The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards

MARC Standards

HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List


MARC DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 2021-DP02

DATE: December 22, 2020
REVISED:

NAME: Designating an Introductory Statement in Field 672 of the MARC 21 Authority Format

SOURCE: German National Library, for the Committee on Data Formats

SUMMARY: This paper explores options for defining a new subfield in field 672 (Title Related to the Entity) of the MARC 21 Authority Format as a way to separate an introductory phrase from the title information contained in the same field.

KEYWORDS: Field 672 (AD); Title Related to the Entity (AD); Introductory Phrase (AD)

RELATED: 2013-01

STATUS/COMMENTS:
12/22/20 – Made available to the MARC community for discussion.


Discussion Paper No. 2021-DP02: Designating an Introductory Statement in Field 672

1. BACKGROUND

The "Integrated Authority File" ("Gemeinsame Normdatei", or "GND") is used in German speaking countries (and beyond) for authority control. While the internal format is an implementation of the Pica format (Pica3 for cataloging purposes, and Pica+ for data handling and storage purposes), the exchange and communications format is the MARC Authority Format.

In the GND, field 672 (Title Related to the Entity), introduced in 2013 into the MARC 21 Authority Format, is used. It occurs more than 3 million times in almost 2 million records. Most of these records describe a person, some are for corporate bodies, and a few are for conferences.

In many cases, subfield $a for the title information contains an introductory statement, in the sense of a relationship information. It is always given in German language (as the cataloging language), and often abbreviated according to the "Rules for Descriptive Cataloging" ("Regeln für die Alphabetische Katalogisierung", or "RAK"), which were the pre-RDA rules in German speaking countries.

The top 12 occurrences of these introductory statements, and their respective numbers (as of September 2020), are as follows:

32.836 "Hrsg. von:"

12.856 "Übers. von:"

 3.008 "Mitverf. von:"

 1.080 "Bearb. von:"

 1.053 "Mithrsg. von:"

   709 "Red. von:"

   501 "Ill. von:"

   317 "Mitarb. von:"

   193 "2. Hrsg. von:"

   189 "Resp. von:"

   141 "2. Verf. von:"

   137 "1. Hrsg. von:"

For indexing reasons, it would be helpful to separate this introductory information from the title information itself. This could be achieved by the definition of one new subfield in field 672.

It should be noted that the relationship information here reflects the relationship information in subfields $e / $j (Relator term) and $4 (Relationship) in fields 1XX and 7XX of the MARC Bibliographic Format. However, the direction is a different one: While e.g., 700 $e contains a relator term from the resource to a person (e.g., "editor"), field 672 of the Authority format provides the reciprocal relationship (e.g., "editor of", or, in German, "Hrsg. von"). As a result, the codes and terms from the MARC lists for relators cannot be used here in field 672, and using subfields $e/$j or $4 is not an option.

For similar reasons, this kind of an introductory statement is not to be confused with a formal statement of responsibility, often taken from a resource, and provided in e.g., field 245 subfield $c of the MARC Bibliographic Format.

2. DISCUSSION

Field 672 is currently defined in the MARC 21 Authority Format as follows:

FIELD DEFINITION AND SCOPE
Citation for a work that is related in some manner to the entity represented by the 100, 110, 111 or 151 field in the authority record.

In general, any one of the remaining alphabetic subfield codes may fit the purpose described in section 1. A good analogy might be subfield $i for a "Display text", as defined in some fields, among them field 246 (Varying Form of Title). Another option is subfield $p for an "Introductory phrase", as defined in field 534 (Original Version Note).

We suggest the definition of one of the following new subfields in field 672 of the Authority Format, by option:

OPTION 1:

$i – Display text (NR)
Display text that introduces the title information, and may contain relationship information. Subfield $i precedes subfield $a at the beginning of the field.

OPTION 2:

$p - Introductory phrase (NR)
Introductory phrase that introduces the title information, and may contain relationship information. Subfield $p precedes subfield $a at the beginning of the field.

3. EXAMPLES


Example 1:
Authority record for a person, each field 672 using subfield $i (Option 1)

LDR 01637nz  a2200301oc 4500

001 1072465388

003 DE-101

005 20200217124926.0

008 150617n||aznnnaabn           | aaa    |c

024 7# $a1072465388$0http://d-nb.info/gnd/1072465388$2gnd

035 ## $a(DE-101)1072465388

035 ## $a(DE-588)1072465388

040 ## $aDE-101$cDE-101$9r:DE-101$bger$d1210$erda

042 ## $agnd3

043 ## $cXA-NL

075 ## $bp$2gndgen

075 ## $bpiz$2gndspec

079 ## $ag$qf$uv

100 1# $aSlofstra, Bouke$d1960-

375 ## $a1$2iso5218

377 #7 $adut$aeng$alat$2iso639-2b

548 ## $a1960-$4datl
$4
https://d-nb.info/standards/elementset/gnd#dateOfBirth
$wr$iLebensdaten

550 ## $0(DE-101)04061414X$0(DE-588)4061414-1
$0
https://d-nb.info/gnd/4061414-1$aÜbersetzer$4beru
$4
https://d-nb.info/standards/elementset/gnd#professionOrOccupation
$wr$iBeruf

550 ## $0(DE-101)041992415$0(DE-588)4199241-6
$0
https://d-nb.info/gnd/4199241-6$aKlassischer Philologe$4berc
$4
https://d-nb.info/standards/elementset/gnd#professionOrOccupation
$wr$iCharakteristischer Beruf

551 ## $0(DE-101)040138313$0(DE-588)4013831-8
$0
https://d-nb.info/gnd/4013831-8$aEindhoven$4ortg
$4
https://d-nb.info/standards/elementset/gnd#placeOfBirth
$wr$iGeburtsort

672 #0 $iÜbers. von:$aLectio publica de analogia linguae Graecae (ca 1750)$f2015

672 #0 $iHrsg. von:$a"A plank I saved from a shipwreck."$bJ.H.H. Halbertsma's commentary
       on Tiberius Hemsterhuis's Lectio publica de originibus linguae Graecae$f2017

672 #0 $iHrsg. von:$aEen meelijwekkend volk$bvreemden over Friezen van de oudheid tot
       de kerstening$f2017$w(DE-627)1030495408

Example 2: Authority record for a corporate body, second field 672 using subfield $p (Option 2)

LDR 01727nz a2200349oc 4500

001 1174699752

003 DE-101

005 20190103142819.0

008 190103n||aznnnaabn           | ana    |c

024 7# $a1174699752$0http://d-nb.info/gnd/1174699752$2gnd

035 ## $a(DE-101)1174699752

035 ## $a(DE-588)1174699752

040 ## $aDE-23$cDE-23$9r:DE-1$bger$d0023$erda

042 ## $agnd3

043 ## $cXA-DXDE$cXA-DE

075 ## $bb$2gndgen

075 ## $bkiz$2gndspec

079 ## $ag$qf

110 2# $aDienstags-Prediger-Collegium$gLeipzig

410 2# $aDienstags-Prediger-Collegium, h. 9.$gLeipzig

410 2# $aDienstägiges Prediger-Collegium$gLeipzig

410 2# $aDienstägiges Prediger-Kollegium$gLeipzig

410 2# $a-Das- dienstägige Prediger-Collegium$gLeipzig

410 2# $a-Das- dienstägige Prediger-Kollegium$gLeipzig

410 2# $aPrediger-Collegium, dienstags von 9 bis 10 Uhr$gLeipzig

500 1# $0(DE-101)104222298$0(DE-588)104222298
$0
https://d-nb.info/gnd/104222298$aRivinus, Tileman Andreas
$d1654-1692$4rela
$4
https://d-nb.info/standards/elementset/gnd#relatedPerson
$wr$iRelation allgemein$eRelation allgemein$9v:Präses$9Z:1684

548 ## $a1684$4datb
$4
https://d-nb.info/standards/elementset/gnd#associatedDate
$wr$iZeitraum

551 ## $0(DE-101)040352064$0(DE-588)4035206-7
$0
https://d-nb.info/gnd/4035206-7$aLeipzig$4orta
$4
https://d-nb.info/standards/elementset/gnd#placeOfBusiness
$wr$iOrt

667 ## $aEines von mehreren Predigerkollegien in Leipzig des 17. und 18. Jh.

667 ## $aVD-17

672 #0 $aDie Gottgelassene Sterbens-Lust$f[1684]$wVD17 23:745100N

672 #0 $pHrsg. von:$aG. G. L. M.: Das In der Blüthe der Jugend Recht
       Männliche Christenthum$f[1684]$wVD17 23:745104T

4. BIBFRAME DISCUSSION

BIBFRAME is flexible in handling of relationship and indicating relationship types.  When the proposal is fully explored the appropriate relationship method can be determined.

5. QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

5.1.  Is the need for the separation of an introductory phrase with relationship information sufficiently demonstrated?

5.2.  If yes to question 5.1.: Should the need be accommodated by the definition of a new subfield in field 672?

5.3.  Or should the need be accommodated by a different format solution?

5.4.  If yes to question 5.2: Which of the subfield codes should be chosen: "$i" (Option 1), or "$p" (Option 2), or a different one?

5.5.  Is there anything else that should be taken into account?


HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List

The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards
(12/22/2020)
Legal | External Link Disclaimer Contact Us