On 12/20/2013 5:13 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
Thanks, I wasn’t aware of this LCRI (I’m afraid there’s still a lot I don’t know about Anglo-American cataloging). Indeed this sounds rather complicated and a lot of effort. Also, I’m not sure I’ve really understood its consequences: So, the original collection might have got “Poems. Selections” but the translation would have got “X’s best poetry. German” in 240? If so, then that would still seem something of a muddle to me.
And would that rule still be valid under RDA? I can’t remember seeing something similar in the LC-PCC PS.
What this means is if a cataloger gets a book titled “The Coffin of Count Thrümmel” by Otto Bierbaum, finds that it is a translation and contains several other poems, he or she is supposed to look to see if it existed as a separate collection in German. The cataloger then may run across this “Die Schatulle des Grafen Thrümmel und andere nachgelassene Gedichte,” (http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/2640962) and then the cataloger is to try to determine if it is the same collection or not. If it is determined that it is a translation of this specific collection, the uniform title would be:
240 10 Schatulle des Grafen Thrümmel und andere nachgelassene Gedichte.$lEnglish
otherwise, if it is not the same thing, you would do:
240 10 Poems.$kSelections.$lEnglish
and you could throw on a date. The idea of “adequate title” may also apply here. LCRI 25.10 example 2. https://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/25-10-works-in-a-single-form
since this would mean that the original German title was “adequate”.
This seemed to me to be what you were suggesting in your post. As I pointed out, it is really a lot of work for, as I see it, little gain.