of minimizing the number of related term references that are made.” There are very few instances where RTs are called for in new proposals: 1. To link terms with meanings that overlap or are used somewhat interchangeably. The example given in H 370 is Boats and boating and Ships. The unwritten rule in PTCP is you create an RT if someone reasonably thinks of one when they think of the other. So, does one reasonably think of boats and boating when they think of ships. This is a good litmus test to apply when proposing this type of RT. 2. To link a discipline and object studied, as with Ornithology and Birds. 3. To link persons and their fields of endeavor, as with Medicine and Physicians. Even with these three instances listed above, there are exceptions to the rules, as explained in H 370 point 2. As always, remember to read other relevant instruction sheets; they could contain helpful information on RTs that is not part of H 370. A great example of this is H 1631.5 Family Names: Headings and References<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/FreeSHM/H1631_5.pdf__;!!IBzWLUs!T5ik_GaydWju09EcbeE9_LZovEji7jtJExyPNL6jDabhbt3gKuhKva1i4EqIrBuAl3t9B70vDw7rHtMJaA8$>. Section d., Related names, provides instructions on how to create RTs for similar names from different ethnic backgrounds and RTs for family names that have changed substantially as a result of emigration. Examples 100 3 $a Jacobs family 500 3 $a Jacobus family 500 3 $a Jacoby family 150 $a Care of the sick 550 $a Home nursing 150 $a Housing 550 $a Dwellings The important takeaway for proposers is to use RTs sparingly and only in the instances noted above. Do your best to apply the rules governing RTs in your proposal. If RTs need to be removed or adjusted, Policy Specialists will make those changes at point of review. Most of the RTs established on any given approved list are on records for family names. Another important point: RTs are reciprocal. We will discuss this more in our next SACO Short (coming 5/19). SACO Shorts are quick tips that cover common proposal problems or frequently asked questions. SACO Shorts are published on the first and third Mondays of the month.
_______________________________________________ Heb-naco mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco
