1 / 6

Addressing Personal Name Differentiation Issues in Cataloging Practices

This report examines the complexities surrounding the differentiation of personal names in various cultures, particularly focusing on the challenges faced by Chinese, Korean, and Japanese cataloguers. Issues related to the International Cataloging Principles (ICP) and proposals submitted for Indonesian personal names are discussed. The document critiques existing guidelines on controlled access points and suggests potential adjustments to improve clarity and reduce "overdifferentiation" in cataloging practices. This analysis aims to enhance consistency and accuracy in the representation of personal names across different languages.

amato
Télécharger la présentation

Addressing Personal Name Differentiation Issues in Cataloging Practices

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Personal Names Working Group I Report Ben Gu National Library of China

  2. General Issues • No problems in • ICP draft • Draft of ICP of IME ICC 1-3 • Glossary

  3. Differentiation • Japanese: Not too many Japanese have the same names; • Korean have problems in differentiating personal names just like in China • As to foreign personal names, which are not specified in KCR; • Chinese have problems in differentiating people with the same names. • Dina Isyanti submitted a proposal to AACR Committee in the Rules for Indonesian Perosnal Names (Attachment of her report)

  4. In Consistency 5.1.3 and 5.5.1.1 • 5.1.3 When names have been expressed in several languages, preference should be given to a heading based on information found on manifestations of the expression in the original language and script … • 5.5.1.1 when there is a commonly used title in the language and script of the catalogue, preference should be given it. • “Should be”  “could be” or “may be”

  5. Personal Views • “Controlled” in “Controlled access points” is not clear. Quite a lot of Chinese cataloguers (not I) think: • “Controlled” = Authority control = Differentiation, • This results in “overdifferentiation” of all 1XX and 7XX fields (MARC21), by subject, job title, etc., although AACR2 has rules for undifferentiated names.

  6. Thank you

More Related