In RDA 1.4, we read: When recording an element listed above as a
supplied element, record the supplied element in the most appropriate
language and script. (The elements listed are those that are normally
transcribed more or less exactly in the bibliographic description.)
Now I was wondering what might be a good policy for the most
appropriate language. The LC-PCC PS for 1.4 doesn't comment on this
point, although I think there can easily be different opinions as to
what is most appropriate.
For instance, according to AACR2 (1.4C6.), the probable place of
publication, distribution etc. is to be given in the English form of
name if there is one, whereas the German RAK rules (§ 144,3) call for
giving such a place if possible, in its original language form. So,
you'd have to use Florence according to AACR2, but Firenze according
to RAK.
The example given in AACR2 1.4C6. is [Munich?], and this example is
still there in RDA 2.8.2.6.2. But taking into account that RDA examples
are not prescriptive, but illustrative only, I think that RDA 1.4 would
also make it possible to write [München?], if one believes the
original language form to be the most appropriate.
Giving places of publication, distribution etc. in their original
language makes a lot of sense to me, because if the information *had*
been on the resource, the source of information would indeed probably
have read Firenze, München a.s.o. So, my thinking for a possible
policy statement at the moment runs along these lines:
For most elements, the language of the title proper is the most
appropriate, if an element has to be supplied. But for elements from the
production statement, publication statement, distribution statement or
manufacture statement, the language of the country where the producer,
publisher etc. is based should be seen as the most appropriate. Proviso:
If the cataloger's knowledge of the language in question isn't
sufficient, the language preferred by the agency is used instead (in our
case, this would be German).
Do you think this would be a sensible policy, or would you argue against
using the original language in the cases mentioned?
I'm also a bit puzzled about e.g. the title proper of series. I
believe I would only supply this if I found it in some other source,
e.g. in an advertising brochure (cf. RDA 2.2.4). Then I'd simply
transcribe this, and wouldn't have to worry about the question of
language at all, wouldn't I?
Heidrun
--
-
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
