025.431: The Dewey blog

Endangered Languages

Endangered languages have been in the news since the “United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) . . . launched an interactive electronic version of its atlas cataloguing some 2,500 endangered languages worldwide” (UNESCO press release), e.g., the Washington Post article “Preserving Languages Is About More Than Words.”

Interdisciplinary works on endangered languages are classed in 408.9 Treatment of language with respect to ethnic and national groups (built with 4 from 400 Language plus T1—089 Ethnic and national groups).  The interdisciplinary number for language and languages is 400 Language; it has unsubdivided Relative Index entries “Language” and “Languages” and the class-here note “Class here interdisciplinary works on language and literature.”  Standard subdivision T1—089 Ethnic and national groups has the note “Class here ethnic and national minorities.”  It is especially the languages spoken by minority groups that are endangered.  An example of a work classed in 408.9 is Endangered Languages: What Role for the Specialist?

By the rule of zero, works on a specific endangered language are classed with the language in 420-490 Specific languages.  For example, A Tarifit Berber-English Dictionary: Documenting an Endangered Language is classed in 493.3 Berber languages (built with 493 Non-Semitic Afro-Asiatic languages plus 3 from T6—933 Berber languages, as instructed at 493).  Tarifit Berber is also known as Rif language, and Rif is in the including note at T6—933 Berber languages; hence no further addition is possible. 

Sociological and anthropological works on endangered languages are classed in 306.44 Language, which has the note “Class here anthropological linguistics, ethnolinguistics, sociolinguistics.”  The number 306.44 is subordinate to 302–307 Specific topics in sociology and anthropology. An example of a work classed in 306.44 is Discourses of Endangerment: Ideology and Interest in the Defence of Languages.

In WebDewey the LCSH “Endangered languages” has been editorially mapped to both 408.9 Treatment of language with respect to ethnic and national groups and 306.44 Language.

Biofilms

“Scientists Learning to Target Bacteria Where They Live,” an article in Washington Post by Kari Lydersen, recently drew attention to bacterial biofilms:

In the arms race between humans and bacteria, the ability to form “biofilms”—large aggregations of microbes embedded in a slimy matrix—has been one of the weapons the organisms use to defeat the immune system, antibiotic drugs and other threats. But scientists, who only recently recognized the role that biofilms play in antibiotic resistance, may be closing in on promising prospects for defeating pathogens.

Scientists have learned that bacteria that are vulnerable when floating around as individual cells in what is known as their “planktonic state” are much tougher to combat once they get established in a suitable place—whether the hull of a ship or inside the lungs—and come together in tightly bound biofilms. In that state, they can activate mechanisms like tiny pumps to expel antibiotics, share genes that confer protection against drugs, slow down their metabolism or become dormant, making them harder to kill.

The answer, say researchers, is to find substances that will break up biofilms.

Interdisciplinary works on microbial biofilms are classed in 579.1782 Ecological communities of microorganisms, fungi, algae (built with 579.17 Ecology, organisms characteristic of specific environments plus 82 from 577.82 Ecological communities, according to instructions at 579.171–579.178 Specific topics in ecology, specific environments).  The number 579.1782 is a subdivision of the interdisciplinary number for microbiology: 579 Microorganisms, fungi, algae.  The number 579 has the note “Class here microbiology” and the unsubdivided Relative Index entry “Microbiology.”  An example of a work classed in 579.1782 is Community Structure and Co-operation in Biofilms.

Interdisciplinary works on bacterial biofilms are classed in 579.31782 Ecological communities of prokaryotes (built with 579.3 Prokaryotes, which has the notes: “Variant names: Monera, Schizomycetes, Schizophyta, bacteria” and “Class here bacteriology,” plus 17 from 579.17 Ecology, organisms characteristic of specific environments, following the footnote instruction at 579.3 to add as instructed under 579.2–579.8 Specific taxonomic groups of microorganisms, fungi, algae, plus 82 from 577.82 Ecological communities).

Comprehensive medical works on microbial biofilms are classed in the comprehensive number for medical microbiology:  616.9041 Medical microbiology.  The number 616.9041 has the Relative Index entry “Microbiology—medicine.”  Under 616.9041 is the note: “Class here drug resistance in microorganisms.”   The number was built with 616.904 Special topics of communicable diseases plus 1 from 01 Medical microbiology in the add table under 616.1–616.9 Specific diseases according to instructions under 616.904.  An example of a work classed in 616.9041 is Biofilms, Infection, and Antimicrobial Therapy.

Under 616.9041 Medical microbiology is the note:  “Class medical microbiology of a specific disease or group of diseases with the disease or group of diseases, plus notation 01 from table under 616.1-616.9, e.g., medical microbiology of tuberculosis 616.99501.”     Comprehensive medical works on bacterial biofilms are classed in 616.9201 Medical microbiology of bacterial diseases (built with 616.92 Bacterial diseases plus 01 Medical microbiology from table under 616.1–616.9 Specific diseases, following footnote instruction at 616.92 to add as instructed under 616.1–616.9).  An example of a work on bacterial biofilms classed in 616.9201 is Control of Biofilm Infections by Signal Manipulation.   

Contemporary Styles of Music

There are several areas of difficulty that plague classifiers when approaching 780 Music:

• The citation order is complex; its implementation, via a class-with-the-last policy, is hard to grasp.
• Not all cultures recognize a distinction between folk music and popular music.
• The evolution of music styles muddies everything!

We are proposing several sets of changes in the 780s to address these difficulties, which especially affect the classification of contemporary music. The changes aim to:

• Make clear that the classification of (contemporary) folk and popular music follows the same principles that govern all of the 780s
• Accommodate contemporary developments in musical styles
• Make the classification of contemporary music less volatile (i.e., less subject to change over time)
• Make the classification of contemporary music more expressive

A few examples will provide a taste of the problems addressed and the solutions proposed. Consider, for example, kwaito, which one source describes as “a mixture of all that 1990’s South African youth grew up on: South African disco music, hip hop, R&B, Ragga, and a heavy, heavy dose of American and British house music.”  Several issues are evident here: (1) Should kwaito be treated as folk music (781.62) or as popular music (781.63-781.66)? More generally, is there a way to distinguish reliably between 781.62 Folk music and 781.63-781.66 Popular music? (2) If treated as popular music, should kwaito be seen as non-western popular music (781.63) or, given the western basis of many of its underlying influences, as western popular music (781.64-781.66)? (3) If treated as western popular music, should kwaito be classed in the number coming first, the number coming last, or the number of the most prominent genre? That is, how should hybrid music styles be treated? (4) If classed with house music (arguably its most prominent genre), where should kwaito be classed? That is, where does electronica belong?

Our answer to question (1) is based on a new scope note proposed for 781.62 Folk music: Music originating within and associated with an ethnic or national group. The criteria in the scope note are meant to be not only necessary--a musical style should not be classed in 781.62 if (a) it originated within an ethnic or national group, but is not longer associated with them or (b) it is associated with an ethnic or national group, but did not originate within them--but also sufficient; that is, if the two criteria are met, the musical style should be classed in 781.62 (but see the exception in the paragraph below). The sufficiency of the criteria is meant to be communicated by notes at 781.63 ("Class popular music originating within and associated with an ethnic or national group in 781.62") and 781.64 ("Class western popular music originating within and associated with an ethnic or national group in 781.62"). We recognize that adhering to these criteria may result at times in classing a style under 781.62 for which "popular music" is a better label than "folk music."

But does kwaito meet the exception given at 781.62 ("Class a specific style of music provided for in 781.64-781.66 with the style, e.g., reggae 781.646, Afro-Cuban jazz 781.6572687291")? This is a trickier question, because it is more subjective. What does it mean to be a specific style of, for example, hip-hop? Our intent is to include in "specific style of X" only those styles that are considered solely "a kind of X" (rather than being considered, say, a blend of X and Y). The case with kwaito is intriguing: some sources describe it as a kind of house music; other sources refer to it as South African hip-hop. That both claims are made is evidence that kwaito is not simply a kind of house or a kind of hip-hop.

Fortunately, there is agreement that kwaito originated within South Africa and is currently associated with South Africans; it thus accords with the scope note at 781.62. This means kwaito would be classed in 781.62968 South African folk music (built with 781.62 Folk music, plus T5—96 African, following instructions in the add table under 781.621–781.629, plus notation 8, from T2—68 South Africa, following instructions at T5—966–968).

Answering the first question as we did makes the other questions moot for kwaito, but the other questions—especially the third and fourth questions—have significant generality beyond kwaito. We have struggled with deciding how to handle styles of music based on two or more previous styles. Using Grove Music Online as our source (supplemented by information on styles of popular music at allmusic.com), we propose to distinguish between styles that are essentially specializations of an existing style (as rockabilly is a kind of rock style) and hybrid styles, in which two or more styles have fused to form a new style (as folk rock is a blending or fusion of folk music and rock music). Styles that are specializations of an existing style would class with that style; indeed, we propose to add a class-here note for specific styles (e.g., Class here specific rock styles at 781.66), resulting in specialized styles approximating the whole of the number where they are classed. Thus rockabilly would be classed in 781.66 Rock (Rock ‘n’ roll). Hybrid styles would class with the number coming last (following the policy enunciated under 780), to which newly proposed notation 17 from the table under 781.63-781.69 could be added, so a prominent other style could be expressed. Thus folk rock would be classed in 781.661762 (built with 781.66 Rock (Rock ‘n’ roll), plus notation 17 Hybrid styles from the add table under 781.63-781.69, following the footnote instruction at 781.66, plus notation 62 from 781.62 Folk music, following the instruction at the add table notation).

As for question 4, where in the world is (Veronica) Electronica?—OK, so you gotta know the game Where in the World is Carmen San Diego? to appreciate that clever turn of phrase—we are proposing an expansion for electronica at 781.648.

What about existing styles whose treatment may not accord with these principles? Take, for example, reggae, which meets the newly proposed folk music criteria: reggae clearly originated in Jamaica and typically is still associated with that country. We have decided, however, not to move any styles that have already been developed in the schedules, so reggae stays at 781.646, rather than moving to 781.629697292 Jamaican folk music (built with 781.62 Folk music, plus T5—969 African (outside Africa), following instructions in the add table under 781.621–781.629, plus notation 7292, from T2—7292 Jamaica and Cayman Islands, following instructions at T5—969).

A detailed discussion of the changes being proposed can be viewed here.

We invite your feedback on the proposed changes, either posted as a comment to this blog entry or sent directly to [email protected]. Feedback is requested by April 15, 2009.

Motion Pictures and Television

The March 2009 New and Changed Entries posting focuses on 791.43 Motion pictures, 791.44 Radio, and 791.45 Television. 

The entry for 791.43 Motion pictures has the notes:

Regardless of distribution medium or method

Class here made-for-television movies, video recordings of motion pictures [both formerly 791.45]; direct-to-video and direct-to-DVD releases of motion pictures; dramatic films, entertainment films; films developed originally for Internet transmission; comprehensive works on dramatic, entertainment, documentary, educational, news films

The entry for 791.45 Television has the notes:

Regardless of distribution medium or method

Class here dramatic programs, entertainment programs; mini-series, extended pilots of television series; television-like programs developed originally for Internet transmission; comprehensive works on dramatic, entertainment, documentary, educational, news programs

Made-for-television movies, video recordings of motion pictures relocated to 791.43

These notes all have hierarchical force and thus affect subdivisions of 791.43 and 791.45.

There is a new Manual note to help distinguish between 791.43 Motion pictures and 791.45 Television:

Use the Internet Movie Database (http://www.imdb.com/) or a similar online source for help in determining if a production should be treated as a motion picture or a television program.  If in doubt, prefer 791.43.

An example of a made-for-television movie is Carrie’s War (2004), which is now classed in 791.4372 Single films.  The Internet Movie Database (IMDb) entry has the label “(TV)”: Carrie’s War (2004) (TV).

An example of a video recording of a motion picture is Fanny och Alexander, issued on videodisc in 2004, but originally released as a motion picture in 1982; it is now classed in 791.4372 Single films.  The IMDb entry has no special label after the date of the original theatrical release:  Fanny och Alexander (1982).

An example of a television mini-series is Jane Eyre (2006), which is classed in 791.4572 Single programs.  The IMDb entry has the label “TV mini-series”: “Jane Eyre” (2006) TV mini-series. 

There are also several film versions of Jane Eyre that are properly classed in 791.4372 Single films, e.g., a video recording of the 1996 motion picture Jane Eyre, which has no special label attached to its IMDb entry: Jane Eyre (1996).

New Assistant Editor of the DDC

We are delighted to announce the appointment of Michael Panzer as assistant editor of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), effective today.  Michael, who from 2002 to 2005 headed the technical team that translated Dewey into German, is the first member of a Dewey translation team to be appointed assistant editor.

Since joining OCLC in 2007, Michael has served as global product manager of taxonomy services at OCLC.  Along with colleagues in the OCLC Office of Research, Michael has been heavily involved in representations of the DDC for semantic web applications.  His recent focus has been on the development of a prototype Dewey history-of-concepts web service.  Michael will continue to serve as a technical advisor to Dewey research projects and web services, but his current business and licensing responsibilities will be assumed by OCLC Dewey product manager Libbie Crawford.

Prior to joining OCLC, Michael worked at Cologne University of Applied Sciences, where he was team leader of CrissCross, a research project funded by the German Research Foundation focused on mapping SWD, DDC, RAMEAU, and LCSH.   Michael has an MA from Heinrich Heine University (Düsseldorf) in German Literature with a minor in Information Science.  He also attended the University of California, Davis, on a four-month research scholarship.

Michael will continue to be based at OCLC headquarters in Dublin, Ohio.  Please join us in congratulating Michael on this important appointment.

Rethinking Meals

The current development for meals at 641.52–641.54 Cooking specific meals combines the type of meal with the time of day consumed.  This approach poses a problem for the representation of the main meal of the day in different cultural contexts.  We are proposing a simpler framework for meals to meet the needs of the worldwide community of Dewey users.  We welcome comments and suggestions--please tell us what you think!  Please reply directly to this blog entry (or alternatively to [email protected]) by March 27, 2009.

Proposed Development for Meals 

>                                   641.52–641.54       *‡Cooking specific meals

                    Class comprehensive works in 641.5

 

641.52          First meal of the day

 

Class here breakfasts, brunches

 

641.53  *‡     Light meals

Class here snacks; dinners, lunches, suppers, teas as light meals

 

Class breakfasts and brunches in 641.52; class dinners, lunches, suppers, teas as main meals in 641.54

 

641.54            Main meal of the day

 

Class here dinners, lunches, suppers, teas as main meals

 

Class breakfasts and brunches in 641.52; class dinners, lunches, suppers, teas as light meals in 641.53

 

Comprehensive works on specific meals will continue to be classed in 641.5 Cooking, where there are further instructions about the choice of numbers within 641.5 and elsewhere in 641 Food and drink and 642 Meals and table service.  For example, works on cooking specific kinds of dishes associated with specific meals are classed in 641.8 Cooking specific kinds of dishes, preparing beverages, e.g., wraps are classed in 641.84 Sandwiches.

Below are the proposed changes to the current development to produce the new framework shown above.  Changes to schedule numbers are indicated only by underlining.  Other changes are underlined, and deletions are marked by strikethroughs. 

Proposed Development for Meals (with changes to current development indicated)

>                                   641.52–641.54       *‡Cooking specific meals

                    Class comprehensive works in 641.5

 

641.52          First meal of the day Breakfasts

 

Class here brunches [formerly 641.532], breakfasts

 

641.53  *‡     Light meals Luncheons, lunches, brunches, teas, suppers, snacks

Standard subdivisions are added for luncheons, lunches, brunches, teas, suppers, snacks together; for luncheons alone, for lunches alone

 

Class here snacks, dinners, lunches, suppers, teas as light meals

 

Class breakfasts and brunches in 641.52; class dinners, lunches, suppers, teas as main meals in 641.54

 

641[.532]          Brunches

 

                            Relocated to 641.52

 

641[.534]          Box and bag lunches

 

                            Standard subdivisions are added for either or both topics in heading 

 

                            Number discontinued; class in 641.53

 

641[.536]          Afternoon teas

 

                            Number discontinued; class in 641.53

 

641[.538]          Suppers

                         

Class evening meals that constitute the main meals of the day in 641.54

 

                             Number discontinued; class in 641.53

 

641[.539]          Snacks

 

                            Including elevenses

 

                            Number discontinued; class in 641.53

 

 

 

641.54            Main meal of the day Dinners

 

Class here dinners, lunches, suppers, teas as main meals

 

Class breakfasts and brunches in 641.52; class dinners, lunches, suppers, teas as light meals in 641.53