[DCRB-L] WG5: Problems draft

[Brian Hillyard]

A rather delayed response to something in Deborah's draft.

4B3  "If considered necessary for identification, supply in square
brackets the modern form of the name of the place"

Deborah has noted that lack of modern names for places appearing in
Latin is a serious obstacle to readers and suggests making this rule
explicitly cover those cases as well, and Larry suggests providing some
examples to prevent cases like "Berolini [Berlin]"!

I notice that in 4B1 and 4B8 (both supplying a place name, though in
slightly different circumstances) we are told to use "an English form of
name if there is one"; in 4B10 we are to "supply the name appropriate to
the date of publication if possible, e.g. St. Petersburg (not Leningrad)
for works published in that city before 1914"; and in 4B11 and 4B12 we
are given no guidance on the form of name to supply.

This is highly complex with a distinction between different names (St
Petersburg/Leningrad) and different forms of names.  Sometimes only a
philologist would realise that "Eboracum" and "York" are different forms
and not different names (so I believe).  But perhaps we shouldn't get
too hung up on that one.

What is important is the distinction between current vernacular and
current preferred English.  So for the Latin name "Mediolanum" there is
the current vernacular "Milano" and there is the current preferred
English "Milan" (the Getty thesaurus covers all this).  I think the
simplest way through this is to standardise around the 4B1 and 4B8
instructions, though making them more precise by prescribing "the
current English name if there is one or, if not, the current vernacular
name".  If we are supplying names in square brackets, is there any need
to deviate from this in 4B10 (i.e. we should just use the current
English name that identifies the place for catalogue users)?

It also seems reasonable that we want to avoid catalogue records with
(e.g.) "Lyon [Lyons]", "Milano [Milan]", "Romae [Rome]", "Edinburgi
[Edinburgh]", or "Londini [London]", and these might stand for examples
of unnecessary glosses; just possibly "Berolini [Berlin]" does not fall
into this category of unnecessary (because of the added "o"?) - but this
is where the arguments start.

A possible formulation of 4B3 would be along the lines:
4B3  If the current English name of the place differs beyond easy
recognition [better than "significantly"?] from the place name as
transcribed (whether because of a change of name or because it is in a
different language, especially Latin), supply in square brackets the
current English name if there is one or, if not, the current vernacular
name.   
	Christiania [Oslo]
	Mediolanum [Milan]
	Lugdunum Batavorum [Leiden]
	[need current vernacular example]

If the phrase "current English name" is accepted for 4B3, it should also
be used in 4B1, 4B8, 4B11,  4B12, and, I think, 4B10.

Choice of name in these places also looks as though it should be related
to the name chosen for 752, if used; MARC21 offers no guidance on
authority there.

Brian Hillyard


-- 
Dr Brian Hillyard
Head of Rare Books
National Library of Scotland
EDINBURGH EH1 1EW
e-mail: b.hillyard at nls.uk
Fax: 0131 466 2807 *** Tel: 0131 226 4531
Library website: http://www.nls.uk