Cutter, C.A.: Subjects (1985)
0.00
0.0019633435 = product of:
0.003926687 = sum of:
0.003926687 = product of:
0.007853374 = sum of:
0.007853374 = weight(_text_:a in 3625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007853374 = score(doc=3625,freq=22.0), product of:
0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046056706 = queryNorm
0.14788237 = fieldWeight in 3625, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3625)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The publication in 1876 of Rules for a Printed Catalogue by Charies A. Cutter (1837-1903) was a landmark in the literature of library science. This code provided the basis for all subsequent codes of descriptive cataloging and catapulted the dictionary catalog into the position of being the predominant form of catalog in American libraries in years to come. Cutter's rules for subject entry were the first and, in essence, still the only codification of the alphabetical subject catalog. These Rules represented the culmination of many years' experience in compiling the dictionary catalog of the Boston Athenaeum (published in 18741882) during Cutter's tenure as its librarian from 1869 to 1893. Prior to the advent of the dictionary catalog, the popular method for organizing subject entries in a catalog was the classified arrangement, in the form of either the classed catalog (usually based an a particular classification scheme) or the alphabetico-classed catalog, in which the primary objective was subject collocation. Subject entries were arranged systematically and logically according to their subject relationships. In the alphabetical subject arrangement in the dictionary catalog, an the other hand, the primary objective is what Cutter calls the "facility of reference"; in other words, subjects can be located quickly in the catalog because they are listed directly under their specific names in an alphabetical order. Unlike the classed catalog which requires an accompanying index, the alphabetical subject catalog combines the functions of the subject entries and index in one alphabetical sequence, even though at the expense of subject collocation.
Some of the advantages of the classed catalog were then reintroduced into the alphabetical subject catalog through see also references and, to some extent, by the use of inverted headings. Although never officially acknowledged, Cutter's principles provided the philosophical underpinnings for the Library of Congress and the Sears subject headings systems. His principles of common usage, specific entry, uniform heading, and syndetic structure have been reflected in the Library of Congress Subject Headings practice and reiterated by David Judson Haykin (q.v.) in his exposition of the Library of Congress system. Cutter's definition of "specific entry" has been frequently quoted as the basis of the alphabetical subject catalog. Because Cutter's Rules are no longer in print, the following excerpt contains all the rules an subject entry from the fourth edition of Rules for a Dictionary Catalog. These rules, first published over a hundred years ago, do not address all the problems encountered in subject analysis in modern times. Nonetheless, many of his ideas are still valid and manifested in subject cataloging practice in American libraries today. Moreover, as A. C. Foskett comments, "his Rules can still be read with profit (and, more unusual in such works, pleasure) today."
- Footnote
- Original in: Cutter, C.A.: Rules for a dictionary catalog. 4th ed. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office 1904, S.66-82
- Source
- Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
- Type
- a
