Cataloger's
Reference Shelf
Library of Congress Rule Interpretations
Cataloger's
Reference Shelf
Library of Congress Rule Interpretations
24.19. Direct or Indirect Subheading
The rules emphasize omission of hierarchy but qualify this emphasis as follows:
"Omit . . . hierarchy unless the name of the subordinate or related body has been, or is likely to be, used by another body entered under the same higher or related body"-Rule 24.14 for bodies entered under a higher body other than a jurisdiction.
"[Omit hierarchy] unless the name of the agency has been , or is likely to be, used by another agency entered under the same government"-Rule 24.19 for bodies entered under a jurisdiction.
The words "or is likely to be" will carry a varying import to different catalogers. The statement below indicates the particular import of the words that Library of Congress catalogers should heed.
Two types of names do not need explanation, i.e., in these cases all catalogers treading only the rule and no gloss would reach the same conclusion. These types of names are:
1. names of subordinate bodies performing functions common to many higher bodies ( FN 1), when the name of the subordinate body (exclusive of any names of higher bodies included in the name) is as common sounding as its function.
Headings for such subordinate bodies as these obviously could not omit hierarchy.
2. names of subordinate bodies performing one or more of the major functions that are unique to the particular higher body (within the same corporate structure).
A decision on hierarchy in these cases is also obvious.
If the name of the body being established does not fit either of the above obvious, categories, consider whether or not the name would be appropriate for another subordinate body within the same corporate structure. Common sense will be the best guide, but in some doubtful cases it may be relatively easy to make the decision if an important idea expresses in a word or phrase present in the higher body’s name is missing from the name of the body.
Avoid a very literal approach to this question, however. The name of the body being established may adequately imply the ideas expressed in the higher body’s name without actually repeating the words of that name,
If still in doubt, retain the higher body in the heading.
See also: