This discussion by the direction of proper authority is a discussion of
the alphabetic subject catalog as suggested by the A. L. A. and Library
of Congress subject heads. It is confined to general principles and
general principles, of course, always have exceptions. This discussion
is, however, free in considering these so far as it pleases.
Some of the fundamental principles may seem more like rules than
principles at first sight but it is believed that they are all well
principled. However, it is not pretended that they are all the
principles in sight; quite the contrary, there is quite a pocket-full
of these left each with the memorandum of some principle, big or
little, and there are but twenty-one here enumerated. This being a
discussion rather than a systematic paper properly refers to matters
of recent personal experience. Since the first page of the new subject
index contains subjects down to the name "Absolute," there has been
drawn a synopsis of all the subject headings used by the A. L. A.,
Library of Congress, Harvard, Sydney, Princeton and the indexes of the
Expansive Classification and Decimal Classification.
This will illustrate the variety of usages which have to be dealt with
in attempting to systematize this matter so as to get uniformity and
may be regarded as illustrations of the principles enumerated.
1. A catalog is a name list of concrete or specific objects as
distinguished from classes of objects; a list of plants in a botanical
garden, of mineral specimens in a museum or books in a library, but
a list of kinds of plants, minerals or books apart from concrete
specimens is not. In the case of books such a list is a bibliography.
The book catalog is a directory or guide book to certain concrete
books, the bibliography is a list of books in the abstract, applying
equally whether its books exist in one place or another, or even if
they no longer exist at all.
2. A library catalog is a directory or guide book to books for use.
The immediate object to publishers, new book dealers, book auctioneers
or antiquarians is sale, the object to the librarian is use. This
difference affects both the form of the catalog and the description of
the books.
3. Library catalogs in turn may be distinguished into catalogs for
the administration (which include chiefly accession catalog and the
shelf list) and those for direct use of readers (which include author,
subject, title, imprint, etc., catalogs)--the special use in every case
modifying the form of the catalog.
4. Catalogs for readers differ according to the two needs of readers
which the catalogs try to meet. These needs are (1) To find a given
book; (2) to find a book or group of books of a given character. It
is not quite exact to say under this second head, that the object is
to find information on a given subject or topic, for it may be that
the object is to find special forms such as incunabula or Venetian
imprints, association books, fiction, poetry, drama, essays, orations,
ballads, encyclopedias, dictionaries, periodicals, classes of rarities,
books on vellum, etc.
5. The prime object of a library catalog or directory to books for use
resolves itself into a matter of the economy of time and of attention.
Where there are only two or three books in a man's library there is
obviously little need of catalog. As soon as there are many the guide
book is needed. Whether, therefore, the catalog is author or subject,
the controlling thought in its making is the economy of attention of
the user.
6. The alphabetic order is on the whole the quickest reference order.
The economic solution for these two needs proves, therefore, to be, the
two alphabetical catalogs (1) the author and title catalog, (2) the
alphabetical subject catalog. Title catalogs and the like are simply
supplementary practical devices to aid inexperienced or forgetful
readers.
The author and title catalog is distinguished from the author and
catch-word catalog by the entry of anonymous titles under the first
word rather than under the most significant word.
6b. Following a natural evolution, the systematic library catalog and
the alphabetical classed catalog are practically extinct species,
overwhelmed in the struggle for existence by the alphabetical subject
catalog's quick and ready reference. This economy is, to be sure,
effected for the average use, at a very great expense to the use of a
good many readers who wish to consider all related aspects of a topic,
but with the growing habit of classification of libraries, there is in
fact a handy substitute, for these readers, in the classification, its
index, and the shelf list. The alphabet subject catalog has thus become
the recognized sole form of subject catalog for users in general.
7. The nature and origin of the alphabetical subject catalog is the
same as that of the alphabetical encyclopedia, the alphabetical index
to books and alphabetical index to a system of classification. Its
rules and applications may, therefore, be guided by experience and
practice in these three fields as well as direct experience in the
alphabetical subject catalog.
8. Habit being a chief factor in quick reference, it is important that
the name of the subject should be that of common usage. By this is not
meant necessarily the use of the common people, but the form generally
used in book indexes, encyclopaedias, and library classifications.
It is greatly to be desired that all encyclopedias, classifications,
indexes and alphabetical subject catalogs should use just the same
terms--the same form among synonyms, the same practice as to singular
or plural, adjectives or substantive entry.
9. At least the names of the subjects in the alphabetical subject
catalog should be identical with those of the alphabetical index to the
systematic catalog if there is any or the classification of its own
library.
10. Whatever names are used must be clearly defined. This is the
first principle of subject cataloging, whether the arrangement is
alphabetical or systematic, that the subject word shall be so clearly
defined that there is no mistaking what is to go under it. It is hard
to lay too much stress on this matter. It is the Alpha and Omega of
subject cataloging of every sort, besides which even uniform names and
the question of arrangement are quite secondary.
11. In choosing the names for classes, the most specific should be
used. This is a very important aid indeed to clear definition. The only
objection is the splitting of kindred subjects--the same idea which
leads to the alphabetical classed or systematic catalog.
Many cautions are issued warning against being too specific--some well
founded, but the danger lies almost wholly in the other direction.
There may be a limit but the principle is one of the clearest and most
important in the whole matter and even the encyclopedias--even the
Britannica itself--are getting further and further away from the old
Britannica type.
12. The names of subjects so far as they are identical with author
catalog entries should be determined by the same rules as in the author
catalog. This is another important aid to uniform names which should be
strictly insisted on.
13. The alphabetical subject catalog should have a classed index,
as the classed catalog or the shelf list must have an alphabetical
index. Note that the index to the new Britannica by its alphabetical
index recognizes itself as an alphabetical classed encyclopedia
rather than an alphabetical subject encyclopedia. Note also that it
has the systematic index--the idea which in the end must be applied
to every alphabetical subject catalog and which will be fully served
automatically if the names of the classification index are identical
with the subject headings and the class number attached to each of the
subject catalog headings.
14. Sub-headings and sub-sub-headings should be alphabetically
arranged. They should not be systematic or chronological.
15. Sub-headings should be chosen by the same rules and principles as
main headings and thus make a duplicate list. There may be practical
limits to this but principle is clear.
16. The arrangements of titles under main subject or sub-headings need
not be alphabetical. Much is to be said for the chronological order of
authorship or publication, but almost the only use for alphabetical
arrangement by authors under heading is a poor duplication of author
catalog use. It might be a real advantage to break the bad habit of
using subject catalog for author purposes and on the other hand, the
chronological arrangement of titles in the vast number of cases would
save turning all the cards as required in the alphabetical order.
Nevertheless the alphabetical is now the common method.
17. Complex books may be analyzed for the subject catalog. This is
the distinctive advantage of the subject catalog over the shelf list
that it can put different articles in the same volume or various
subjects involved in one title under all their effective headings. It
is obvious, however, that this principle must be limited--to apply in
a wooden way would involve all periodicals and essays, a rock on which
more than one attempt at subject cataloging has been wrecked.
18. The subject catalog should not be overloaded with references. The
principle of economy of attention requires this. Few things are more
aggravating in working under subjects than to have to finger over a
large number of irrelevant cards. Some of the remedies for this are
subdivision, the arrangement in chronological order of publication as
above suggested, limiting analysis by excluding all works analyzed in
accessible indexes and, where there is more than one edition of the
same work, indicating one only and referring to the author catalog for
the others.
19. The card should not be overloaded with details. The principle
of economy of attention involves reducing the amount of material
in a title to its lowest terms (whether on card or printed book) a
matter greatly helped by typographical distinctions or corresponding
distinction in the breaking of written lines, the location of certain
details on certain lines or certain fixed places on the card, the use
of red ink, underscoring, and similar details enabling the user to get
the essential facts as to the identity of the work and its location in
the building in the shortest possible time.
20. The indications on the cards of either catalog should be as brief
as may consist with clearness and so displayed on the card as to catch
the eye quickly.
21. Subject cataloging is a practical art, not a science. Names will be
changed from time to time and a part of the art is therefore to develop
a method of record on cards which shall cost the least possible effort
for making changes.
Dr. G. E. Wire, of Worcester, continued the discussion of subject
headings, with special reference to medical headings in the third
edition of the A. L. A. List of subject headings.
Dr. Wire said a lack of knowledge of medical and surgical terms had led
the compilers of nearly all the library catalogs into using erroneous
headings, "Sees" and "See alsos" and that these errors had been
continued in the third edition of A. L. A. subject headings.
A cataloger of good preliminary education, with experience gained in
a large library, and with the opportunities to be found in a large
library, college, reference or circulating, of consulting books, or
people or both, can in time produce a fairly logical system of "Sees
alsos" and "Sees," and subject headings in almost any subject except
medicine.
Among the changes suggested by Dr. Wire are the following:
=Abdomen.= The rational references and cross references are:
See also, Intestines, Viscera.
Cross reference should be simply Viscera.
=Anatomy.= Why refer to Glands and not to Liver, the biggest gland in
the body? Why to Chest and not to Lungs? Autopsy should not be referred
to; that reference should come from Pathology.
=Appendicitis.= This is a surgical disease and should be put under
Surgery, Practice of, instead of Medicine, Practice of.
=Contagion and contagious diseases.= Contagion and Infection seem to be
confused. We are referred from Infection to Contagion as if they were
synonymous terms.
=Homeopathy.= "See also Medicine" should be used for polemical
treatises only. These headings show a bias against Homeopathy which is
common in some classifications.
=Hygiene.= Has 54 "See alsos," most of which are fair but one-half of
them could be omitted to the bettering and clearing of the list.
=Hygiene, Public.= This is better on the whole than Hygiene (plain),
more consistent and logical in their references and cross references,
thus confirming our contention that it is from lack of medical and
surgical knowledge that these lapses occur.
=Medicine.= I should omit the following special headings, leaving only
the general: Allopathy; Anatomy; Anæsthetics; Antiseptics; Autopsy;
Bacteriology; Dentistry; Diagnosis; Histology; Homeopathy; Hospitals;
Inoculation; Narcotics; Pathology; Pharmacy; Physiology; Stimulants;
Surgery; Therapeutics; Vaccination.
From =Medicine, Practice of=, I should omit all the surgical headings
as follows: Appendicitis; Bones, Diseases; Cancer; Erysipelas; Eye,
Diseases and Defects; Obstetrics; Surgery; Tumors.
Dr. Wire recommended that a medical mind with suitable library training
should have been consulted about these headings before a final printing.
Miss Anna M. Monrad, of Yale university library, outlined the
principles and scheme of subject headings for philology and literature
applied in the catalog of Yale university library.