There seems to be much confusion about the cataloguing of series.
As of June 2006, the Library of Congress no longer authorizes series statements.
However, most cataloguing agencies (including mine) continue to use/create them.
The 440 tag was made obsolete in December 2008.
The series statement as it appears on the item is entered in a 490 tag.
The authorized form of the series statement is entered in a 8xx tag.
Never use a 490 tag without also using a corresponding 8xx tag.
There is no provision for nonfiling characters in the 490 tag’s indicators. Therefore it is prudent to NOT ENTER initial articles in the series statements. If initial articles are entered the series will not index correctly.
When in the past you would have entered a 440 tag, you will now use 490 and 830 tags.
The 830 tag is most often used in direct conjunction with and never without the 490 tag with a first indicator of 1.
The 830 tag will include the Library of Congress authorized title of the series and may also include the number assigned to the particular item.
830 tags must always be justified by a 490 tag.
830 tags are used for series that are produced by more than one author or a corporate body.
800 series tags are used in direct conjunction with and never without the 490 tag with a first indicator of 1.
The 800 tag is used when a series statement is entered under the author’s name. (one author is responsibe for the entire series)
The 800 tag will also include the Library of Congress authorized title of the series and may include the number assigned to the particular item.
I hope this post clarifies the subject. The changes in series cataloguing that have come about in recent years have made many of us confused. Our databases reflect both the old and the new input practices. I guess we all have a lot of recon ahead of us.
4 responses so far ↓
Nathan // October 16, 2009 at 11:36 am |
Thank you!
~Nathan
Heather // October 16, 2009 at 3:18 pm |
Thank you so much for clarifying this for me. It helps a great deal. Our database is full of incosistenties with the 440/490. Small steps.
I have another one. Like you we were using the incorrect code for our organization in the 040 field. Now we have the right one however my question is if I have a record that I am copy cataloguing with no 040 how do I precede?
$ablank?$dmy code
http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd040.html
Or would I be better off cataloguing an original marc record rather then a record of unknown origins?
Thanks in advance
fictionophile // November 9, 2009 at 11:13 pm |
Heather,
I’m not sure how other people handle this, but when I am cataloguing a record that doesn’t contain an 040 I input the following:
$beng$dCaNSH
With no $a it should be obvious to other library users that the code for the creator of the record was missing when I encountered it.
David Bigwood // October 16, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
Nice short summary of the recent change. Thanks.
I have to disagree with not putting initial articles in 490. It is a transcription field, not an access field. It should not be included in the index for series statements. So the initial articles should not bother anyone and the user gets to see what is on the item itself. Just my opinion, FWIW.