I appreciate your efforts to indicate the diacritics, but in this
message they're still a bit confusing.
1) You say there is a dot under the final h in Yera, but the h did
not come through any more than the dot did.
2) dot under the k in the original is confusing, since the only k we
see is the
, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Joan C Biella j...@loc.gov wrote:
This is indeed a horrible question, because:
Our usual authoritative source for place-name romanizations,
ha-Entsiklopedyah ha-'Ivrit, gives Bratslav, which you might think
would point to Braslav.
But I'm pretty sure that in all
This is indeed a horrible question, because:
Our usual authoritative source for place-name romanizations,
ha-Entsiklopedyah ha-'Ivrit, gives Bratslav, which you might think
would point to Braslav.
But I'm pretty sure that in all the vocalized texts I've seen, and
these pretty much all come from
I think, though I may be wrong, that ve-khu. is more like et cetera,
meaning and other things, than like et al. meaning and other people.
Anyway, the list in AACR2 is The List, as far as LC is concerned. For what
that's worth to any other library.
Joan
Cliff Miller clmil...@jtsa.edu
://hebrewlit.notlong.com
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Joan C Biella j...@loc.gov wrote:
I think, though I may be wrong, that ve-khu. is more like et
cetera, meaning and other things, than like et al. meaning and
other people.
Anyway, the list in AACR2 is The List, as far as LC is concerned. For
what that's
Because this message wasn't posted to Heb-NACO till last Friday, I'll extend my
personal deadline to Friday of this week, Feb. 8.
Any other comments on the Hatam Sofer and how to vocalize him?
Joan
Joan C Biella j...@loc.gov 1/25/2010 3:46 PM
The argument from the pronunciation of Chasam
For what it's worth, LC interprets AACR2 in a very literal way. Because it
doesn't list a Hebrew abbreviation for et al. in the Appendix on
Abbreviations, we don't use one. We use [et al.], in roman script, in both
roman and nonroman fields.
Joan
Heidi G Lerner ler...@stanford.edu 01/30/10
The argument from the pronunciation of Chasam Sofer sounds good to me.
Would anyone else like to contribute to this discussion?
If I don't hear to the contrary from anyone by next Monday, Feb. 1st, I'll
change LC's he-Hatam Sofers to ha-Hatam Sofers.
Joan
Barry Walfish
Yes--I suppose it should be listed under both he- and hag!
Thank you--
Joan
Jasmin Nof j...@umd.edu 1/20/2010 2:34 PM
Joan, would you like for me to note this on the changed romanization
chart in the wiki? Jasmin
Joan C Biella wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Recently in leafing idly through
Dear colleagues,
Recently in leafing idly through the new edition of Even-Shoshan I
noticed that one of my favorite off-the-wall Hebrew romanization
oddities exists no more. In the article on “hag [subscript dot under
the h]” we are no longer instructed to romanize the singular with the
definite
So are we agreed that דיאיל is a variant of די איל? --Joan
Jasmin Nof j...@umd.edu 11/12/2009 4:51 PM
yes, it precedes ga'on ha-hasid rabenu bahyah the first time and then a
bunch of other words before Yiśraʼel ben Ḥayim (there should have
been
an ellipses below). does that help?
Joan C
Well, I'm no Ladino expert, but in the first case you mention, I would
say we're dealing with a compound of de and el. I would guess it's
a dialect (or subdialect) word, and I guess I would romanize it as
de'el. Why it's used before a proper name I don't know--is there
really no Rabi or the
Fun!
Heidi G Lerner ler...@stanford.edu 11/12/09 5:59 PM
Please see below re Virtual International Authority File
- Forwarded Message -
From: Policy and Standards Division pol...@loc.gov
To: pccl...@listserv.loc.gov
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 2:09:15 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada
For those who want to follow LC, please cf. p. 33 of *Hebraica
Cataloging*:
+++
Names of the Divinity. Those abbreviations representing the
Tetragrammaton are romanized visually:
Y.
D.
H.
This is not an exception to the principle of romanizing abbreviations
on the basis of
In Ps. 39:13, 84:9 and 102:2 this is vocalized shim'ah tefilati.
Rachel Simon rsi...@princeton.edu 9/17/2009 1:29 PM
How should the word שמעה in the title ספר שמעה תפילתי be Romanized?
Thanks
Rachel
Just a note to advise you all that the old LC heading
Schneersohn, Menahem Mendel, 1902-1994 [subscript dot under h of Menahem]
has become what's in the subject line of this message. The author of a
forthcoming book on the Rebbe made a big effort to provide us with facsimiles
of the
Browsing through various editions of Even-Shoshan yesterday, I noticed that he
now gives ahra'i meaning responsible instead of ahara'i. Jasmin, will
you please put this on the list of new romanizations?
Unfortunately, he still seems to require aharai for after me (of course
spelled
else mind that a search for a term in a nonroman script
retrieves a see reference and also a bunch of bib records (filing under
the see reference)?
If I'm missing something obvious, please let me know.
Thanks.
Nancy
Joan C Biella wrote:
Nancy and others,
Of course I work at LC and you're
We'll be glad to present our section's interim guidelines for nonroman
references in NARs, as suggested by Nancy. It doesn't seem likely that the
Policy Standards Office will be ready to present anything similar before AJL.
As for standardizing practice for nonroman fields in bibliographic
Beider, our authority for Yiddish names of Hebrew or Aramaic derivation,
gives FAYVUSH (ultimately from Latin Vivus).
I would recommend using Fayvush in both Hebrew and Yiddish contexts, as we do
with Leyb, Ayzik and others.
We can't make the whole database consistent easily, though, because
...@mail.biu.ac.il
Tel: 972-3-5318127, Fax 972-3-7384065
Joan C Biella j...@loc.gov
Sent by: owner-heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
30/04/2009 00:07
Please respond to
heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
To
heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
cc
Subject
Re: Yitshak Berger vs. Yitzhak Berger
I've looked at the old and the new Even-Shoshans, and in each case under
kuf-tsade-tav he says, for mem-kuf-tsade-tav, see under MIKTSAT.
I don't think this leaves room for the existence of an analytic form
composed of mi- and ketsat. Cliff, can you give an example of what you
mean that clearly
An Israeli-and-Judaica-Section response (our name has changed from
Hebraica Team):
Long ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth and I did not work at LC (or
maybe I wasn't even born yet), it was decided that LC would use only de-
and di- in romanization Aramaic. Whether there's actually a grammar
[mailto:owner-heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of Joan C
Biella
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 9:30 AM
To: heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subject: RE: Yitshak Berger vs. Yitzhak Berger
I can't provide any more info than is in the two authority records. If you
have
I just had a query about the title (if it is a title) Hamishah Humshe Torah.
Specifically about the capitalization. Well, one reason you see a lot of LC
records where the humshe is not capitalized is that I, Joan, just learned the
rule for this the other day, after spending years of doing it
I would think so; did you find something else? --Joan
Rachel Simon rsi...@princeton.edu 3/31/2009 10:37 AM
Regarding the title אי-מקום, אי-פעם with tsere under the alef: should
it be E-mak.om, e-pa'am ?
Rachel
. Also, I believe the lone dot
beneath the dalet is equivalent to a hirik.
Thus, again reiterating Joan's disclaimer, I guess that the romanization
would be ketava di-matla.
Oraham's dictionary of the stabilized and enriched Assyrian language and
English.
Joan C Biella wrote:
Well, I'm
Barry--
In Voyager we create this character by typing s and then the diacritic
accent grave which positions itself over the s much the same way a
subscript dot positions itself under the preceding letter.
When typing in Word in a Unicode font, it is necessary to type the s, then
from the
Dear colleagues,
I've received the query below. If the Library of Congress ever had a copy of
this volume, it has been misplaced. Can any of you provide access to it?
Thank you very much.
Joan
Ruth P. Schoenberg ru...@brooklyn.cuny.edu 3/12/2009 4:33 PM
I am wondering if you could be of
Just to make sure of this: is the whole context of these names Yiddish?
It might make a difference if there is any Hebrew in the items (or
might not).
If the whole context is Yiddish, we have to recognize that these names
are not written “Yiddish-style,” which requires using characters
(e.g.,
is 'e'; why do you
recommend 'a' in this case? Regarding פולמן, I based my romanization
choices on the English forms given on the cd, Fulman. Do I ignore this
evidence and romanize with a 'p' anyway?
Thanks, Jasmin
Joan C Biella wrote:
Just to make sure of this: is the whole context
FYI--ALA/LC romanization doesn't embrace Sheifer, though in a Yiddish
context Sheyfer might be possible.
I had a book the other day with a surname much like this, only with TWO
pehs. I romanized it as Shipfer, having observed that others with
this name inhabit the authority file.
Joan
Zachary
Learned friends,
I'm cataloging a book called Seder Purim ve-Ta'anit Ester (Tel Aviv: Koral,
5762) which includes Kuntres halakhot u-minhagim mi-tokh sefer Likute Mahariah
(or Maharyah).
I see LC cataloged a book (
Sorry, that last message was sent long before being finished!
What I was about to say was, there's a record (LCCN 92828611) for Sefer
ha-Purim which seems to contain this same kuntres of Mahariah on Purim.
Various folks in OCLC have cataloged this, but as far as I can see no one has
identified
Dear Yossi,
Along with those who have already written on this subject, I would be
very unhappy if the OCLC session, which I have attended for many years,
were held on Wednesday afternoon this year--insuring that I could not
attend. Especially in view of the cost to OCLC mentioned in Shoshanah's
Friends, off and on I've been keeping a list of fancy ways to refer to the
Hebrew months yet conceal from the uninitiated which month you're referring to.
Jasmin is going to put my list on the wiki, but perhaps you would all be kind
enough to look at it, and correct, change, delete or add as
May I ask the learned which month this is? It's the month in 5767 to which the
introduction of v. 5 of LCCN 2008471837 is dated.
Thank you--
Joan
Tseloteh de-Avraham sounds good to me. (Tseloteha if Avraham were
feminine.) --Joan
Jasmin Nof [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/06/08 11:56 AM
oops, missed the 'h' at the end of tseloteh.
Jasmin Nof wrote:
Hi Rachel,
The Shtainzalts ed. of the Talmud vocalizes it tselote,
צְלתֵהּ דְאַבְרָהָם
It's one of the many kuntresim of I. Raitport. The title is
be-din kaf-tav-vav-tav-yod mem-yod-kaf-tav-tav shi'ura
What are the two kaf-tav-tav words??? I wasn't able to find this one in OCLC,
much less romanize it, and with your help I'd like to do both.
Thank you for your collective
katute mikatat shi?ura
(OCLC #62579702). I haven't the foggiest what this means, but this looks
to be a fine place to start; NYP is usually reliable with this sort of
thing.
B
Joan C Biella wrote:
It's one of the many kuntresim of I. Raitport. The title is
be-din kaf-tav-vav-tav-yod mem
Unfortunately (perhaps), no. Gavoha is correct. For reasons unknown
to me, because I wasn't around when the current romanization table was
developed, the furtive patah is romanized AFTER final he and 'ayin (as
in gavoha and Yehoshu'a), though it is romanized BEFORE het (as in
luah). This is not
]
Phone: (310) 825-4446
Fax: (310) 794-9357
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joan C
Biella
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 4:18 PM
To: heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subject: RE: question re citiation of JNUL Hebrew record in OCLC
Not sure I
Those who can't read Rachel's message--your e-mail is probably not set
to read html. There's a setting in my e-mail that I can change to
HTML to make the message readable; maybe you can too.
P.S. Another Jerban (dare I guess that yours is Jerban too?) author is
established as Menini in nr
I agree with Yossi--no Hebrew should appear in a 670 without
accompanying standard romanization--since the standard romanization will
be used in a reference, if not in the heading.
Joan
Yossi Galron [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7/21/2008 4:39 PM
As I understand the instructions it should be:
(hdg.: שריג,
NACO/PCC Folks:
A reminder that the project to begin adding non-Latin script data (4XX
references and selected notes) to NACO records will begin next week. Those
institutions that contribute to the NACO file via a NACO node (including LC
catalogers working in OCLC only) may begin adding
Dear Funnel and other NACO friends,
Obeying the instructions in the announcement I forwarded to you yesterday about
adding nonroman references to authority records, I checked the new version of
the Non-Latin Script Data in Name Authority Records FAQ at this url:
No, that Uk is not an adjective--it stands for United Kingdom and can be seen
in the 040s of headings in the LC/NACO Authority File.
I'm writing to share with you the experience I've had recently with Uk
rabbinic headings. Some months ago, my attention was drawn to a few with this
040, the
Com, and hope
that experience we all gain during the testing period in the initial months
of implementation will help us develop recommendations for policy and/or best
practices.
Lenore
Joan C Biella [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6/19/2008 11:41 AM
Friends,
I wrote a document to guide the LC
]
- Original Message -
From: Joan C Biella [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: LC doc on Hebrew references in NARS
As Lenore says, a serious discussion of these topics can go on for weeks.
Yossi has just suggested to me
I see from the early responses to my guidelines document that there's a basic
principle the document doesn't discuss.
We're not (yet) creating nonroman HEADINGS. In the LC/NACO Authority File,
there will be, for the foreseeable future, no 1XX that is not in roman script.
What we'll begin to
Just one thought about this: it's a problem with MANY ramifications, some of
which we'll discuss in the LC Update. It's because it's so complex that LC is
allowing a six-month period for testing the system, at the end of which some
best practices will be enshrined in rules and RIs. An
The suggestion that we use the later of two possible Gregorian dates in the
fixed field, rather than the earlier one, has been made many times. Please
take note that this change in our practice would require a change in the MARC
documentation, which now specifies citing the earlier year. I
Are you the one who reported it? Thank you! We should try to keep track of
this and see if the OCLC documentation does get changed.
Joan
Marlene Schiffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5/8/2008 12:42 PM
Please be aware that Jay Weitz, Senior Consulting Database Specialist at
OCLC is aware of this
Friends,
Here is a piece, or two pieces, of information which may interest you--or they
may make you tear your hair and shriek Is there no justice?! In spite of
this risk, I think you should know.
I received a query about how to code the fixed field for Type of date
(008/06) when the 260$c
We at LC certainly hope to hear discussion of the White Paper as soon as you
think of things to say. But it seems pretty clear now that the first thing
that will happen is that nonroman headings will be imported into the authority
file (as references) automatically from current OCLC records,
Yesterday the LC Hebraica Team sent the Cataloging Policy and Support Office a
list of words from the 2003 edition of Even-Shoshan's dictionary. These are
words which show different romanizations in that edition from those in earlier
editions. In accordance with our policy of following the
There are a number of problems to be considered before assuming that the roman
form of the name in a Hebrew book must be a typo.
1) Consider n 99028230 Newton, Chim. This person has written 5 books in
the LC database. Should we assume that his (or her) heading also results from
t.p. typos?
Well, Yossi, I don't know. Is this a trick question? Alcalay's
dictionary says that the Qal form of the root nun-tsade-het means to
overcome, overpower, defeat, conquer, triumph over, excel, win, beat,
subjugate, subdue. So doesn't this mean To overcome (or overpower,
etc.) Hitler? That would
When the word masekhet immediately precedes the name of a tractate, it is
taken to be the first word of the name of the tractate, and should be
capitalized.
Joan
Dear Friends,
I am trying to catalog the book Be-sodo shel Ari'el Sharon, published by
Yedi'ot aharonot in 2007.
It seems to be popular in the library world to treat this as a Hebrew
translation of a French book called Ariel Sharon. But I can't find such a
book. What I find is a book called
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Joan C Biella [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9/18/2007 11:26 AM
Re: 110 Maʻayenot hạme Tẹveryah (Israel)
The dots both appear to be under the wrong letters. I assume that's
not really the case?
Joan
Roger Kohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/18/07 10:12 AM
CATALOGING POLICY
, just online they appear under the wrong letters.
jasmin
Joan C Biella wrote:
Re: 110 Maʻayenot hạme Tẹveryah (Israel)
The dots both appear to be under the wrong letters. I assume that's
not really the case?
Joan
Roger Kohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/18/07 10:12 AM
CATALOGING
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Joan C Biella [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9/18/2007 11:26 AM
Re: 110 Maʻayenot hạme Tẹveryah (Israel)
The dots both appear to be under the wrong letters. I assume that's
not really the case?
Joan
Roger Kohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/18/07 10:12 AM
CATALOGING
Re: 110 Maʻayenot hạme Tẹveryah (Israel)
The dots both appear to be under the wrong letters. I assume that's
not really the case?
Joan
Roger Kohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/18/07 10:12 AM
CATALOGING POLICY AND SUPPORT OFFICE
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS SUBJECT HEADINGS
TENTATIVE WEEKLY LIST 39
Here's a question: The rationale for adding dates to these headings is stated
to be the desire to facilitate displaying them in chronological order by date
of publication.
Don't most (or all) OPACs already have the ability to rank search results by
date of publication?
Joan
25.21A. Use as
Okay, I have consulted the two authority records and the problem seems
straightforward. So I deleted nr 95021838 (Zaborz, Mendel ben Yehudah
Leyb, 1749-1826) and updated n 88294746 (Levin, Menahem Mendel,
1749-1826). I chose to retain the latter because (a) it was the older
record and (b) it
Remember that 260$e$f are only needed if there is no 260$b. I don't have the
rules and RIs handy--perhaps someone else can supply the citation.
If you have a 260$b and want to record the printer info, you can put it in a
note ... though that sounds like overkill to me.
Joan
Jasmin Nof
is that the meeting always
runs overtime.
MRS
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joan C Biella
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 4:24 PM
To: heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lenore Bell; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Heidi Lerner
Subject: Re: RAS
Here's a new agenda topic: can we figure out a communal notification approach
for reporting errors in PCC records? Could we use Heb-NACO? I'll try to draft
a proposal to hand out at the meeting.
Joan
Daniel Lovins [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/05/07 12:33 PM
Dear colleagues,
Here's a preliminary
Speaking only for myself at this point, I think that unless ha-yom were
entered under H in the dictionary (which it isn't), the best way to treat it
would be to code it as a normal noun-plus-definite-article. I would not like
to add still another thing to remember to our romanization/coding
I've been consulting the MARC21 Bibliographic Format field list online, looking
especially at the 024 field--Other Standard Identifier (other than ISBN or
ISSN, I think that name means). Most of the possibilities I see given for this
field are international codes of one kind or another. The
Daniel, it now looks as if I will be coming to Phoenix after all, and I wonder
how your cataloging panel has shaped up. Is there room for me to add anything?
I was thinking of contacting Yossi and asking if I could collaborate with him
in talking about nonroman fields. --Jaon
Daniel Lovins
Greetings, friends.
This is just to let you know that I finally got around to fixing the six
remaining headings in the LC/NACO Authority File that begin with the title
Admur. They're all Admor now, in accord with the latest edition (that I
know of) of Even-Shoshan. I will be correcting the
Isn't that what they say in the lawcourts?
But seriously: Beider gives Boyez as the Yiddish equivalent of Bo'az
(Ruth's guy). May I formally request that Heidi add this equivalence to the
list of authorized Yiddish forms of Hebrew/Aramaic names?
Thanks, Heidi.
Joan
To put it another way, the reason we don't include the hyphen is because of a
statement in HCM, p. 21, in the Little Words section:
In the rare cases where Even-Shoshan may show the same word under more than
one entry element, the more analytical option is chosen.
(The more analytical option
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Joan C
Biella
Sent: Tue, January 23, 2007 6:30 AM
To: heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Re: belin or bailin?
I'm afraid that Sara's :-) reflects her understanding that the ALA/LC
romanization table for Hebrew does not include
Not sure it needs special mention--the romanization table is already there.
--Joan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/23/07 8:43 AM
thanks for letting me know the klal; (perhaps it can be mentioned in
the updated version of HCM?) bailin it is, for better and worse...
Joan C Biella wrote:
Those
Those attempting to follow the ALA/LC romanization table for Hebrew are
restricted to the equivalences it offers. Consonant-yod-yod can only be
romanized as consonant-ai. Consonant-single yod can be romanized as
consonant-e (assuming a tsere or segol) if appropriate.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can't find this exactly stated in HCM, but it's clear from the examples on p.
20 under Hebrew Hyphenation that a word is romanized as itself even when
prefixes are attached to it. (Thus bi-Yerushalayim, not b-Irushalayim or
bi-Rushalayim, and so forth.)
This should obviously hold true for
How should we romanize tet-resh-kuf-kamed-yod-nun? The LC Hebraica Team
recently received a query on this matter. We considered two options:
1: traklin. This is a foreign word (from Greek triclinium), and we
preserve initial consonant clusters in foreign words (e.g., prozah).
2: teraklin.
The standard romanization of the Arabic word is mulukhiyah (macron over the
2nd u, but never mind that). I've changed our record to reflect this, minus
the macron. A few 246s are probably in order. In this case, I doubt we'll
ever make a rule, so romanize as you like!
Joan
[EMAIL
Okay, I've now changed the heading for the former Haimof, Hayim to Chaimoff,
Chaim. (Figured we should use the found romanization, since we had it.) His
belles-lettres Cutter wll remain as it was.
I'll look into the other guys whose surnames begin with Haim- when time
permits.
Joan
I'm sure this heading has bothered every Hebrew cataloger since 1980 when it
was created. When I asked my own trainer the justification for it, I think I
was answered in the mistaken belief that the usual spelling of the surname had
only one yod. Het-yod-mem-vav-peh would indeed have to be
The Hebrew catalogers at LC unanimously feel that the phrase bi-devarim
ha-mekarvim is ungrammatical, and prefer ba-devarim ha-mekarvim. They don't
agree with the nuance of translation that Jasmin is suggesting between
bi-devarim and ba-devarim.
Joan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/03/06 12:23 PM
hi
My imagination has let me down. I have to transcribe the name of the author of
Sefer ha-orah: Ya'akov ha-Kohen mi-shin-gimel-bet-yod-alef. Shagbi? Sagbi?
Segovya?
Can any of my learned colleagues identify where Ya'akov ha-Kohen is from?
Thank you--
Joan
P.S. The work I'm cataloging is
These terms are not standardized in English or in Hebrew. There's no way I can
imagine, short of checking the actual books themselves in the various
libraries, to know if they carried edition statements which were ignored by
catalogers. Your book appears to have an edition statement, so if
CPSO said no to a similar query some time ago. E-mail addresses are not
legitimate sources for an author's preferred usage. --Joan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/27/06 4:52 PM
Dear group,
I have an author who only goes by his surname.
On the t.p. I have: Ts'ins.ki.
On p. 4. of cover I have
Mile-fanim seems right to me, setting off both prepositions. I've corrected
the single instance I could find of mi-lefanim in the LC database.
Joan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/08/06 11:15 AM
mi-lefanim or mile-fanim, that is the question (and LC has both)
Rachel
I'm adding the 3rd volume of Yitshak Ginzburg's Malkhut Yisra'el, which is
called Milhamot h.v.y. geresh.
Does this mean the same as h. geresh, I mean H. geresh? Could it stand for
ha-Shem ve-Yisra'el?
Thanks for your help--
Joan
Regarding the vocalization of tsafnat in the phrase tsafnat pa'neah, I've
given my opinion that the vowel of the tsade is kamats gadol and the vowel of
the feh is sheva (the one called sheva medium in old grammars, resulting from
the reduction of a vowel, not pronounced but still causing a
Two questions:
Is there any thought that AJL might prepare a similar letter?
Is there any thought that the PCC may apply for a Federal grant to help it fill
in for cataloging services LC ceases to provide?
Joan
This is not an official communication from the Library of Congress
[EMAIL
The phrase tsafnat pa'neah occurs in Genesis 41:45. If you look at the
Biblical text, you'll see that the tsade is pointed with kamats and also with
meteg, the little vertical line to left of and under the kamats. The meaning
of meteg is, This syllable is open and the vowel in it is long,
Just a note about classification--no institution is required to follow LC!
(Unless the records are supposed to meet BIBCO standards, as Bob points out.)
Joan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/16/06 11:23 AM
Bernard:
I agree, though the problem is not editions of previously published works
(these get
I would say that in our cataloging, the initial a should be capitalized only
if (1) it's the first word in the title, or (2) if the context is German.
Joan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/15/06 11:30 PM
Joan Biella wrote:
We've just queried CPSO about a knotty
capitalization problem that has vexed
You might want to recap some of the later discussion and report that eventually
CPSO said that folks may, optionally, include 1st 670s with (name not
given)--they're not forbidden to, as the original statement implied. Many of
us feel that such a 670 adds useful information to a NAR. --Joan
There's a Meir Rakutz in the 1987 Tel-Aviv phonebook. There's also someone
named Rakotsch. I think I'd go with the latter because of the geresh. Perhaps
this is a Hebrew version of Rakoczy. Refer from the form with u. --Joan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/08/06 4:27 PM
Dear Group,
I have a an art
yerah she-marbim bo be-simhah
Is this Sivan?
Thank you--
Joan
As far as I know, the prohibition still holds. I'll ask CPSO about flourished
dates and century dates for 20th century persons, though.
As for the cases you cite, without exception those headings are conflicts, and
the qualifier was added to break the conflict, which is allowed.
Here's the reply I got from CPSO. The part about $c qualifiers is phrased
oddly, but I'm pretty sure it means we're not supposed to use them either
(except to break conflicts).
Joan
The guidelines in question continue to stand. For 20th century persons we
do not accept
Questions: are we talking about the surname Sheyn now, or a Yiddish
adjective? Are we talking about a name or word in the 245$a or in the 245$b or
$c?
If the string occurs in a 245$a, a 246 with an alternative spelling can
certainly be made.
If the string occurs in a 245$b or $c, LC would
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
