025.431: The Dewey blog

EPC Meeting 131

Giles Martin took the photo of EPC at OCLC on June 12, 2009.  Standing, from left to right: Andrea Kappler (Evansville Vanderburgh [IN] Public Library), Sandra Singh (University of British Columbia), Lyn McKinney (Billings [MT] Senior High School), and Welna van Eeden (University of South Africa); seated, from left to right: Karl Debus-López (Library of Congress, standing in for Beacher Wiggins), David Farris (Library and Archives Canada), EPC Vice-Chair Anne Robertson (Australian Committee on Cataloguing), and Deborah Rose-Lefmann (Northwestern University).

It seems like forever since I’ve written something here, and I’m suppressing the urge to report chronologically on my activities since the last time you heard from me (so stay tuned for reports on three very interesting meetings [one in Houston and two in Vienna] in which I participated back in April).  Today, I’m jumping forward to last week with a quick summary of Meeting 131 of the Decimal Classification Editorial Policy Committee (EPC), which was held June 10-12 at OCLC.  The meeting was chaired by EPC Vice-Chair Anne Robertson (Australian Committee on Cataloguing).  EPC Chair Caroline Kent (British Library) and new EPC member Jonathan Furner (UCLA [and yes, former DDC assistant editor and creator of 025.431: The Dewey blog]) were unable to attend in person, but e-mailed voluminous comments that were considered by the committee during the meeting.

EPC reviewed the full version of Table 1 (Standard Subdivisions).  One provision was postponed for discussion at Meeting 132 in November 2009: the use of T1—0286 Waste technology to represent green technology.  We'll have more to say about that issue once we sort out the ripple effects throughout the schedules.  In Table 2 (Geographic Areas, Historical Periods, Persons), EPC looked mostly to the past in reviewing provisions for the ancient world in T2—3.  Some of the ancient world proposals have implications for the modern world versions of the Mediterranean and Black Sea regions, Asia Minor, and Turkey.  EPC also approved some adjustments to German administrative units proposed by colleagues at Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, plus the placement of the Barents Sea region, North Calotte, and Sápmi (Lapland).  EPC approved the full version of Table 3 (Subdivisions for the Arts, for Individual Literatures, for Specific Literary Forms), and an expansion for Hakka (Han Chinese who speak Hakka dialect) in Table 5 (Ethnic and National Groups).

EPC approved updates in the following schedules: 004-006 Computer science, 200 Religion, 300 Social sciences, 301-307 Sociology and anthropology, 320 Political science, 330 Economics, 340 Law, 400 Language, 610 Medicine and health, 780 Music, 800 Literature, and 960 History of Africa.  EPC reviewed preliminary versions of 640 Home and family management, 690 Buildings, 710 Civic and landscape art, and 720 Architecture.  On the recommendation of EPC, we plan to post the sewing and clothing sections of 646 shortly for outside comment.  EPC also reviewed a preliminary proposal for updates to sections of 372.3-372.8 Elementary education in specific subjects.  In addition to comments from members and observers on the private EPC mailing list, EPC’s deliberations were informed by reports from the working groups associated with the European DDC Users’ Group (EDUG) in the areas of law, education, archaeology, and technical issues.

EPC reviewed several research initiatives from the OCLC Office of Research and the Dewey editorial team, plus the latest draft specification for Dewey Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs).  We’ll be back with more information on these initiatives later.

EPC scheduled a follow-up electronic Meeting 131A (to be held August 3-28, 2009), during which the committee will address use of the term “encompassing” in the DDC, plus minor issues in 400, 710, and 780.  Meeting 132 will be held November 16-17, 2009, at the Library of Congress.

One other major Dewey event took place last week—June 12 was the last day for updating Dewey data in the current Editorial Support System (ESS).  The new ESS, along with new data formats based on the MARC classification and authority formats, is scheduled to be launched on July 5 (another reason for our recent periods of silence on this blog).  Rebecca wrote a bit about the new ESS last month—watch for more reports shortly.

President Abraham Lincoln and His Wife, Mary Todd Lincoln

The United States is celebrating the bicentennial of the birth of President Abraham Lincoln (he was born February 12, 1809, the same day as Charles Darwin).  The Lincoln Bicentennial Commission web site has events listed for all 2009, plus much information about Lincoln and his family.  The Library of Congress, Smithsonian, and C-Span web sites—among many—also have information about Lincoln bicentennial exhibits and programs.

Comprehensive biographies of Lincoln are classed in 973.7092 Administration of Abraham Lincoln, 1861–1865—Persons (built with 973.7 Administration of Abraham Lincoln, 1861–1865    Civil War plus T1—092 Persons).  Examples are Lincoln and Lincoln: A Photobiography. 

Most biographies of President Lincoln’s wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, are classed in the same number as President Lincoln’s biography, 973.7092.  Examples are Mary Todd Lincoln: A Biography and Mrs. Lincoln: A Life.  The Manual entry for T1—092 Persons has a section entitled “Families and close associates of the famous”:

Class a history of the immediate or extended family of a famous person with the biography of that person if the work strongly emphasizes the famous person. The same rule applies to the biography of a single relative or close associate of a famous person.

International Year of Astronomy 2009, Galileo Galilei, and Telescopes

According to its official web site, “The International Year of Astronomy 2009 (IYA2009) is a global celebration of astronomy and its contributions to society and culture and marks the 400th anniversary of the first use of an astronomical telescope by Galileo Galilei.” 

General works about astronomy are classed in 520 Astronomy and allied sciences, e.g., Astronomy: Principles and Practice and Out-of-this-World Astronomy: 50 Amazing Activities & Projects.

Comprehensive biographies of Galileo Galilei are classed in 520.92 Astronomers, built with 52 from 520 (the final placeholder zero is deleted before Table 1 notation is added) plus T1—092 Persons.  The final placeholder zero must be deleted because, as the “Introduction to the Dewey Decimal Classification” (section 8.5) instructs:  “The classifier should never use more than one zero in applying a standard subdivision unless instructed to do so. If more than one zero is needed, the number of zeros is always indicated in the schedules.” The built number 520.92 can be found in the print Relative Index or in WebDewey. 

In the section entitled “Comprehensive biography” in the Manual Entry T1—092 Persons is the instruction:  “Use the number for the subject of the person's most noted contribution for the comprehensive biography of the person.”  That is why the comprehensive number for Galileo is in the field of astronomy, even though he also made important contributions in other fields.  If his contributions in physics are considered of equal importance, then 520 Astronomy and allied sciences is preferred over 530 Physics by the first-of-two rule.  Examples of works classed in 520.92 Astronomers are Galileo: Astronomer and Physicist and Galileo: Renaissance Scientist and Astronomer.

General works about the history of telescopes are classed in 522.209 History of telescopes (built with 522.2 Astronomical instruments    Telescopes plus T1—09 Historical, geographic, persons treatment), e.g., Eyes on the Skies: 400 years of Telescopic Discovery and Stargazer: The Life and Times of the Telescope.  The heading for 522.2 Astronomical instruments    Telescopes is an example of a dual heading; standard subdivisions may be added for astronomical instruments, for telescopes, or for both.

Christmas Literature

“Dickens was facing financial ruin when he imagined Ebenezer Scrooge,” writes Jonathan Yardley in his review of Les Standiford’s The Man Who Invented Christmas: How Charles Dickens's A Christmas Carol Rescued his Career and Revived Our Holiday Spirits.  Standiford’s work, with its stretch-the-truth main title, gives the background story to the writing of A Christmas Carol in 1843.  Pamela Dolan, inspired by an interview with Standiford to reread A Christmas Carol, begins a blog entry:

“If I could work my will, every idiot who goes about with ‘Merry Christmas’ on his lips, should be boiled with his own pudding and buried with a stake of holly through his heart.”

What sort of Scrooge could say such a thing, you ask? Why, Charles Dickens’ Scrooge, of course, the original meanie himself. If you haven’t read A Christmas Carol recently, you should go back to give it a try. I did, and I was surprised by the colloquial vigor of much of the language and the power of the familiar story to move me.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a stage or screen version of it that has really touched me all that much, but reading it straight through the other night I was astonished to find myself with big tears dripping down my cheeks as I turned the last page. I’ll definitely take the time to read it aloud to my children this season.

A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens and Standiford’s book about it are both classed in 823.8 English fiction, 1837–1899 (built with 82 base number for English literature, as instructed at 820.1–828 Subdivisions of English literature, plus T3A—3 Fiction from Table 3A Subdivisions for Works by or about Individual Authors plus 8 Victorian period, 1837–1899, from period table at 820.1–828 Subdivisions of English literature, as instructed at T3A—31–39 Specific periods). 

Themes can be expressed in Dewey literature numbers only for works by or about more than one author, when one can use Table 3B Subdivisions for Works by or about More than One Author and Table 3C Notation to Be Added Where Instructed in Table 3B, 700.4, 791.4, 808–809.  For example, The Oxford Book of Christmas Stories is classed in 823.0080334 Collections of English fiction about holidays by more than one author from multiple periods (built with 82 plus T3B—300, as instructed at T3B—3001–3009 Standard subdivisions; collections; history, description, critical appraisal of fiction, plus 80 from add table under T3B—1–8 Specific forms, as instructed at 801–809 Collections displaying specific features or emphasizing specific subjects . . . , plus T3C—334 Holidays, which has the note “Including religious holidays, e.g., Christmas”). 

EPC Meeting 130

The Decimal Classification Editorial Policy Committee (EPC)* held Meeting 130 at the Library of Congress November 18-19.  The meeting was chaired by Caroline Kent (British Library); Anne Robertson (Australian Committee on Cataloguing) was re-elected vice-chair for another two-year term. 

Prior to Meeting 130, EPC held an electronic pre-meeting, and approved updates to historical periods; modernization of the treatment of radio programs, motion pictures, and television programs regardless of method of distribution; and updates to 510 Mathematics.  All but the last will be distributed to users in early 2009.  EPC also approved, with minor modification, the long-planned updates to groups of people in Table 1 and 305-306—we plan to release the updates in mid-2009.

EPC discussed two sets of updates to Table 2 (Geographic Areas, Historical Periods, Persons)—the conversion of the relocation information and corresponding changes in the reorganization of Scotland, England, and Wales presented in DDC 22; and further updates to the area table for Indonesia.  Both sets of changes require additional consultation with in-country groups.   EPC approved a final round of updates to Table 4 (Subdivisions of Individual Languages and Language Families, for Individual Literatures, for Specific Literary Forms), Table 5 (Ethnic and National Groups), and Table 6 (Languages)—most of the updates will be distributed to users in mid-2009.

In the schedules, EPC approved updates in the following areas: 001 Knowledge; 002 The book; 150 Psychology; 330 Economics; 390 Customs, etiquette, folklore; 400 Language (including the relocation of computational linguistics); 610 Medicine and health; 640 Home and family management; 650 Management and auxiliary services; 660 Chemical engineering & related technologies; 730 Sculpture and related arts; 740 Graphic arts and decorative arts; 750 Painting and paintings; 760 Printmaking and prints; 770.23 Photography as a profession, occupation, hobby; and 790 Recreational and performing arts. EPC also approved updates to the current historical periods in 947 Russia and 968 South Africa. Updates in many of these areas will be released during 2009.  EPC reviewed reports on work under way in 340 Law, and discussion papers on 370 Education and 780 Music. We will be seeking advice from users on a number of topics discussed at Meeting 130, including subjects in primary school curricula, language variations, meals, clothing, musical styles, and literary periods for Galician.

EPC reviewed several research initiatives from the OCLC Office of Research and the Dewey editorial team, plus draft guidelines for classifying photographs for the World Digital Library project—we’ll blog about these activities separately in the coming weeks.

On November 18, EPC held a special dinner in honor of assistant editor Winton Matthews and outgoing member Arlene Taylor.  Winton has indicated that he plans to retire in early 2009—we’ll share the resolution passed by EPC in his honor later on the occasion of his retirement.  Arlene Taylor served on EPC 2000–2008.  The committee's resolution honoring Arlene reads in part:

Whereas Arlene Taylor . . . participated in the development and review of Edition 22 (2003) and Abridged Edition 14 (2004) of the Dewey Decimal Classification, and in the publication of ongoing updates in WebDewey and Abridged WebDewey; . . . focused in particular on the needs of students and teachers of the DDC in her comments; . . . contributed “Teaching the Dewey Decimal Classification System” to a special issue of Cataloging & Classification Quarterly devoted to the DDC; . . . presented “Research in Knowledge Organization” at Meeting 116; . . . participated in the EPC planning retreat, “The Future of the Dewey Decimal Classification,” March 15-18, 2004, at OCLC;  . . . paid special attention to the treatment of groups of people, and in particular prompted improvements to the caption for people in early adulthood and the terminology for children of unmarried parents (the latter formerly “children born out of wedlock”);  . . . Be it resolved that the members of the Decimal Classification Editorial Policy Committee here assembled at the One Hundred Thirtieth Meeting of said committee, the DDC editors, and staff at the Library of Congress Dewey Section and OCLC express to Arlene Taylor their deep gratitude and appreciation for her service and commitment to the Committee and the Classification, their regret that she will no longer be one of their number, and their wishes for her continued success and happiness now that she has retired from the Committee.

*Photo at top of EPC at LC on November 18, 2008—from left to right: Beacher Wiggins (Library of Congress), Vice Chair Anne Robertson (Australian Committee on Cataloguing), Welna van Eeden (University of South Africa), Sandra Singh (University of British Columbia), Lyn McKinney (Billings [MT] Senior High School), EPC Chair Caroline Kent (British Library), Andrea Kappler (Evansville Vanderburgh [IN] Public Library), Arlene Taylor (University of Pittsburgh SIS, retired), David Farris (Library and Archives Canada), and Deborah Rose-Lefmann (Northwestern University).

Unemployment

Unemployment has been in the news recently, e.g., “Unemployment Rate in US Surging,” “Unemployment Up, Even as Economy Sprouts New Jobs,” and “Unemployment Likely to Keep on Rising.”  General works on unemployment are classed in 331.137 Unemployment, e.g., Economics of Unemployment. 

Works with geographic treatment of unemployment are classed in subdivisions of 331.1379 Historical, geographic, persons treatment.  For example, The Rise of Unemployment in Europe: A Keynesian Approach is classed in 331.13794 Unemployment in Europe (built with 331.1379 plus T2—4 Europe as instructed under 331.1379).  Unemployment in Asia is classed in 331.13795 Unemployment in Asia (built with 331.1379 plus T2—5 Asia).  Reconciling Workless Measures at the Individual and Household Level:  Theory and Evidence from the United States, Britain, Germany, Spain and Australia, which treats unemployment in OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, is classed in 331.1379177 Unemployment in nations belonging to specific international organizations (built with 331.1379 plus T2—177  Nations belonging to specific international organizations).

The number 331.1379 is a displaced standard subdivision, a displaced version of the standard subdivision T1—09 Historical, geographic, persons treatment; it allows area notation to be added directly to the schedule number.  The bracketed entry 331[.13709] Historical, geographic, persons treatment, with its do-not-use note, indicates where the displaced standard subdivision is located: “Do not use; class in 331.1379.” 

The Manual note T1—093–T1—099 and T2—3–T2—9 Geographic treatment points out: “When area notation from Table 2 is added directly in the schedules, standard subdivisions T1—01–T1—091 can be added without restrictions, e.g., use 365.94405 for periodicals about penal institutions in France.”  Out of Work: Unemployment and Government in Twentieth-Century America is classed in 331.1379730904 Unemployment in 20th century United States (built with 331.1379 plus T2—73 United States plus T1—0904 20th century, 1900–1999).  

Groups of People: Last call for comments

On August 1, we asked for comments on the draft schedules and implementation plan for updates to groups of people in Table 1 and 305-306 (see here for the discussion plus links to the draft schedules). Today is the announced final day for comments—we’ll accept comments from stragglers through November 2. Next week, we will send the comments received to date plus our recommendations to the Decimal Classification Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) for consideration at EPC Meeting 130, November 18-19, 2008.

Global Positioning Systems (GPS)

In August, while on vacation backpacking in central Oregon, my sister and I began learning to use her new GPS receiver—fascinating! 

General explanations of the Global Positioning System are found at “GPS Tutorial” and “How GPS Receivers Work.”  The Russian Federation has a similar system, Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS).  The European Commission (EC) and the European Space Agency (ESA) plan to launch a global navigation satellite system called GALILEO. 

Interdisciplinary works on GPS and other global navigation satellite systems are classed in 910.285 Computer applications in geography and travel, as shown by the class-here note at 910.285: “Class here interdisciplinary works on geographic information systems (GIS), global positioning systems (GPS).”  Examples are GPS for Dummies and Fun with GPS. 

The number 910.285 is built with standard subdivision notation T1—0285 Computer applications.  There is a scatter see reference at 910.285: “For an application of geographic information systems (GIS) or global positioning systems (GPS) to a subject, see the subject, plus notation T1—0285 from Table 1, e.g., GIS applications in mathematical geography 526.0285.”  Works on use of GPS in various outdoor recreational activities are classed in 796.50285 Computer applications in outdoor life (built with 796.5 Outdoor life plus notation T1—0285 Computer applications), e.g., GPS-Navigation [für Wanderer, Bergsteiger, Biker . . . ].  Works on the use of GPS for hiking and backpacking are classed in 796.510285 Computer applications in walking (built with 796.51 Walking, which has the class-here note “Class here backbacking, hiking,” plus T1—0285).

Works that emphasize engineering aspects of GPS receivers are classed under radio engineering in 621.384191 Direction and position finding, which has the class-here note “Class here GPS receivers,” e.g., Hacking GPS.

Incidentally, orienteering is a competitive sport, with World Cup competition sponsored by the International Orienteering Federation (the final round of World Cup 2008 will be held in Switzerland on the first weekend of October).  Works on the sport are classed in 796.58 Orienteering, e.g., Orienteering and Be Expert with Map & Compass: The Complete Orienteering Handbook.  Standard rules of orienteering require that competitors use map and compass, not GPS.   There are versions of the sport that allow competitors to use GPS, and GPS can be used in other ways, e.g., to make the special maps used in the sport.  Nevertheless, most works on use of GPS should not be classed in 796.58 Orienteering.

Groups of People in Table 1 and 305–306

Since late 2005, the Dewey editorial team has been working on a project to improve the representation of groups of people throughout the DDC. The project had the following goals:

• Study the treatment of groups of people throughout the DDC
• Update the terminology for groups of people (also reconsider terminology in Table 1 —09)
• Update the provisions for specific groups of people

We started the project with a reconsideration of the phrase “kinds of persons” in the caption at Table 1 —08 and elsewhere in the DDC. The phrase “kinds of persons” is currently used throughout the DDC to describe groups of people. Use of the phrase in Table 1 —08 causes confusion with “persons treatment” in Table 1 —092; more troubling is the unintended interpretation of “kinds of persons” as a definitive classification of people. As a first step, we replaced “kinds of persons” with “groups of people” in Table 1 —08 and elsewhere in the DDC. At the same time, we deleted “History and description with respect to” entirely from the caption at Table 1 —08 and elsewhere in the DDC. We also substituted “Groups of people” for “Social groups” in the caption at 305 and elsewhere in the DDC.

We have long known that “persons treatment” is a confusing phrase, and questioned whether there was any reason to continue using it in Table 1 —092. We changed the caption at Table 1 —092 to “Biography,” and made a slight revision to the caption at Table 1 —09 at the same time (now “History, geographic treatment, biography” instead of “Historical, geographic, persons treatment”).

We have adopted consistent use of “people” versus “persons” when we are referring to a group of people by a specific attribute, e.g., homeless people. In a few cases, the term “persons” has been retained when it is part of the common name for a group of people, e.g., “stateless persons.”

Similar changes to terminology have been introduced in the Relative Index. In addition, we have replaced the current “Persons” index array with three new entries: Person (Legal concept), Persons (Individuals), and People. The index term for groups of people in general is “People”; the general index term for individuals is “Persons (Individuals).”

We have made small adjustments throughout Table 1 and 305–306 in the developments for groups of people by specific attributes.  We wish to draw special attention to the following developments:

• Updated provisions for people by gender or sex at Table 1 —081 and 305.3 (including a new number for men at Table 1 —0811)
• A new development for transgender and intersex people at Table 1 —0867 and parallel changes to the development at 306.76 Sexual orientation, transgenderism, intersexuality
• Updated developments for people by marital status in Table 1 —0865 and marriage and family in 306.8
• Extensions to collected biography in Table 1 —092

Draft PDFs of the revised versions of the schedules for Table 1 —08–09 and 305–306 plus the Relative Index are now available for review. Relative Index entries are marked with the following internal codes: P (proposed new print/electronic entry), E (proposed new electronic-only entry), N (electronic-only entry), and I (intellectually mapped LCSH). Entries without codes are current print/electronic entries. In most cases, current Relative Index phrase entries in which the term “persons” has been replaced by “people” are also not accompanied by a code. The draft schedules have been produced directly from our editorial support system without further editing of the PDFs, and may contain some spacing problems that do not exist in the electronic version.

Timetable for Review and Implementation

The Decimal Classification Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) has approved the updated developments in principle and has recommended that we introduce them into the DDC as soon as possible. At Meeting 129, EPC approved an implementation plan that includes a period of user comment, final approval, and implementation in 2009.

We are asking for comments on the draft schedules and implementation plan. Please reply directly to this blog entry (or alternatively to dewey@loc.gov) by October 30, 2008.  Receipt of comments by that date will facilitate discussion of user feedback and final action on the updated developments by EPC at Meeting 130 (November 18–19, 2008).  It is our current intention to implement the changes throughout the DDC and introduce them in WebDewey and Abridged WebDewey by second quarter calendar year 2009. We will also make final PDFs of Table 1 and 305–306 available on the Dewey web site at the same time the changes are implemented in the web versions of the DDC. There will be ripple effects elsewhere in the DDC that will not be addressed in the PDF versions; areas with substantial changes related to the treatment of groups of people (e.g., 150 Psychology, 362 Social welfare problems and services) will be featured as New and Changed Entries on the Dewey web site. The changes introduced in the web versions of the DDC will also appear in the print version of DDC 23 (scheduled to be published in late calendar year 2010).

Computational Linguistics

Ever have difficulty deciding whether material should be classed in 006.35 Natural language processing or in 410.285 Computational linguistics? (It would seem so, since many works have been classed in both numbers.) Since we have also found it difficult to distinguish clearly between the two numbers, we decided to take advantage of a recent major gathering of computational linguists at ACL-08: HLT (ACL = Association of Computational Linguistics; HLT = Human Language Technology) to get their feedback on the treatment of computational linguistics and natural language processing in the DDC.

According to LCSH, the intended distinction between computational linguistics and natural language processing is that Computational linguistics (LCC: P98-98.5; DDC: 410.285; 467 WorldCat records) is for “works on the application of computers in processing and analyzing language,” whereas Natural language processing (Computer science) (LCC: QA76.9.N38; DDC: 006.35; 365 WorldCat records) is for “works on the computer processing of natural language for the purpose of enabling humans to interact with computers in natural language.” Dewey currently adopts this same distinction. The distinction, however, does not reflect current thought.

Computational linguists at ACL-08 tended to agree that “natural language processing” (NLP) and “computational linguistics” (CL) mean pretty much the same thing (or, if different, that the meaning of natural language processing is encompassed within the meaning of computational linguistics). That makes our decision to merge natural language processing and computational linguistics relatively easy.

Deciding where the merged subject should go is much harder. On the one hand, there was agreement that the relative contribution of computer science to computational linguistics is greater than the contribution of linguistics. Similarly, there was agreement that a background in computer science is more essential for computational linguistics than a background in linguistics. Further, computer scientists are much more likely than linguists to embrace computational linguistics as part of their field. From these statements, classing the merged natural language processing / computational linguistics in 006 might seem a no-brainer. On the other hand, however, some of the observations shared suggest that the situation may not be so cut-and-dry: Computational linguistics really belongs in linguistics, but linguists don’t realize it yet. Computer scientists sometimes change the field they apply their skills to (that is, a junior computational linguist might not continue to work in computational linguistics). As a supervisor, you get better results teaching computer science to a linguist than teaching linguistics to a computer scientist.

There are at least two distinctions made in computational linguistics that should inform our decision. The first is a distinction between symbolic and statistical approaches to computational linguistics, the former emphasizing linguistics-based representations of natural language, the latter emphasizing quantitative representations of natural language. Many symbolic approaches could be classed comfortably within linguistics; however, the same could be said of statistical approaches considerably less often.

A second distinction is made in computational linguistics between tasks and applications: Computational linguistics tasks (e.g., part-of-speech tagging, parsing, word sense disambiguation, text segmentation) rely, wholly or in part, on specific properties of language in their processing and analysis and may be combined to form applications of extrinsic value; computational linguistics applications (e.g., question answering, information retrieval, automatic abstracting, machine translation) are comprised of components addressing multiple linguistic properties and are of extrinsic value. Again, one end of our spectrum (in this case, tasks) is much more like linguistics than the other (in this case, applications—unless the application is itself in linguistics, e.g., translation), but all applications carry out some number of tasks.

It appears to us that the best solution would be to drop the distinction between natural language processing and computational linguistics by relocating comprehensive and interdisciplinary works on computational linguistics from 410.285 to 006.35. We would continue to use 410.285 in its broad meaning as computer applications in linguistics; for example, the SIL (initially known as the Summer Institute of Linguistics) software catalog, which supports the work of field linguists, would be classed in 410.28553. This catalog includes, inter alia, fonts, a concordance generator, a tool for drawing syntax trees, interlinear text editors, a Spanish verb conjugator, and a program for learning the International Phonetic Alphabet.

We would love to hear your reactions to this solution. (Or if you have another solution that accounts for the interdisciplinary nature of computational linguistics, we would love to hear that, too.) For best consideration, please either comment on this blog or send email to dewey@loc.gov  by August 15.