(_a_) is most familiar to that class of people who consult the
library; a natural history society will of course use the scientific
name, a town library would equally of course use the popular
name—«Butterflies» rather than «Lepidoptera», «Horse» rather than
«Equus caballus». But the scientific may be preferable when the common
name is ambiguous or of ill-defined extent.
(_b_) is most used in other catalogues.
(_c_) has fewest meanings other than the sense in which it is to be
employed.
(_d_) comes first in the alphabet, so that the reference from the
other can be made to the exact page of the catalogue.
(_e_) brings the subject into the neighborhood of other related
subjects. It is, for instance, often an advantage to have near any
art or science the lives of those who have been famous in it; as,
«Art», «Artists»; «Painters», «Painting»; «Historians», «History». If
one were hesitating between «Conjuring», «Juggling», «Legerdemain»,
«Prestidigitation», and «Sleight of hand», it would be in favor of
«Conjuring» or «Prestidigitation» that one could enter by their side
«Conjurors» or «Prestidigitators».
Sometimes one and sometimes another of these reasons must prevail.
Each case is to be decided on its own merits.
102. In choosing between two names not exactly synonymous, consider
whether there is difference enough to require separate entry; if not,
treat them as synonymous.
_Ex._ «Culture» and «Civilization», «Culture» and «Education».
103. Of two subjects exactly opposite choose one and refer from the
other.
_Ex._ «Temperance» and «Intemperance», «Free Trade» and «Protection»,
«Authority» (in religion) and «Private judgment». Reasons for choice
the same as between synonyms.
To this rule there may be exceptions. It may be best that works on
theism and atheism should be put together, perhaps under the heading
«God»; but Theists and Atheists as bodies of religious believers
ought certainly to go under those two headings, and therefore it is
appropriate to put works in defence of theistic doctrines and those in
defence of atheistic doctrines under «Theism» and «Atheism».
(_h._) _Subject-word and subject._
104. Enter books under the word which best expresses their subject,
whether it occurs in the title or not.
It is strange that the delusion ever should have arisen that “a
catalogue must of necessity confine itself to titles only of books.”
If it does, it can not enter that very considerable number of books
whose titles make no mention or only an obscure or a defective mention
of their subjects (§ 85), and it is at the mercy of deceptive titles
(_e. g._, Channing’s sermon “On a future life,” which treats of Heaven
only, Irving’s History of New York, Gulliver’s Travels). A man who
is looking up the history of the Christian church does not care in
the least whether the books on it were called by their authors church
histories or ecclesiastical histories; and the cataloguer also should
not care if he can avoid it. The title rules the title-catalogue; let
it confine itself to that province. {51}
(_i._) _Homonyms._
105. Carefully separate the entries on different subjects bearing the
same name, or take some other heading in place of one of the homonyms.
_E. g._, it will not do to confound works on the vegetable kingdom
with works on vegetables, in the sense of kitchen-garden plants; the
first would be properly entered under «Botany». Ottley’s “Italian
school of design” or a work on “Wagner and his school” are not to
be put under «Education». Special care is of course needed with
foreign titles; the cataloguer may be easily misled by the sound if
he is not on his guard. I have seen Lancelot’s “Jardin des racines
grecques” classed with works on «Gardening», Stephanus Byzantinus
“De Dodone [urbe Molossidis]” put under «Dodo» with a reference from
«Ornithology», and Garnier “Sur l’autorité paternelle” among the works
on the Christian «Fathers».
(_j._) _Compound subject-names._