025.431: The Dewey blog

EPC Meeting 141

On October 15–16, Meeting 141 of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) was held at OCLC headquarters in Dublin, Ohio. Often held in June, this year’s meeting was pushed back to October; with Rebecca Green’s retirement and Violet Fox joining the team, we wanted the extra time to be able to present a full agenda to the committee. As it turns out, Rebecca was able to join us for this meeting, allowing her to present the exhibits she had worked on and to say goodbye to EPC members.

This year’s meeting was the first face-to-face meeting for new member Elise Conradi from the National Library of Norway. Readers may recall that at last year’s meeting, the committee updated its bylaws, including provision for a member representing the European Dewey Users Group (EDUG), and EDUG elected Elise as its representative shortly thereafter. Member Gert de Jager, finalizing his dissertation on Dewey, was unable to attend. Also in attendance were Jody DeRidder, Marti Heyman, and Sandi Jones from OCLC. The meeting included presentations from OCLC Research Scientist Diane Vizine-Goetz, and from Stephen Schindehette, Technical Product Manager for Data Services and WorldCat Quality Management.

The committee approved two changes to the editorial rules, which govern how the editorial team works. The first establishes procedures for dealing with Relative Index terms that could be considered offensive to groups of people. This arose when the editorial team was contacted by a Dewey user from Ethiopia who identified a dated, offensive term for an ethnic group from that country. The revised rules provide guidance about when such terms should be removed. Other terms which may be considered offensive may still be retained if used by some of the people in question (e.g., “queer”). The second change to the editorial rules provides greater latitude for providing common forms of individuals’ names in the schedules. For example, at 951.93052 Administration of Kim Chŏng-ŭn, 2011-, there is now an index term for the common name of North Korea’s leader (Kim Jong-un), in addition to the form found in the Library of Congress Name Authority File.

The main business of EPC is the review of proposals for changes to the tables and schedules of the DDC. EPC 141 exhibits included proposals that will result in the following:

• An official option in the Introduction for prioritizing Indigenous groups in knowledge classification; this is the result of several years and discussions with Indigenous knowledge organization professionals.
• Clarification on how to class works about relations between two or more religions.
• Development for Orthodox Christian churches which makes clear how to express geographic notation for ecclesiastical jurisdiction vs. scope of the work; a new Manual note explains some of the complex structure of Orthodox churches and their implications for classification.
• Provision has been made for endangered languages and responses to language endangerment, both in the 400s and at 306.44 Languages for sociolinguistics.
• Updated language for transgender people and transgender identity, along with clear places in the schedules and tables for works about the LGBT community as a whole.
• Changes to the schedules for scouting organizations that enable expression of coeducational (boys and girls) scouting groups.
• The hierarchy of 629.2 Motor land vehicles, cycles will be updated to provide for autonomous vehicles, such as self-driving cars.
• Changes to the period tables under 871-878 Subdivisions for specific forms of Latin literature and 881-888 Subdivisions for specific forms of classical Greek literature that reduce the chances of building invalid numbers in WebDewey.

Finally, EPC requested more detail in a proposal that laid out an optional, chronological notation in the 200s with less emphasis on Christianity. This notation expands upon the option given in the Manual note 220-290 Optional arrangement for Bible and specific religions. We welcome any feedback on current use of, or interest in, this option.

As usual, after we’ve implemented a change in WebDewey, we’ll often make a blog post going into more detail. Stay tuned!

Numbers with Two Sets of Standard Subdivisions

From time to time you may have run across a Dewey number with two sets of standard subdivisions. For example:

• 470.01–470.09 Standard subdivisions of Italic languages vs. 470.1–470.9 Standard subdivisions of Latin
• 646.7001–646.7009 Standard subdivisions of management of personal and family life vs. 646.701–646.709 Standard subdivisions of grooming
• 947.0001–947.0009 Standard subdivisions of eastern Europe vs. 947.001–947.009 Standard subdivisions of Russia

You may be surprised to find out there are more than three dozen such standard subdivision pairs in Dewey. Most of them are found in the 400s, 800s, and 900s.

Up to this time, it has not been possible to distinguish between the members of these pairs in WebDewey’s number building engine. If you were adding standard subdivisions at 646.7, for example, the number building engine automatically assumed you wanted 646.7001–646.7009 Standard subdivisions of management of personal and family life because that span came first. If you wanted to use 646.701–646.709 Standard subdivisions of grooming instead, you would have to use Edit Local and the record for the resulting number would not show how the number should have been built, were it possible to build it correctly.

But now—ta da!—the number building engine will allow you to distinguish between the two sets of standard subdivisions. In these cases only, at the appropriate point in your number building, click and add the standard subdivision span you want. You will then be taken to the appropriate standard subdivision span. When you click and add a standard subdivision notation from this span, it will be added with the correct number of zeros.

Let’s consider three examples—one from the 400s, one from the 800s, and one from the 900s.

Example 1. How can we build 470.143 Semantics of Latin? We go directly to 470.1–470.9 and click Start:

This takes us to Table 4 Subdivisions of Individual Languages and Language Families, based on the note that notation from Table 1 is to be used as modified under T4—01–09:

From there we navigate to, and then add, T4—0143 Semantics:

This allows us to build the correct number:

When we click Save, we generate a correct and informative MARC 765 field (you can see the 765 fields in built number records by clicking MARC at the top of the WebDewey screen):

765 0# $b 47 $a 470.1 $c 470.9 $z 4 $s 0143 $u 470.143

Example 2. Our investigation here will focus on 840.01–840.09 Standard subdivisions of literatures of Romance languages vs. 840.1–840.9 Standard subdivisions; collections in more than one form; history, description, critical appraisal of works in more than one form of French literature. If we want to build 840.03 for encyclopedias of Romance language literatures, we navigate to 840.01–840.09 and click Start:

This takes us to Table 1 Standard Subdivisions:

Clicking T1—03, and then Add, gives us the desired number:

When we save this number, we get the following 765 field:

765 0# $b 84 $a 840.01 $c 840.09 $f 0 $z 1 $s 03 $u 840.03

What if instead we wanted to build the number for encyclopedias of French-language literature? This time we start with 840.1–840.9, which takes us to Table 3B—01–07 Standard subdivisions:

Since the standard subdivision we want to add is not modified under Table 3B, we navigate to T1—03 and add our standard subdivision from there:

When we save this number, we get the following 765 field:

765 0# $b 840 $a 840.1 $c 840.9 $z 1 $r 0 $s 3 $u 840.3

But if we want to build 840.8 or 840.9 or any of their subdivisions, we should navigate to the appropriate notation within the context of Table 3B and add that notation. For example, to build the number for collections of French literary texts about holidays we navigate to T3B—0801–0809 and click Add:

Following the directions there, we navigate to T3C—334 Holidays and add that notation:

This results in building the number 840.80334:

When we save this number, we get the following 765 fields:

765 0# $b 840.8 $f 0 $z 3B $a 0801 $c 0809 $z 3C $s 334 $u 840.80334

765 0# $b 840 $a 840.1 $c 840.9 $z 3B $r 0 $s 8 $u 840.8

Example 3. Now we look at building a standard subdivision number for Germany, from the span under 943.001–943.009, which we distinguish from standard subdivisions of central Europe from the span under 943.0001–943.0009. More specifically, we wish to build the number for the history of Turks in Germany. We begin by clicking Start at 943.001-943.009:

This takes us directly to the Table 2 notation for Germany, which we add:

This takes us, in turn, to the standard subdivisions in the add table under 930–990:

From here we add in turn 930-990:0041-0049, T5—943, and T6—9435, to give us 943.0049435:

When saved, the resulting 765s are:

765 0#  $b 943.004943 $z 5 $a 943 $z 6 $r 943 $s 5 $u 943.0049435

765 0#  $b 943.004 $a 930 $c 990 $w 930 $c 990 $y 1 $a 0041 $c 0049 $z 5 $s 943 $u 943.004943

765 0#  $b 943 $a 943.001 $c 943.009 $w 930 $c 990 $y 1 $t 004 $u 943.004

765 0#  $b 9 $a 943.001 $c 943.009 $z 2 $s 43 $u 943

Unfortunately, we are aware of a problematic set of circumstances, namely, when a 900 number is being built using the add table under 930–990 and the standard subdivision range with fewer zeros applies. There are three subcases. First, if the standard subdivision being added is special notation in the add table under 930–990 and or if it is built using an add note in that add table, everything should be fine; for example, consider what we have just seen in building the number for the history of Turks in Germany, which uses special notation 930–990:0041–0049. (Recall that standard subdivisions of central Europe are on three zeros at 943.0001–943.0009, thus making standard subdivisions of Germany at 943.001–943.009 the standard subdivision range with fewer zeros.)

Second, but what if we wanted to build the number for an encyclopedia of German history, i.e., 943.003, where notation 930–990:003 Dictionaries, encyclopedias, concordances is found in the add table, but it is not special notation, nor is it built using an add note in that add table? We begin by clicking Start at 943.001-943.009 and then add T2—43. After this we are given the chance to add from 930–990:001–009. If we then click 930–990:003, we get the correct number, but the 765 field will (appropriately enough) reflect that the 003 came from the add table under 930–990, when its source should be Table 1. (For help in determining when to use standard subdivisions notation in an add table and when to go straight to Table 1, see this previous blog post). We can get the correct number, but only at the expense of an incorrect 765 field.

The third subcase occurs when the standard subdivision being added is not special notation in the add table under 930–990, is not built using an add note in that add table, and doesn’t display as a single notation in that add table. For example, if we wanted to build the number for a journal of German history, we begin by clicking Start at 943.001-943.009 and then add T2—43. After this we are given the chance to add from 930–990:001–009. But the notation for journals occurs only as part of a range, 930–990:005–006. Under these circumstances, we have no choice but to navigate to T1—05 Serial publications. When we click and add T1—05, the result will include an extra zero, which must be corrected using Edit Local. This subcase also includes all the subordinate Table 1 notations not explicitly listed in the add table under 930–990 (e.g., T1—0202 Synopses and outlines, T1—083 Young people). Again, the only option is to navigate to the desired notation in Table 1 and to correct the number of zeros in the resulting number using Edit Local.

Nilo-Saharan languages and Nilo-Saharan peoples

At its Meeting 140, EPC approved subdividing Table 6 notation for Nilo-Saharan languages. The Nilo-Saharan languages constitute the last major group of African languages to be subdivided in DDC. According to Ethnologue, there are 207 Nilo-Saharan languages. There is literary warrant for subdividing T6—965 Nilo-Saharan languages, and literary warrant for separate numbers for subgroups of Nilo-Saharan languages, e.g., T6—9658 Songhai languages. However, most of the individual languages have little literary warrant. Only two specific languages now have their own numbers:

T6—9655226 Maasai

T6—9655842 Dholuo (Luo of Kenya and Tanzania)

 At 496.5 Nilo-Saharan languages are instructions to build schedule numbers for Nilo-Saharan languages and linguistics.  Here are the Hierarchy box and the Notes box for 496.5:

As the add note at 496.5  shows, all the new subdivisions of notation T6—965 can be used to build language and linguistics numbers, but notation from Table 4 can be added only for the two languages that have their own numbers.

Similarly, all the new subdivisions of notation T6—965 can be used to build literature numbers according to the add note at 896 African literatures, but notation from Table 3 can be added only for the two languages that have their own numbers.

Here are examples of languages and linguistics works for which the new numbers for Nilo-Saharan languages can be used:

A unified orthography for Kalenjin languages of Kenya: (Keiyo, Kipsigis, Marakwet, Nandi, Pokot, Sabaot and Tugen)

496.556 Kalenjin languages

[built with base number 496.5 plus 56 from T6—96556 Kalenjin languages]

Bilingual Dholuo-English dictionary, Kenya

496.55842321 Dholuo (Luo of Kenya and Tanzania)—bilingual dictionaries—English

[built with base number 496.5 plus 5842 from T6—9655842 Dholuo (Luo of Kenya and Tanzania) plus T4—3 Dictionaries of the standard form of the language plus T6—21 English as instructed at T4—32-39 Bilingual dictionaries. This dictionary has entry words in both English and Dholuo, but it is aimed at speakers of English, because the introduction and explanatory apparatus are only in English; the note at T4—32-39 indicates that such a dictionary should be classed with the language other than English, hence Dholuo. A Dholuo-English dictionary with entry words only in Dholuo is also classed in 496.55842321, e.g., Dholuo-English dictionary]

At T5—965 Peoples who speak, or whose ancestors spoke, Nilo-Saharan languages are instructions to build numbers for Nilo-Saharan peoples. Here are the Hierarchy box and the Notes box for T5—965:

Here are examples of works for which the new numbers for Nilo-Saharan peoples can be used:

Turkana herders of the dry savanna: Ecology and biobehavioral response of nomads to an uncertain environment

 305.8965522 Ethnic and national groups—Turkana (African people)

[built with base number 305.8 Ethnic and national groups plus notation T5—965522 as instructed at 305.81-305.89 Specific ethnic and national groups. Notation T5—965522 is built with base number T5—965 plus 522 from T6—965522 Lotuxo-Teso languages as instructed at T5—965. Notation T5—965522 has the Relative Index entry “Turkana (African people).” Notation T6—965522 has the including note: “Including Teso-Turkana languages” and the Relative Index entry “Turkana language.”]

Broken spears: A Maasai journey

305.89655226 Ethnic and national groups—Maasai (African people)

[built with base number 305.8 Ethnic and national groups plus notation T5—9655226 as instructed at 305.81-305.89 Specific ethnic and national groups. Notation T5—9655226 Maasai (African people) is built with base number T5—965 plus 5226 from T6—9655226 Maasai as instructed at T5—965.]

The updates for Nilo-Saharan languages and Nilo-Saharan peoples can be found in PDF form on the Dewey Services update page.

The First-of-Two Rule

Section 5.7 of the DDC Introduction indicates that a work on two subjects should be classed with the subject receiving fuller treatment.  But what about works in which the two subjects receive equal treatment?  In this case we invoke the first-of-two rule—but only if the rule of application, which takes precedence over other rules, doesn’t apply.  This rule instructs us to class such a work in the number coming first in the DDC schedules. 

Note that the first-of two rule does not instruct us to class the work in the number of the subject coming first in the title of the work.  Such an interpretation would make collocation an issue of whether all works on the two-subjects-treated-equally happened to name them in the same order in the title.  The first-of-two-rule also does not instruct us to class the work in the number of the subject coming first in the alphabet.  This would make collocation an issue of whether all languages name the two subjects so that they stand in a single fixed order.  In contrast, using the schedules as the basis for the first-of-two rule provides a mechanism whereby two-subjects-treated-equally will consistently be classed in the same number.

For example, given the first-of-two rule, works giving equal treatment to 782.26 Motets and 782.294 Psalms should be classed in the first of the two numbers, that is, in 782.26.  And, given the first-of-two rule, works giving equal treatment to 746.422 Knotting and 746.436 Tatting should be classed in the first of the two numbers, that is, in 746.422. 

Of course a work giving equal treatment to knotting and tatting is as relevant to tatting as it is to knotting.  Statements throughout this post about the number that the first-of-two rule instructs us to use should be understood to address the assignment of the standard DDC number, captured in the 082 field (Dewey Decimal Classification Number) of the MARC bibliographic record.  The number not chosen as the standard number should be considered for inclusion in the 083 field (Additional Dewey Decimal Classification Number).  Our work on knotting and tatting might then have the following fields added to its bibliographic record:

082         #4            $a  746.422 $2 23

083         #4            $a  746.436 $2 23

while our work on motets and psalms might have the following fields assigned:

082         #4            $a  782.26 $2 23

083         #4            $a  782.294 $2 23

As we saw in a follow-up post on the rule of application, sometimes the basic rules that govern the assignment of numbers in the DDC are built into its notes.  For example, consider a work on abstracting (025.41 Abstracting) and subject indexing (025.47 Subject indexing and cataloging), which gives the two subjects equal treatment.  By the first-of-two rule, such a work should be classed in the first of the two numbers, that is, in 025.41.  Application of the rule is reinforced in this context by the class-here note at 025.41, which states that comprehensive works on abstracting and subject indexing are to be classed in that number.  Another example can be found at 382.093–382.099 International commerce in specific continents, countries, localities.  Provision is made here for representing commerce between two geographic units by adding Table 2 notation for both of them, separated by an intervening 0.  If the work emphasizes one of the geographic units, its Table 2 notation is given first.  But “if emphasis is equal, give priority to the one coming first in Table 2,” which echoes the first-of-two rule.

Sometimes, however, notes are given that override the first-of-two rule.  Consider, for example, a work giving equal treatment to American literature (which is classed in 810 American literature in English) and British literature (which is classed in 820 English and Old English literatures).  By the first-of-two rule, such a work would be classed in the first of the two numbers, i.e., 810.  But at 810 we find the class-elsewhere note, “Class comprehensive works on American literature in English and English literature in 820.”  Another example arises with works giving equal treatment to historical bibliography, which is found in the class-here note of 002 The book, and analytical bibliography, which is classed in 010.42 Analytical bibliography (Descriptive bibliography).  By the first-of-two rule, such a work would be classed in the first of the two numbers, i.e., 002.  But at 002 we find the class-elsewhere note, “Class comprehensive works on historical and analytical bibliography in 010.42.” 

An exception to the first-of-two rule comes into play when the two subjects are the two major subdivisions of a broader subject, in which case a work giving equal treatment to the two subjects is to be classed in the number for the broader subject of which they are major subdivisions.  For example, a work giving equal treatment to dialectology (417.2) and historical linguistics (417.7) should be classed in 417 Dialectology and historical linguistics (and not in 417.2), because 417.2 and 417.7 are the two major (and indeed, the only) subdivisions of 417. 

Finally, what may seem like a subtle distinction needs to be drawn between treatment of two subjects, to which the first-of-two rule may apply, and two aspects of a single subject, to which preference notes and preference tables apply.  We have seen that classification of a work giving equal treatment to the two subjects, knotting and tatting, is governed by the first-of-two rule.  Consider by way of contrast a work on knotted rugs, a single subject with two aspects.  The one aspect is classed in 746.422 Knotting; the other aspect is classed in 746.7 Rugs.  If the first-of-two-rule applied (but it doesn’t), the work would be classed in 746.422, but the preference table under 746.1–746.9 gives priority to 746.7 Rugs over 746.4 Needlework and handwork.

 

Rule of Application, Part 2

 

Last week's post on the rule of application noted that this rule has been woven into the schedules of the DDC and promised this follow-up post with further examples.  In the meantime, Juli's post on recycling plastics concluded in this manner:

It should come as no surprise that works on recycling specific materials are classed according to the rule of application: recycling applied to plastics classed with plastics, recycling applied to a specific kind of plastic classed with the kind of plastic, recycling of specific kinds of wastes classed with specific kinds of wastes. . . .  Nevertheless, it is still necessary to check the Relative Index and notes to see exactly what DDC numbers should be used.

This post proceeds along two avenues.  We will start with two large-scale implementations of the rule of application in the schedules.  Then we will consider several recent developments in the schedules that have been driven by the rule of application.

One large-scale implementation of the rule of application is found in 610 Medicine and health with regard to the relationship between 615 Pharmacology and therapeutics and 616 Diseases.  This relationship is so crucial that the rule of application finds explicit statement in the schedules, even though it is standard operating procedure (pun intended!).  At 615.5 Therapeutics we find the following scatter class-elsewhere note:

Class therapies applied to a specific disease or group of diseases with the disease or group of diseases in 616–618, plus notation 06 from table under 616.1–616.9, notation 06 from table under 617, or notation 06 from table under 618.1–618.8, e.g., therapies for cardiovascular diseases 616.106

And at 615.7 Pharmacokinetics we find the following scatter class-elsewhere note:

Class use of a drug to treat a specific disease or group of diseases with the disease or group of diseases in 616–618, plus notation 061 from table under 616.1–616.9, notation 061 from table under 617, or notation 061 from table under 618.1–618.8, e.g., drug treatment for diseases of liver 616.362061

Therefore, for example, works on the treatment of arthritis using acupressure are classed in the number for arthritis (616.722 Arthritis) rather than in the number for acupressure (615.8222 Acupressure).  Numbers for diseases allow for addition of notation from the internal add table under 616.1–616.9, where we find 06 Therapy and subdivisions, including 062-069 Other therapies, with an add instruction to add the numbers following 615.8 in 615.82–615.89.  The specific number for treatment of arthritis using acupressure therefore is 616.72206222.

Another large-scale implementation of the rule of application is found in 780 Music.  This time the rule of application finds form, not as an explicit statement in a class-elsewhere note, but as an implicit effect of the class-with-the-last preference order that governs the 780s.  As pointed out in the Manual note for 780 Music, the usual arrangement or facet order in music is executant, form, general principles, and standard subdivisions.  We find executants in 782 Vocal music, 783 Music for single voices, and 784–788 Instruments and their music; it is useful for our purposes to note that these numbers are not only for the voices and instruments that produce music, but also for the music they produce.  We find musical forms that are executant-specific in the early numbers of their ranges (e.g., 782.1–782.4 Vocal forms, 784.18 [Instrumental] Musical forms) and those that are not executant-specific in 781.8 Musical forms.  We find general principles that are executant-specific in the earliest numbers of their ranges (e.g., 782.01–782.07 General principles of vocal music, 784.11–784.17 General principles of instruments and instrumental ensembles and their music) and those that are not executant-specific in, e.g., 781.1 Basic principles of music, 781.3 Composition, and 781.4 Techniques of music.  OK, so the class-with-the-last preference order implements the facet order (that is, executants come last, preceded by form, which in turn is preceded by general principles; and, as always, standard subdivisions come last), but what does this have to do with the rule of application?  It’s this:  processes and techniques that can be applied to music, e.g., composition, arrangement, performance, conducting, recording, are included in the general principles grab bag.  Therefore—after the lengthy prelude, do we now need a drum roll? (oops, inflicting punishment again)—processes and techniques applied to musical forms or to music-by-kinds-of-executants are classed with the forms or executants.  For example, works on the composition of fugues are classed in the number for fugues (784.1872 Fugues) rather than in the number for composition (781.3 Composition).  Numbers for specific musical forms allow for addition of notation from the internal add table under 781.2–781.8, where we find 1 General principles and an instruction to add the numbers following 781 in 781.1–781.7.  The specific number for composition of fugues therefore is 784.187213.

Now we turn to several examples, all involving computing, showing how the rule of application guides ongoing development of the DDC.  We note first that works on the application of computers to a subject are classed in the number for the subject followed by T1—0285 Computer applications, if appropriate.  Thus, when we relocated computational linguistics from 410.285 (Linguistics) Computer applications to 006.35 Natural language processing, it then became possible to express computational linguistics applications by adding T1—0285635, following the add instruction at T1—0285.  Consistent with the rule of application, works on the use of natural language processing / computational linguistics to accomplish certain tasks are classed with the task, plus notation T1—0285635.  Hence we get automatic abstracting 025.410285635 (025.41 Abstracting), word sense disambiguation 401.430285635 (401.43 Semantics), automatic part-of-speech tagging and automatic parsing 415.0285635 (415 Grammar of standard forms of languages), and machine translation 418.020285635 (418.02 Translating).

Questions on how to treat subjects like wireless Internet, wireless LANs, and wireless metropolitan networks were easily answered through the rule of application:  class in the number for the kind of network.  Therefore, wireless Internet is classed in 004.678, wireless LANs in 004.68, and wireless metropolitan networks in 004.67.

With DDC 23 additional concepts were incorporated into existing computer science classes.  Two of these were integrated development environments (IDEs) and application frameworks. Webopedia describes an IDE as "a programming environment integrated into a software application that provides a GUI builder, a text or code editor, a compiler and/or interpreter and a debugger."  So we had to decide whether to represent an IDE as a systems program (this is how interpreters, compilers, and assemblers are treated) or as an aid in programming (this is how application generators, text editors specially designed to assist in coding programs, and debuggers are treated).  Since the rule of application sided with the latter, "integrated development environments" was added to the class-here note at 005.1 Programming.  The pcmag.com encyclopedia characterizes an application framework as "a set of common software routines that provides a foundation structure for developing an application. Frameworks take the tedium out of writing all the program code for an application from scratch."  As with integrated development environments, the purpose of application frameworks is to support the development of programs.  The rule of application again leads to application frameworks being associated with 005.1 Programming, where "application frameworks" was also added to the class-here note.

Nicotine

(This is the third in a series of posts on eponyms.)

Within the nightshade family of plants is the genus Nicotiana, including more than 70 species of tobacco.  Both the genus name Nicotiana and nicotine, the alkaloid that is the principal constituent of the tobacco leaf, are derived from the name of Jean Nicot de Villemain (1530–1600), a French diplomat and scholar.   As France’s ambassador to Portugal, Nicot sent tobacco seeds that had originated in the New World to Paris in 1560; he also recommended tobacco to the queen, Catherine de Medici, for migraine headches, thus introducing medicinal use of tobacco to the French court. 

The literature on nicotine is inseparable from the literature on tobacco and has many aspects.   For example, from a social welfare perspective, tobacco abuse is classed in 362.296 Tobacco as a subdivision of 362.29 Substance abuse  (for example, Smoking.drugabuse.gov:  Nicotine addiction ... and other dangers of tobacco use); from a human toxicology persective, tobacco is classed in 615.9523952 (built with 615.952 Plant poisons, plus 3952 from 583.952 Solanaceae [the scientific name for the nightshade family], following the add instruction at 615.9523–615.9528 Specific plant poisons; for example, Toxicology:  Tobacco-specific n-nitrosamines:  Recent advances); from an agricultural perspective, tobacco is classed in 633.71 Tobacco as an alkaloidal field crop (for example, The culture of tobacco).  Other appropriate numbers can be seen by browsing the Relative Index under Tobacco, Tobacco abuse, Tobacco industry, etc.  No interdisciplinary number for nicotine or tobacco is given.

Works on Jean Nicot de Villemain as a French diplomat should be classed in 327.440092 Foreign relations of France—biography (built with 327 International relations, plus T2—44 France, plus T1—0092 Biography [the use of 00 for standard subdivisions is given in a footnote], following the add instructions at 327.3–327.9 Foreign relations of specific continents, countries, localities).  (The Manual note at T1—092 Biography indicates that for public figures, greatest weight should be given to the highest office reached, after which it specifies that 327.3–.9 should be used for ambassadors.)  While Nicot may be best known for introducing the use of tobacco to France, his most significant work was the compilation of Thresor de la langue françoyse, tant ancienne que moderne, perhaps the first modern dictionary of the French language.   Works on Jean Nicot as a French lexicographer should be classed in 443.092 French lexicographers (built with 44(0) French, plus T4—3 Dictionaries, plus T1—092 Biography).   Although lexicography is in the class-here note at T4—3028 Auxiliary techniques and procedures; apparatus, equipment, materials, in the preference table for Table 1, T1—092 Biography is higher than T1—028 Auxiliary techniques and procedures; apparatus, equipment, materials.

But what about a comprehensive biography of Jean Nicot?  The Manual note at T1—092 Biography gives the following instructions:   “Use the number for the subject of the person’s most noted contribution for the comprehensive biography of the person.   If the person made approximately equal contributions to a number of fields, use the number for the subject that provides the best common denominator, giving some extra consideration to the person’s occupation.”   The introduction of tobacco to the French court, from which the use of tobacco was further disseminated throughout Europe, was a “contribution” of significant effect, marked by the eponymous use of his surname for tobacco’s scientific name and for its chief chemical compound.  But however significant the effects of his actions with respect to tobacco, his ambassadorship was of only 2-3 years’ duration.  The remaining 40 years of his life were spent as a man of learning.  No number would seem to provide a best common denominator across the range of his contributions.  The Manual note subsequently instructs:  “Class an individual biography in the number most nearly covering the history and civilization of the place and time of the activity emphasized when a work is not clearly associated with any subject but is clearly associated with a place, even in cases when a person’s activity may not approximate the whole of the most specific period.”  Consequently, a comprehensive work on Jean Nicot is best classed in 944.029092 (built with 944.029 Historical periods of France—reigns of Francis II, Charles IX, Henry III, 1559–1589, plus T1—092 Biography).

Eponymy and the DDC

I’m taking advantage of a minor relocation in DDC 23—the relocation of dictionaries of eponyms from 413.1 Specialized dictionaries to 412.03 Etymological dictionaries—to start a series of blog posts on eponymous subjects.   But first, please remind me (you might be saying), what’s an eponym?  And while you’re at it, why would dictionaries of eponyms be relocated out of 413.1?  (They sound pretty specialized, don’t they?)  And what do eponyms have to do with etymology?

An eponym is a word/phrase that is derived from the name of a person.  For instance, the Dewey Decimal Classification is an eponym, derived from the name of Melvil Dewey, the person who devised the system.  Thus eponymy is one of the types of word sources studied in etymology.  Yes, dictionaries of eponyms are specialized dictionaries, but classing them with other works on etymology makes for a better fit than classing them with other specialized dictionaries. 

The number for the DDC is, as the blog itself broadcasts, 025.431 Dewey Decimal Classification.  What then is the class number for comprehensive works on Melvil Dewey?   The Manual note at T1—092 Biography instructs us to “use the number for the subject of the person’s most noted contribution for the comprehensive biography of the person.”  It might seem obvious then that comprehensive works on Melvil Dewey should be classed in 025.431092.  But what of his other noted contributions, among which are his (co-)founding of The Library Journal, the American Library Association, and the Library Bureau, as well as the world’s first library school?   We are helped out again by the Manual note, which goes on to say, “If in doubt between a number for a discipline and a number for a specific subject within the discipline, prefer the number for the discipline.”  The most appropriate number for comprehensive works on Melvil Dewey therefore is 020.92 (built with 020 Library and information sciences, plus T1—092 Biography).  A good example of such a work is Wayne Wiegand’s Irrepressible reformer:  A biography of Melvil Dewey.

Languages for Special Purposes; Translating

As noted in a recent post, over the past several months we have incorporated a number of changes in Table 4 Subdivisions of Individual Languages and Language Families and 400 Language into WebDewey.  This entry addresses changes announced in the December 2009 New and Changed Entries (in Word and PDF formats), which focused on new entries for languages for special purposes, translating materials on specific subjects, translating literature (belles-lettres) and rhetoric, translating literature from a specific language, and translating specific forms of literature.  The changes are given there only in the context of Table 4; parallel changes have also been made in the 400s, as can be seen in WebDewey and Abridged WebDewey.

Table 4 begins with a set of modifications to standard subdivisions, including (1) several extensions to the meaning of standard subdivisions (e.g., the addition of an including note for language acquisition, speech errors, a class-here note for psycholinguistics, and a scatter class-elsewhere note at –019 Psychological principles), (2) the displacement of several standard subdivision concepts to other notation (e.g., the do-not-use note at –03 Encyclopedias and concordances pertaining to dictionaries of standard form of language, which are to be classed instead in –3 Dictionaries of the standard form of the language), and (3) a few expansions (e.g., –042 Bilingualism, which does not occur in Table 1).  Most of the expansions involve adding further subdivisions under –014 Language and communication.  The newest of these is –0147 Languages for special purposes (also known as LSPs or sublanguages).  LSPs are languages that are used in specific contexts, often restricted by subject matter and/or level of expertise (e.g., the languages of medicine, law, advertising, broadcasting).  

Note that there is no expansion for LSPs in Table 1 Standard Subdivisions.  Therefore, a work like The language of medicine, its evolution, structure, and dynamics should continue to be classed in 610.14 Language of medicine (built with 61[0] Medicine plus notation 014 Language and communication from Table 1; the placeholder zero at the end of 610 is dropped before the standard subdivision is added), not in 610.147, since Table 4 notation is not used in this context.  Nor is there a need for an equivalent expansion here:  the class number 610.14 already adequately expresses the concept “language of medicine.”  The use of T4—0147 is restricted to contexts where the base notation represents a language or family of languages and a note specifically authorizing addition of notation from Table 4 or specifically authorizing use of notation from Table 1 “as modified under” Table 4 exists.  An example is Fachsprachen in der Romania.  Fachsprachen is the German term for languages for special purposes, while in linguistics, der Romania refers to areas in which Romance languages are spoken (incidentally, because der Romania has a special meaning in the field of linguistics, this expression belongs to an LSP).  The appropriate number for this work is 440.0147 Languages for special purposes of Romance languages (built with 44[0] Romance languages plus 0 (standard subdivisions for Romance languages use two zeros, while standard subdivisions for French use one) plus notation 0147 Languages for special purposes from Table 4 ; the placeholder zero at the end of 440 is dropped before the expanded standard subdivision is added).  The use of notation 0147 from Table 4 is authorized by the note at 440.01–440.03 Standard subdivisions of Romance languages:  “Notation from Table 1 as modified under T4—01–T4—03 in Table 4, e.g., semantics of Romance languages 440.0143.”  Notation T4—0147 is not expected to be used nearly as often as 401.47, its counterpart in the modified standard subdivisions at 401–409; 401.47 would be used for LSPs generally.  Examples of works that should be classed in 401.47 Languages for special purposes include Sublanguage: Studies of language in restricted semantic domains and Fachsprachen: ein internationales Handbuch zur Fachsprachenforschung und Terminologiewissenschaft = Languages for special purposes: An international handbook of special-language and terminology research.

In the past there has been only a single class in Table 4 and a single class in the 400s (T4—802 / 418.02) for translating and interpreting.  New entries have now been added for T4—803 / 418.03 Translating materials on specific subjects, T4—804 / 418.04 Translating literature (belles-lettres) and rhetoric, T4—80402–T4—80409 Translating literature from a specific language (there is no 418 equivalent, since a specific language is involved), and T4—8041–T4—8048 / 418.041–418.048 Translating specific forms of literature.  With regard to Table 4, all of these numbers follow a common pattern of using the base number for the language being translated into if the work is about translating into a specific language, the base number for the language being translated from if the work is about translating from a specific language into many languages, or the base number for the language coming later in 420–490 if the work is about translating in both directions between two languages.  (If the work is about translating from many languages into many languages, then a subdivision under 418 would be the appropriate choice.)

In the case of T4—802, notation from Table 6 Languages is added to express the language being translated from if the work is about translating from one language into one language or to express the language coming earlier in 420–490 if the work is about translating in both directions between two languages.  Table 6 notation is not added if the work is about translating from one language into many languages or from many languages into many languages; under no circumstances would Table 6 notation be added to 418.02.  For example, the work Structure of Meaning (SOM): Towards a three-dimensional perspective on translating between Chinese and English should be classed in 495.180221 Translating between Chinese and English (built with 495.1 Chinese [between English and Chinese, the language appearing later in 420–490] plus notation 802 Translating to and from other languages from Table 4 plus notation 21 English from Table 6).

In the case of T4—803 / 418.03, three-digit notation from 001–999 is added to express the subject.  However, fewer than three digits would be added if the number includes a zero that is not in initial position (the instruction reads “but stop before any zero that follows a non-zero number”).  These restrictions (three-digit notation; zeros only in initial position) are necessary to ensure that a specific number will not have more than one interpretation, since it is possible to add further notation from Table 6 to express the language translated from.  By way of example, the work Translation and medicine would be classed in 418.0361 Translating medical materials (built with 418.03 Translating materials on specific subjects plus 61 from 610 Medicine).

In the case of T4—80402–T4—80409, notation from Table 6 is added to express the specific language the literature is translated from.  For example, the work The Chinese translation of Russian literature: three studies should be classed in 495.180409171 Translating Russian literature into Chinese (built with 495.1 Chinese [the literature translated into] plus notation 8040 Translating literature from a specific language from Table 4 plus notation 9171 Russian from Table 6).

In the case of T4—8041–T4—8048 / 418.041–418.048, one-digit notation from Table 3B is added to express the literary form being translated.  For example, the work Advanced translation from Russian prose, which concerns translating Russian prose into English, should be classed in 428.04809171 Translating miscellaneous writings from Russian to English (built with 42[0] English plus notation 804 Translating specific forms of literature from Table 4 plus notation 8 Miscellaneous writings, representing notation 808 Prose literature from Table 3B, plus 0, following the instruction at T4—8041–T4—8048, plus notation 9171 Russian from Table 6).

Computational Linguistics, Corpus Linguistics, and Pragmatics

A significant part of my Dewey life these past three years has been spent in Table 4 and the 400s.  In that period of time, eight—count them, eight!—EPC exhibits (most developed with my colleague Juli Beall) have focused on aspects of Table 4 and the 400s.  Work done in these two contexts (or maybe it’s just one context) has also spawned three blog entries during the same period.  One, named Language, Language Everywhere, commented on the underlying importance of language to much of what we do.  The other two solicited feedback on discussion papers in computational linguistics and language variations. 

A number of changes in Table 4 and the 400s have recently been incorporated into WebDewey, some of which were announced in the September 2009 New and Changed Entries (in Word and PDF formats); some of which were announced in the December 2009 New and Changed Entries (in Word and PDF formats); and, as previously announced, some of which (changes with respect to language variations) will not be implemented until the publication of DDC 23.  This entry will address changes in the September New and Changed Entries posting; a subsequent entry will address changes in the December New and Changed Entries posting.

The September 2009 New and Changed Entries posting included significant changes with respect to computational linguistics, corpus linguistics, and pragmatics.  As indicated in the previous blog entry on computational linguistics, we have relocated computational linguistics from 410.285 Linguistics computer applications to 006.35 Natural language processing, where computational linguistics now appears in the class-here note.  This (006.35) is now the number in which general works on computational linguistics should be classed.  Examples of such works include Speech and language processing: an introduction to natural language processing, computational linguistics, and speech recognition and Survey of the state of the art in human language technology.  According to the rule of application, works about the application of one subject (in this case, computational linguistics) to another subject, should be classed with the second subject.  The relocation opens up the possibility of expressing computational linguistics applications through the addition of standard subdivision notation T1–0285635 Computational linguistic applications (built with T1—0285 Computer applications plus notation 635 from 006.35 Natural language processing, following instructions at T1—0285).   Two such built numbers are given in the New and Changed Entries:  025.410285635 Automatic abstracting / automatic text summarization (built with 025.41 Abstracting plus notation 0285635 from Table 1, as analyzed above) and 401.430285635 Word sense disambiguation (built with 401.43 Semantics plus notation 0285635 from Table 1, as analyzed above).

We have expanded for corpus linguistics at 410.188 Corpus linguistics (under 410.18 Schools, theories, methodologies of linguistics, which itself is a previous expansion under 410.1 Philosophy and theory of linguistics).  In the past, many works on corpus linguistics have been classed with works on computational linguistics, since much of the research in corpus linguistics is done automatically, using computational linguistics techniques.  But this is not optimal, for multiple reasons.  For example, corpus linguistics is a methodology (not a set of techniques), based on the premise that linguistic study should be carried out on language as actually used rather than on language as generated introspectively (“arm-chair linguistics”).  Moreover, corpus linguistics includes aspects (e.g., selection of the language samples that will comprise the corpus) that may have nothing to do with computational linguistics.  Comprehensive works on corpus linguistics (like Corpus linguistics and the web) should now be classed in 410.188.  As a methodology, corpus linguistics is also subject to the rule of application.  Hence a work on corpus linguistics applied to a specific topic in linguistics would be classed with the topic; for example, Discourse on the move: using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure should be classed in 401.41 Discourse analysis.  And a work on corpus linguistics applied to a specific work or the works of a specific author should be classed with the work or author; for example, e-Lears: a Corpus Approach to Shakespeare and Tate should be classed in 822.33 William Shakespeare.  (The Tate adaptation of King Lear would be classed in 822.4 Drama of Restoration period, 1625-1702; as the work treats Shakespeare and Tate equally, it is the first-of-two rule that tips the balance in favor of the Shakespeare number, which comes earlier in the schedules.)

We have also expanded at 401.45 for Pragmatics, with subdivisions under it for 401.452 Speech acts (“Class here illocutionary acts”), 401.454 Presupposition (“Class here implication, entailment”), and 401.456 Reference (“Class here anaphora, deixis”).  In the past, the interdisciplinary number for pragmatics has been 306.44 Language (as an aspect of culture), because of the association between pragmatics and sociolinguistics.  An analysis of interdisciplinary works on pragmatics revealed that the better home for such works is in linguistics.  Therefore, 401.45 has now been designated as the appropriate number for interdisciplinary works on pragmatics.  (In addition to the association of pragmatics with sociolinguistics, there is a strong association of some of the subtopics of pragmatics with philosophy.  Class-elsewhere notes in the subdivisions of 401.45 remind the classifier to consider discipline first.)  Examples of works that should class in 401.45 and its subdivisions are:  Pragmatics and natural language understanding in 401.45 Pragmatics, Using language: The structures of speech acts in 401.452 Speech acts,   Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics in 401.454 Presupposition, and Studies in anaphora in 401.456 Reference.

Comparable changes, as appropriate, have been made in Table 4.

EPC Meeting 132

Giles Martin took the photo of EPC at LC on November 17, 2009. From left to right: Karl Debus-López (Library of Congress, standing in for Beacher Wiggins), Jonathan Furner (UCLA), Welna van Eeden (University of South Africa), Lyn McKinney (Billings [MT] Senior High School), Deborah Rose-Lefmann (Northwestern University), Sandra Singh (University of British Columbia), EPC Vice-Chair Anne Robertson (Australian Committee on Cataloguing), EPC Chair Caroline Kent (British Library), Andrea Kappler (Evansville Vanderburgh [IN] Public Library), and David Farris (Library and Archives Canada).

Meeting 132 of the Decimal Classification Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) was held November 16-17 at the Library of Congress. EPC Chair Caroline Kent (British Library) was re-elected for a second two-year term as chair.

In Table 1 (Standard Subdivisions), EPC approved a proposal to recast T1—0286 Waste technology as T1—0286 Green technology (Environmental technology). In Table 2 (Geographic Areas, Historical Periods, Persons), EPC gave provisional approval to the revision of Asia Minor and Turkey, and requested additional literary warrant information before approving the expansion for Switzerland.

EPC approved selected updates in the following schedules: 004-006 Computer science; 320 Political science; 361-365 Social problems and services; 390 Customs, etiquette, folklore; 400 Language; 569 Fossil mammals and 599 Mammals; 636 Animal husbandry; 646 Sewing, clothing; 690 Buildings; 720 Architecture; 800 Literature and rhetoric; and various historical periods in 900. EPC also reviewed and approved the full schedules for 670 Manufacturing and 680 Manufacture of products for special uses.

Several discussion papers were considered by the committee. One discussion paper addressed current and proposed practices related to representation and use of standard subdivisions with extended or narrowed meanings, and displaced standard subdivisions. Our investigation of such subdivisions was prompted by two streams of inquiry—a set of questions posed by a group of Dewey Section classifiers preparing training materials (Michael Cantlon, Carolyn Turner, and Ruby Woodard), and our ongoing review of practices related to the representation of standard subdivisions in add tables. EPC approved the discussion paper on 281 Eastern churches for external review. We are seeking advice immediately from the Arabic, Greek, and Russian translation teams; we will also be seeking advice from other experts in Orthodox Christianity. Yvonne Jahns (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek), chair of the European DDC Users’ Group (EDUG) 340 Law Working Group, was a guest attendee at the meeting. She participated in the extensive discussion of various 340 Law discussion papers; the full 340 Law schedule will be considered at Meeting 133. Yvonne also presented “20 years SWD: German subject authority data prepared for the future.” EPC considered another set of discussion papers, including one from the EDUG 370 Education Working Group, focused on the 370 Education schedule. EPC reviewed revised proposals for updates to 372.3-372.8 Elementary education in specific subjects, and updates to levels of education in 372, 373, and 378. The full 370 Education schedule will also be considered at Meeting 133.

EPC also heard progress reports on Dewey linked data, mixed translation models, and ongoing efforts to use machine assistance in the development of the abridged edition. Thanks to the efforts of EPC member Welna van Eeden, a representation of the DDC Summaries in Afrikaans was added last week to dewey.info (Afrikaans is the tenth language represented in the service).

EPC scheduled a follow-up electronic Meeting 132A (to be held February 1-26, 2010), during which the committee will review the Editorial Rules for standard subdivisions; further work on the machine-assisted abridged model; updates to T1—0288 Maintenance and repair to address issues raised at Meeting 131; updates to the Table 2 provisions for Asia Minor, Turkey, and Switzerland; a possible expansion at 746.92 Costume to match similar provisions for clothing and accessories elsewhere; the updated history periods for Africa based on comments from outside reviewers; and minor updates proposed by the Swedish translation team. If necessary, we will split the meeting into two parts and schedule Electronic Meeting 132B (possibly as a webinar) at a later date. Meeting 133 will be held June 16-18, 2010, at OCLC headquarters in Dublin, Ohio.