[DCRM-L] Full vs abbreviated language in notes

[Gillis, Jane]

Deborah and others,

As a contrary view, full sentences are great as the default, but I don't think all notes need a subject.  Also sometimes it is clearer not to have a verb, but just a past participle.  Here are some examples of old notes that I would continue to use:

Suspended Oct. 26, 1799; resumed Jan. 13, 1800.
Errors in numbering with many numbers repeated.
Extent of publication not known.
With added caption title at head of first page of each weekly report.
Below issue number and frequency note, "By a society of gentlemen."
Description based on: [Numb. 1 (March 25. 1689)]; title from title page.
Imprint from colophon.
Text in English and Spanish.
No volume designations, but continuous paging begins over again with October issues.
Editor: Sylvester Pollet.
Editor: Rachel Levitsky (with Erica Kaufman, spring 2004- )
Editors: Thurlow Weed, 1830-<1840>, <1843-1855>, 1858-1863; George Dawson, 1846-1856, 1858-<1863>, 1870-<1876>; Frederick W. Seward, 1854-<1863>; John Ten Eyck, 1854-<1863>; Philip Ten Eyck, <1858-1863>; J.D. Parsons, <1858-1863>; George W. Demers, 1867-1870; Charles E. Smith, 1870-1876.

Some notes require full sentences.  Others can  be full sentences or not (e.g., subjects and articles wanting).  Still others are much better if they are more succinct.  I think some notes would just be too wordy and would lose the "punch" that these old notes have.  "Description based on: " and "Latest issue consulted: " are also RDA notes.  

Jane

Jane Gillis
Rare Book Cataloger
Yale University Library
jane.gillis at yale.edu
phone: 203-432-2633
fax: 203-432-4047



-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Lenore Rouse
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 8:43 AM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Full vs abbreviated language in notes

  I'm in favor of full sentences too (subject, verb, object) rather than 
sentence fragments. While being as concise as possible we should still 
be able to communicate in an understandable way.

-- 
Lenore M. Rouse
Curator, Rare Books and Special Collections
The Catholic University of America
Room 214, Mullen Library
620 Michigan Avenue N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20064

PHONE: 202 319-5090
FAX: 202 319-4735
E-MAIL: rouse at cua.edu




On 10/27/2011 6:48 PM, Deborah J. Leslie wrote:
> I apparently promised the DCRM(MS) group to look up some things and talk
> to some DCRM editors about the style of language in the note field, but
> figure a discussion in a wider forum would be more interesting.
>
>
>
> The more time goes on, the readier I am to use full, normal sentences in
> notes, instead of the traditional abbreviated sentence structure that
> grew out of the space-saving milieu of the card. Not that I advocate
> verbosity or chattiness, but sentences with verbs and articles are so
> much easier to read and understand than those without. One also can't
> help but think that the RDA no-abbreviation approach will spread to the
> idea of not just abbreviating words, but sentences as well.
>
>
>
> How about the rest of you? What style do you use when formulating notes?
>
>
>
>
> Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Head of Cataloging, Folger Shakespeare
> Library | 201 East Capitol St., S.E. | Washington, D.C. 20003
> djleslie at folger.edu<mailto:djleslie at folger.edu>   | 202.675-0369 |
> http://www.folger.edu<http://www.folger.edu/>
>
>
>
>