Search (214 results, page 1 of 11)

0.10872358 = product of:
  0.21744716 = sum of:
    0.21744716 = sum of:
      0.15975991 = weight(_text_:translation in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15975991 = score(doc=310,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05322244 = queryNorm
          0.51509106 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
      0.057687245 = weight(_text_:22 in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057687245 = score(doc=310,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18637592 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05322244 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, second edition, aim at universal applicability. Some problems brought forth through the translation process and the laws in the workability of rules in a nonEnglish working language are examined. This leads to acknowledge the failure of AACR2 to acquire an international adaptability. Enquiry into the needs of potential users is advised.

Date

6. 1.2007 19:12:22

0.081542686 = product of:
  0.16308537 = sum of:
    0.16308537 = sum of:
      0.11981993 = weight(_text_:translation in 5945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11981993 = score(doc=5945,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05322244 = queryNorm
          0.3863183 = fieldWeight in 5945, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5945)
      0.043265432 = weight(_text_:22 in 5945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043265432 = score(doc=5945,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18637592 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05322244 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5945, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5945)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Anglo-American codes are examined to determine the implicit or acting concept of work in each, in order to trace the development of our current implicit concept of work, as embodied in AACR2R. The following conditions are examined, using comparison tables: (1) contraction of a work (abridgements, condensations, digests, epitomes, outlines, chrestomathies, excerpts, extracts, selections); and (2) change in substance of a work (adaptations, dramatizations, free translations, novelizations, paraphrases, versifications, films or filmstrips of a text, musical arrangements, musical amplifications, musical settings, musical simplifications, musical transcriptions, musical versions, parodies, imitations, performances, reproductions of art works, revisions, editing, enlargements, expansion, updating, translation).

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 19(1994) no.2, S.5-22

0.06795223 = product of:
  0.13590446 = sum of:
    0.13590446 = sum of:
      0.09984994 = weight(_text_:translation in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09984994 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05322244 = queryNorm
          0.3219319 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
      0.03605453 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03605453 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18637592 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05322244 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Catalogs have for centuries been the main tool that enabled users to search for items in a library by author, title, or subject. A catalog can be interpreted as a set of bibliographic records, where each record acts as a surrogate for a publication. Every record describes a specific publication and contains the data that is used to create the indexes of search systems and the information that is presented to the user. Bibliographic records are often captured and exchanged by the use of the MARC format. Although there are numerous rdquodialectsrdquo of the MARC format in use, they are usually crafted on the same basis and are interoperable with each other -to a certain extent. The data model of a MARC-based catalog, however, is rdquo[...] extremely non-normalized with excessive replication of datardquo [1]. For instance, a literary work that exists in numerous editions and translations is likely to yield a large result set because each edition or translation is represented by an individual record, that is unrelated to other records that describe the same work.

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003

0.056483664 = product of:
  0.11296733 = sum of:
    0.11296733 = product of:
      0.22593465 = sum of:
        0.22593465 = weight(_text_:translation in 1991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22593465 = score(doc=1991,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.7284488 = fieldWeight in 1991, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1991)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article describes the process used to produce an appropriate translation of Resource Description and Access (RDA) into Spanish and to develop adequate cataloging training materials, as prerequisites for adopting the new international cataloging code in Ibero-American countries.

0.056483664 = product of:
  0.11296733 = sum of:
    0.11296733 = product of:
      0.22593465 = sum of:
        0.22593465 = weight(_text_:translation in 2955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22593465 = score(doc=2955,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.7284488 = fieldWeight in 2955, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2955)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A summary of the presence of RDA content in languages other than English in RDA Toolkit, in the RDA Registry, in the RIMMF data editor, and as separate translations is given. Translation policy is explained and the benefits of translation on the content of RDA are noted.

0.049423203 = product of:
  0.098846406 = sum of:
    0.098846406 = product of:
      0.19769281 = sum of:
        0.19769281 = weight(_text_:translation in 1990) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19769281 = score(doc=1990,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.6373927 = fieldWeight in 1990, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1990)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article reports on a joint translation project (France and Canada) of the Resource Description and Access (RDA) standard into French. We describe how the translation committee worked, explain the methodology, and present the measures taken to ensure that all contributing parties be satisfied with the end result. The article discusses problems that arose when dealing with translating specific instructions and examples that needed to be adapted (or changed) to the French context. Other sections report on technical and managerial challenges encountered. We conclude with "lessons learned" that will hopefully help others embarking on such a project.

0.040791042 = product of:
  0.081582084 = sum of:
    0.081582084 = product of:
      0.16316417 = sum of:
        0.16316417 = weight(_text_:22 in 4362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16316417 = score(doc=4362,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18637592 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.8754574 = fieldWeight in 4362, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4362)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2000 19:22:27

0.039939977 = product of:
  0.079879954 = sum of:
    0.079879954 = product of:
      0.15975991 = sum of:
        0.15975991 = weight(_text_:translation in 7321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15975991 = score(doc=7321,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.51509106 = fieldWeight in 7321, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7321)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.039939977 = product of:
  0.079879954 = sum of:
    0.079879954 = product of:
      0.15975991 = sum of:
        0.15975991 = weight(_text_:translation in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15975991 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.51509106 = fieldWeight in 1418, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1418)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Describes the work of mediaeval librarians such as Paulaus Melissus and looks at current problems in cataloguing bibliographies. One of these is that the material used does not have the precise algorithmic format required by information technology; today's electronic cataloguing methods are merely a translation of the former manual ones e.g. book title keywords, and have similar defects. Analyses the 3 basi features of books i.e. text, text edition and materials used, and criticises traditional indexing methods

0.039939977 = product of:
  0.079879954 = sum of:
    0.079879954 = product of:
      0.15975991 = sum of:
        0.15975991 = weight(_text_:translation in 4674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15975991 = score(doc=4674,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.51509106 = fieldWeight in 4674, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4674)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Summarizes the main points of the final report of an IFLA study of international cooperation in the application of name authority data to bibliographic control, as part of the UBCIM Programme. The report is in French and ist entitled: 'La cooperation internationale en matière de données d'auteurs: constats; reflexions, recommendations'. An English translation is expected in the future

0.039939977 = product of:
  0.079879954 = sum of:
    0.079879954 = product of:
      0.15975991 = sum of:
        0.15975991 = weight(_text_:translation in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15975991 = score(doc=2550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.51509106 = fieldWeight in 2550, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Looks at the state of the art of the cataloguing of musical sources in Spain and the problems involved. Using the recent Spanish translation of guidelines for the cataloguing of historical musical sources, the Repertoire International des Sources Musicales (RISM) cataloguers have encountered problems of terminology where instruments and music forms are peculiar to spain and there is a basis absence of information about composers

0.039939977 = product of:
  0.079879954 = sum of:
    0.079879954 = product of:
      0.15975991 = sum of:
        0.15975991 = weight(_text_:translation in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15975991 = score(doc=1183,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.51509106 = fieldWeight in 1183, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1183)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

IFLA's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) lay the foundation for a new generation of cataloging systems that recognize the difference between a particular work (e.g., Moby Dick), diverse expressions of that work (e.g., translations into German, Japanese and other languages), different versions of the same basic text (e.g., the Modern Library Classics vs. Penguin editions), and particular items (a copy of Moby Dick on the shelf). Much work has gone into finding ways to infer FRBR relationships between existing catalog records and modifying catalog interfaces to display those relationships. Relatively little work, however, has gone into exploring the creation of catalog records that are inherently based on the FRBR hierarchy of works, expressions, manifestations, and items. The Perseus Digital Library has created a new catalog that implements such a system for a small collection that includes many works with multiple versions. We have used this catalog to explore some of the implications of hierarchical catalog records for searching and browsing. Current online library catalog interfaces present many problems for searching. One commonly cited failure is the inability to find and collocate all versions of a distinct intellectual work that exist in a collection and the inability to take into account known variations in titles and personal names (Yee 2005). The IFLA Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) attempts to address some of these failings by introducing the concept of multiple interrelated bibliographic entities (IFLA 1998). In particular, relationships between abstract intellectual works and the various published instances of those works are divided into a four-level hierarchy of works (such as the Aeneid), expressions (Robert Fitzgerald's translation of the Aeneid), manifestations (a particular paperback edition of Robert Fitzgerald's translation of the Aeneid), and items (my copy of a particular paperback edition of Robert Fitzgerald's translation of the Aeneid). In this formulation, each level in the hierarchy "inherits" information from the preceding level. Much of the work on FRBRized catalogs so far has focused on organizing existing records that describe individual physical books. Relatively little work has gone into rethinking what information should be in catalog records, or how the records should relate to each other. It is clear, however, that a more "native" FRBR catalog would include separate records for works, expressions, manifestations, and items. In this way, all information about a work would be centralized in one record. Records for subsequent expressions of that work would add only the information specific to each expression: Samuel Butler's translation of the Iliad does not need to repeat the fact that the work was written by Homer. This approach has certain inherent advantages for collections with many versions of the same works: new publications can be cataloged more quickly, and records can be stored and updated more efficiently.

0.03530229 = product of:
  0.07060458 = sum of:
    0.07060458 = product of:
      0.14120916 = sum of:
        0.14120916 = weight(_text_:translation in 2958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14120916 = score(doc=2958,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.4552805 = fieldWeight in 2958, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2958)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The report aims to analyze the applicability of the Resource Description and Access (RDA) within the Italian public libraries, and also in the archives and museums in order to contribute to the discussion at international level. The Central Institute for the Union Catalogue of Italian libraries (ICCU) manages the online catalogue of the Italian libraries and the network of bibliographic services. ICCU has the institutional task of coordinating the cataloging and the documentation activities for the Italian libraries. On March 31 st 2014, the Institute signed the Agreement with the American Library Association,Publishing ALA, for the Italian translation rights of RDA, now available and published inRDAToolkit. The Italian translation has been carried out and realized by the Technical Working Group, made up of the main national and academic libraries, cultural Institutions and bibliographic agencies. The Group started working from the need of studying the new code in its textual detail, to better understand the principles, purposes, and applicability and finally its sustainability within the national context in relation to the area of the bibliographic control. At international level, starting from the publication of the Italian version of RDA and through the research carried out by ICCU and by the national Working Groups, the purpose is a more direct comparison with the experiences of the other European countries, also within EURIG international context, for an exchange of experiences aimed at strengthening the informational content of the data cataloging, with respect to history, cultural traditions and national identities of the different countries.

0.03494748 = product of:
  0.06989496 = sum of:
    0.06989496 = product of:
      0.13978992 = sum of:
        0.13978992 = weight(_text_:translation in 528) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13978992 = score(doc=528,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.4507047 = fieldWeight in 528, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=528)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.03494748 = product of:
  0.06989496 = sum of:
    0.06989496 = product of:
      0.13978992 = sum of:
        0.13978992 = weight(_text_:translation in 1879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13978992 = score(doc=1879,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.4507047 = fieldWeight in 1879, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1879)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Many experts have proposed an evolution toward "next generation catalogs," whose main features are partly inspired by commercial websites such as Google or Amazon. This article examines pros and cons of this integration. It also aims to show how a qualitative approach helps to broaden understanding of web communication mechanisms. After discussing some examples of "next generation catalog" features, I analyze the interface of an online catalog responding to different users' information needs and seeking behaviors. In the conclusion I suggest that the right approach to integration is a "translation" (not a "copy and paste") between commercial and library logics.

0.03494748 = product of:
  0.06989496 = sum of:
    0.06989496 = product of:
      0.13978992 = sum of:
        0.13978992 = weight(_text_:translation in 2182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13978992 = score(doc=2182,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.4507047 = fieldWeight in 2182, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2182)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article examines shared cataloging practices in Nunavut, Canada, where Inuit form 85% of the general population and three official languages, including Inuit language (Inuktitut/Inuinnaqtun), English and French, are used in government and daily discourse. The partners in the Nunavut Libraries Online consortium, together with the Nunavut Government translation bureau, have developed a common vocabulary for creating bibliographic records in Inuktitut, including syllabic script, and used this to create bibliographic cataloging standards, under the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, Second Edition, for creating multilingual and multiscript MARC-compliant, Integrated Library System-compatible records that accurately reflect the multilingual content of material published in and about Nunavut and Inuit.

0.03494748 = product of:
  0.06989496 = sum of:
    0.06989496 = product of:
      0.13978992 = sum of:
        0.13978992 = weight(_text_:translation in 5479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13978992 = score(doc=5479,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.4507047 = fieldWeight in 5479, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5479)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Semantic interoperability between Resource Description and Access (RDA) and BIBFRAME models is of great interest to the library community. In this context, this work investigates the mapping of core entities, inherent and derivative relationships from RDA to BIBFRAME, and proposes mapping rules assessed using two gold datasets. Findings indicate that RDA core entities and inherent relationships can be successfully mapped to BIBFRAME using the bf:hasExpression property, while extending bf:hasExpression as transitive simplifies BIBFRAME representations. Moreover, mapping derivative relationships between RDA Expressions was successful with loss of specificity in non-translation cases. The mapping of derivative relationships between RDA Works produced "noisy" bf:hasDerivative occurrences in BIBFRAME.

0.029954983 = product of:
  0.059909966 = sum of:
    0.059909966 = product of:
      0.11981993 = sum of:
        0.11981993 = weight(_text_:translation in 5853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11981993 = score(doc=5853,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.3863183 = fieldWeight in 5853, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5853)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this paper, the FRBR model is approached through Umberto Eco's semiotic analysis of the translation notion as developed in his Dire quasi la stessa cosa: esperienze di traduzione. Eco's taxonomy of forms of interpretation is used as a basis for a tentative abstract definition of what constitutes a mere expression of a given musical work and what constitutes a new, distinct musical work. The issues of aggregates of musical works, fragments of musical works, and works of vocal music, are also addressed. FRBR can be used as a basis for a model for the complex processes involved in the production and reception of musical works. And FRBR highlights complex bibliographic relationships that put musical works at the very center of myriads of interrelated systems that make up the catalog, which is viewed as a set of circular objects such as atoms or solar systems rather than as a straight linear listing.

0.029954983 = product of:
  0.059909966 = sum of:
    0.059909966 = product of:
      0.11981993 = sum of:
        0.11981993 = weight(_text_:translation in 499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11981993 = score(doc=499,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31015858 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.3863183 = fieldWeight in 499, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8275905 = idf(docFreq=353, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=499)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Texas A & M University Modern Languages Department has been expanding its curriculum to include courses in Chinese. To support this curriculum, the Evans Library has recently acquired titles in Chinese. The Original Cataloging Department did not have the language expertise necessary to catalog these books in a timely manner. This project examined the feasibility of hiring student assistants with language expertise to assist the original catalogers. A graduate student, fluent in Chinese, was hired to transliterate the title page and verso, and provide descriptive information for fifty-five Chinese books. The student was also asked to provide a brief translation to assist in establishing LC Subject Headings and LC Classification numbers. Items for which copy was found on OCLC acted as a control for the accuracy of transliteration. Original catalogers then prepared the bibliographic records for the remaining titles. Utilizing the student's language expertise resulted in the processing of materials in a timely manner benefiting the university community.

0.028843623 = product of:
  0.057687245 = sum of:
    0.057687245 = product of:
      0.11537449 = sum of:
        0.11537449 = weight(_text_:22 in 527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11537449 = score(doc=527,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18637592 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05322244 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 527, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=527)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

OCLC systems and services. 9(1993) no.3, S.20-22