TREATHENT OF PERSIAN MATERIALS I N THE
NATIONAL UNION CATALOG
A Research Project (Ls 890 A)
Presented to the
School of Llbrary Sclence
Emporfa Kansas State College
I n Part ta l Ful f l l lment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of L l brarianship
ABSTRACT
Thfs study lnvesttgates the treatment of the Pcrslan mate-
rials In the National Unlon Catalog (NUC). As there i s no subject
approach to NUC for the t ime being, and slnce Library of Congress - deternines American cataloging and classlflcatlon procedure, the
Library o f Congress Cataloq--kks:Subjects i s selected as the
basls of the study of WC. It i s assumed that HUC w l l l reflect - - much the same characteristics. Persian materials are defined as
those t t t l t s listed under the subject headings glven In Appendix
A of t h i s report. Thls study compares r random sample of 5 per
cent of the Perslan mterials with a sample af 2 per cent of the
Amsrtcan materials (both samples are equal In number). Amtrlcan
materials are deflned as the t l t les listed under the subject head-
lngs simllar to the subjact headlngs selected i n the process of
random sampling of the Ptrs Ian materials. The l l s t of American
subject headlngs i s given in Appendix 0 of t h i s report. The a m -
parison of the tw samples includes: the matching of depth o f
subject Indexing, the average of added entr ies , the amount of bibllo-
graphical Information, the language of these materials, and classl-
flcatlon fnformatlon. In addltton to the comparlson the locations
of Perslan materials a re determined and the l i s t of the tocations
i s given i n Appendix C, The c l a s s l f l c a t l o n number of those Perslan
mater1a)s tltles whIch have both L i b r a r y o f Congress Classlflcatlon
and Dewey Decimal Classlflcar~on are analyzed to s h m the diffarence
of c l a s r t f y l n g Persian mate r ia ls by e l ther of these classiflcations.
The flndtngs suggest more research on the classlftcation of Persfan
materfals, The result Is t h a t Perstan and American materials are
trsated approxtmately equal l y , and any dl fference Is due t o the
composf t Ion of the language of these matertal s whl ch has affect on
detsrmlnlng the classiflcatlon number.
ACKNOWLEDGHENT
L would Ilke to express my appreciation to Dr. John S.
h d e l l for h l s advlcu in the preparation of the Proposal of this
research. Hy speclat thanks are also due to Dr. Charles A. Bolles,
who was my advisor I n conducting t h i s research, for h l r valuable
suggcstfons and advice.
A. 2. K.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
L I S T OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a m . . . m i v
Chrpte r
I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY
BACKGROUND OF THE STUOY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . HISTORY OF CLASSIFICATION
L I B R A R Y C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S * . . b + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAflONALUNlOHCATALOG
FUNCTIONS OF TME NATIONAL UNION CATALOG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURE
.............. ASSUHPTlONS OF THE STUOY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . LlHtTATlONS OF THIS STUDY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY
. . . . 4 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF fHk COLLECTED DATA
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SUHMARYAHDCONCLUSLON
. . . . . . . . RECOHHENDATlOHS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY .............m......m.... APPE N D I X E S ..........................
i l i
L1 ST OF TABLES
fab le Page
1 . Subject Dist r ibut ion o f the F i r s t Sample According . . . . . . . . . to L lbrary of Congress Main Classes 3s
2. Proportion o f the Language In the Sample of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Perslan Materials 36
3 . Proportion of the Language In the American Haterlals. . 37
4. D i s t r t bution o f Both Samples Accordlng to the . . . . . A v a t l a b l l i t y o f the C lass i f i ca t ionNumber . 38
5. Arrangement of Selected Titles In Persian Materials Samples Acccrrding to DDC Hain Classes . . . . . . . . 39
6. Arrangtment of Selected Tltlss In Persian Materials . . . . . . . . Sample According to LCC Hatn Classes 44
7. Dlstrlbution o f Selected f l t les i n Perslan Mater ia ls . . . . . . . . . . . by Hal n Classes of LCC and DOC 42
8. Comparlsonof thaSubJect Indexing InBothSamples . . 44
9. Comparison of Additional Information In Catalog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cards of Both Samples 45
Chapter I
Changes I n the pattern of education, fram a l t r u f s t l c methods
of instruction to heuristic methods of instruction, have altered
the pat tern of l i b r a r y usa. Students require m r e material and
lnfotmation for thetr assignments. Increased sclentiflc reseerch
i n past decades also requlres addltlonal use of l lbrary materials.
"Hote scientlffc research has probably been done In the past twenty
y u n than i n the precmedlng Da hundred Researchers
need informatlon In a reasonable amunt of ti=. The e f f e c t i v e
sa t l s fac t lm of the information needs of the 1 lbrery users i s the
prImc responstbit l ty o f the l i b r a r i e s and Ilbrarlans, To provide
a h t t a r service to the l ibrary patrons, research must be done on
avaflablc reference tools on the part of their contribution on the
satisfactton of the informstion needs.
Since World War I1 the amunt of human knowledge has
increased a t a tremendous rate. The number of publications has
Increased each year, There are mrs than f i v e million articles
published I n various journals each year. Haterials themselves
come out In e variety o f forms. The so-called information explosion
on the one hand and the Increase I n the d a n d for informatlon on
the other hand causes information re t r ieva l to become more and
more complex. Considering the v a r i e t y of forms, subjects, and
I
languages, the problem o f Information retr ieval wlll become much
more compl icated.
In order to alleviate any problem i n t h i s regard, there
must be study of a l l aspects of lnformatlon r t t r l e v a l . Effectfve-
ness o f i n f o r m a t t o n sources depends upon the methods o f indexing
and the arrangement of Information, and the amount o f Informatlon
that these sources provide I n respect to thelr obfect1ves. In a
broader sense the study of the m e t b d s of fnformatim r e t r i e v a l
Includes the study of the effectiveness of a1 1 Informatlon sources
I n d i f fe rent subjects and I n a l l languages.
The reference value o f any informatlon source may be determined
by the usefulness of tha t source I n g i v t n g the kind of lnformatjon
that one seeks, the extent of accuracy, the number o f approaches that
a re avaf lab ia to retr ieve Informatlon, and finally the cost/benefit
of tha t source. I t i s quite Important to be sure that I n a reasonable
amunt of tlmt one can get the Information whIch he I s looking for.
Foskett p l n t s out the problem of Increasing information and
the need for having a systcm that gets one the exact Information that
he wants without delay I n ttm and havlng false drops:
Hawadays, the quantity o f new lnformetlon being generated I s such that no lnd lv idua l can hope to keep pace w i t h even a small f r a c t i o n of It, and the problem that we have to face i s tha t of ensuring that Indlvidualr who need Information can obtain I t w l t h t h e mlnlmbm o f cost (both i n time and In money), and w l t out being ovemhelmed by large rmunts o f Irrelevant matter. P
There arc many studles i n the various aspects o f Informatton
r e t r l e v a t , but so far there are few s tud ies on the evaluation of
i n f o m t l o n sources deal ing w l t h part icular subjects, particularly
those sources which deal w i t h a var ie ty of languages. Neadham, in
3
describing bibliographic organization, points out the Importance
o f the language of documsnts. "Important documents are pub1 ished
in en Increasing number of languages as developing countries produce
mre l iterature. . . 11.3
One of the m o s t important sources of lnformatlon i s the
National Union Cataloq whtch glves the locatlon o f the holdings
of the important research l i b r a r i e s of the Unlted States and Canada,
This ~nvaluable lnformatlon source i s used by many researchers
and scholars, librarians, end students both I n the United States
and other countries I n the wrld. As It 1 lsts many sources o f
infonnatlon i n other languages, i t i s Important to study the amount
of informrt ion tha t i t glves i n respect to each individual language,
Certainly, research on various aspects of t h i s valuable source of
infomation makes i t even more useful.
PURPOSE O f THIS STUDY
Knowlng that - NUC i s used by many l ib ra r ians and researchers
as a tool of reference source, the purpose of t h i s study i s to
Investigate the treatment of Persian materlals i n the National
Unlon Catalog, by comparing the information glven on the catalog
cards f o r the Perslan materlals w i t h those of the American materlals.
The a i m o f th is study I s to f i nd out I f one can get the
i n fomat ion about Perslan mater la ls through as easi ly as when
one Is looking for s i m i l a r information or for slmllar materlals
In the subjects related t o America.
Iran, or anclcnt Persia, has a long h i s t o r y and, as one of
the centers of cfvilixatlon i n the anclent world, ls an ln terest lng
4
subject for many scholarr. I t i s now i n the r a p i d process o f economic
development. I t i s one o f the Important producers of petroleum In
the world. The grawth In the national Income i n recent years Is
amazing. Therefore, the subject of Iran, both as one of the oldest
centers of clvlllzation and as one of the developing countries I n
Asia, I s the subject of study of many scholars both i n l ran and In
other count rf es.
There are many publicatlons about the h i s t o r y , l i t e r a t u r e ,
education, economics and polttlcs o f tran. These pub1 Ications
are not only In the Perslan language, but i n many other foreign
Ianguages. I n addltlon to I ranian libraries, there are many foreign
1 lbrarles which have Perslan Cotlectlons. For instance, according
4 to the fourth c d l t lon of SuCJect Col lectlon there are at least
flfteen l i b r a r i e s In the United States which keep Pcrslan Col lactlons.
Aceordl ng to another source there were more than twenty- two l l b ra r i cs
In the U n l t r d Stater which have Perslan ~ollectlons.~ In addit ion
to those llbrarics which have separate collections of lranlan manu-
scr ipts and pr inted books, there a te many l ib ra r les that do not
have a separate col lection, but they do have books about I ran ef ther
in Engllrh or In other languages.
No doubt NUC 1s used to find out information about various - subjects lncludlng subjects related to Iran. - NUC Is used to see
what books are ava i lab le , or to see where these materials are located.
The question o f t h l r study Is to see I f one can get the needed
information about l ran I n a reasonable way through t h l s source.
As there i s not a subject approach to - NUC for the t i m e being,
and since the Library o f Congress determines and Is the model for
American cataloging practice and the Library of Congress cards
constltutc the majority of t l t l e s ltsted In the NUC, t h i s study - uses the 1973 edi t ion of the L i b r a r y of Congress Catalog--Books:
SubJects as the basis of the study of NUC. I t I s assumed that - NUC w i l l re f lec t much the same characteristics. -
Study of the treatment of Perslan materials i n the NUC - w 1 I l provide a basis for understanding the value of th is reference
source for o b t a i n l ng l nformat ion about other sources o f i nformat ton
on msterlals related to the Perslan I I terature, Pers tan h istory and
the culture of I ran.
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Although the Persian language i s famous as a language of
l i terature, there have been qu i ts a few seIent1f lc studles on the
problems associated w i t h this language In the process of cataloging
and clrsslflcat1on of materials written In th is language or dealing
with Iran. In 1958, Dr. Nasser Sharlfy studied the cataloging of
Perslan works In h i s doctoral dlssertatlan of l l b r a r y science a t
Columbia U n I ~ c r s I t y . ~ He formulated several ruler for t r a n r l i t e r a -
t ion, entry, and descrlptlon of Perslan materials.
In 1970, In another doctoral dlssertatton a t the University
of P i t tsburgh, L Ibrary School, Dr. Hoosheng Ebrami studied catch-
word indexing, subject headlngs, and chaln indexing. He also made
a formulation o f rules for subject analysis I n Farsl (Perstan). 8
There are several other unpublished master's theses from I l b r a r y
schools I n Iran about d l f f e r s n t subjects related to Iranian
6
l ibrarianship. But so fur , to my knwledgt , no one has made a study
of the treatment of Persian materials in the NUC. - Cataloging and clessification are two processes necessary
for organitatlon of materlr lr . Organization of meterlals, I n turn,
1s necessary for In fomat ion retrieval. Many i l b r a r i e s use NUC - for these purposes, There are quite a large number of studies
about classification, cataloging, and subject indexing In general.
One o f such re la t ive ly recent studies 15 by ~ i ~ h f 1 . 1 1 . ~ In t h i s
study on the relatlonshlp of indextng depth and subject catalog
retrieval effectiveness, he proved that there is a pos i t l ve re la -
tionship between the number o f subJect headings assigned to a w r k
and the chance o f being selected by catalog users during ths subJect
search. Consldering these points, the present study attempts to
see I f the catalog gfven for Persian materials In - NUC have the same
subject depth as those o f Amcrtcan materlal s.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Thls study compares two samples o f L l b r a r y of Congress
Cataloq--Bmks:SubJects materials: one for Persian mater ia ls , the
other for American matarlals under the headings selected In the
f I rs t sample. The comparison will be on the b a s f s o f the number
o f subject headings in tuo samples, numbsrs of added entrles, notes,
c l rss i f ica t lon numbers and distribution by the language. This
study attcmpts to f l n d the answer to the following questtons:
1 . What l o the dispersion of the Persian materlals subjects
throughout the Library o f Congress Catalog--Books:SubjectsF The
purpose of t h l s question 1s to see what subjects are mst tIkaly
to be found a b u t Iran. Are these mater ia ls mstly about t h t
h1 s tory , economy, soct a1 rclence, I l terature, education o f l ran
or some other subjects?
2. Uhat Is the proportion of each language? The purpose
of this question 1s to determine t h e language of the documents
about I ranian subjects, knowing the answer t o thls questton, a
researcher wl I 1 l ng to f ind informtlon about L ran through NUC - will be able to prtdlct In w h l c h languages he r i l l probably f i n d
these materlals, 1. e. , he w i l l have an estimate whether these
w i l l be m s t l y Engl tsh, Persian, or another language.
3. Hw many English works have both Dewey Decimal Classl-
f lcat ion and Library of Congress Clasrlflcation? the purpose of
t h t s quest ion Is to understand how useful i s t h l s source In givlng
the Information about classiflcat~on, Although i t I s closely related
to the percentage o f Engl ibh materials, f t w i l l br use fu l to know
what are the chances of f lndlng both DDC and LCC numbers for cards.
4, Uhat slmilarIties and differences ex ts t between Dewey
Oeclmal Classification number and the Library of Congress Classl-
flcatlon number when both of them are asstgned to a given subject7
Do they provide the same concept? Docs i t make any difference Cn
grouping s i m t t a r materlals?
5 + Uhat i s the depth of subject lndexlng? Knowing that
the mre subjec t headlngs assigned to a work the greater the chance
of being selected I n the process of subject search, the purpose of
this question I s to understand the dlfference of subject depth
index o f Persian materlals and American matcrlals in slmilar
subjects.
8
6. Vhat bibllographlcal Information i s g i v e n In the cata-
loging of Persian materiels? Are they treated equally w i t h Amerlcan
mrtsrlals? Samstlmcs a br lc f note I n a catalog card of a book
saves time for the user of the card catalog, For example, a note
may lndlcate whether a book 1 s t rans la ted from the orfglnal source
or fran a secondary source. This Information will be very useful
for a person fntcrestcd In the translation of a particular edftlon.
Therefore, the purpose of t h i s questlon Is to see whet percentage
of Perrlan ~ t e r l a l s have nates and compare them wl t h slmilar
lnformatlon In the second srmpte.
7. Where Is the location of Persian materlals and what
Ilbrary has the largest collect!on about Iran? When a person 1s
doing research about a certain aspect of Iran, I t I s Important
for him to knw the nearest location of the books ha needs. There-
fore, the aIm o f t h i s question Is to determine the location of
the m t e r l a l s In d i f ferent I lbrar les In the United States and
Canada.
8, What other approaches are provided I n these cards to
re t r ieve lnformatlonf Are the average number o f added entr ies
In the sample of Persian materlals the same as those of Amerlcan
materlals?
Chap tcr 2
R E V I E W OF THE LITERATURE
Cataloging and classification are two processes of a broader
subject knmn as the organIzatlon of knowledge. l o Both of them
are equally important f o r information retrleva1. D ls t lnc t ion
should be made between philosophical classification end the l i b r a r y
class1 f lcatlon. Whl le phl tosophical classt f lcat lon arranges knowledge
by f tsclf by c lassi fy ing thoughts and Ideas, l t b rary classlf lcat ion
arranges the recorded know1 edge for specl f I c purposes, as a subject
approach to the avai l ab le col lect lon.
H I S T O R Y OF C L A S S l F l C A T l O N
The idea of classification i s as o l d as human c i v i l i z a t i o n .
Classiflcatlon Is a reflection of the development of concepts that
p r fmi t lve man developed from h i s environment. A t the very beginning
there were only a few concepts, but as p r lmi t lve man found more
concepts, he began to distlngulsh one set of actions or concepts
from another, say day from n i g h t , f ea r from happiness, and so on,
These developments resulted i n c lass i f l ca t lon theorles suggested
by philosophers. The e a r l i e s t tendency t o c lass i fy human knowledge
was suggested by A r f s t o t l e , the Greek philosopher (384-322 0. C . )
w h o d l v f ded "untversal knowledge" i n ten classes: 1 1
Substance
Quant i t y
Qual l t y
Relation
P l ace
7 i me
S l tuatlon or posit Ion
Posltion or acqulred character
Act l v l t y
Pacl v i t y
He distinguished f i v e relat ions: Genus, de f in i t ion , pro-
per ty , difference and accident.
As f a r as the hlstory o f l ibrary classlflcation Is con-
cerned It goes back to the classlficatlon of clay tablets i n the
ancient world. Sayers, I n descrlhlng the hlstory of classlficatlon,
points out:
Our earllest traditions of Ilbrarfes bear t h e i r account of clrsslflcation. We are assured that the c lay tablets I n the Assyrtan l ib rary of Assur--ban--I--pal were d i v i d e d at ieast Into two main c ~ a s s e ~ - - t h o ~ e deallng with the knowledge o f the cart and those dealing w l t h the Heaven--and these subdivided. ?2
He mentions t h a t Aristotlc was the f I r s t one who nude an
arrangement of books, and tha t h i s system of classification was
la ter adopted by Ptolemls. Hawever, t h t earlfest system was deslgned
by Calllmacus (260-240 0. c.), the librarian of the L ibrary o f
Alexanderia I n Egypt. The cata log of Callimacus was called Finakes.
The main classes of his scheme were Poets, land makers, Philosophers,
h i r tor ians, rhetoricians and miscellaneous wr l te rs . l 3 Thest classes
were subdivided by chronological order, subject , and the name of
the a u t h r .
After these ear ly attempts for arrangement of Ilbrary mate-
r i a l s , there is a long interva! which I s characterrzed by nothlng
nm happening in l tb ra r les . In medleval l i b r a r i e s books were
arranged by several general subjects and in each class they had
flxed locations,
Francis Bacon (1561-1626). the English philosopher whose
c lass l f l ca t ton had e great effect in Dewey Decimal C l a s s i f ~ c a t i o n ,
divided the whole humn k n w l e d g e i n t o three categorles; h I story,
which Is the province of memry and includes natural history, c l v ! l
history, l i te rary and eccles iast ica l ; philosophy, whlch 1s the
product of reason and inctudes theology, and, f i n a l l y , poetry,
which i s the product of imaginatfon. 14
In 1643, Gabriel Haude d iv ided h i s book i n to tweive main
classes: 15
Theology Had i cl ne 61 b l lography
Chronology Hl l l t a r y Jur lsdlct lon
Counci l and Canon Law A r t Geography
HI story Phl losophy L i terature
Pol i t i c s
Jacques Charles Burntt (1780-1867), French bocrksel ler ,
dlv ided h l s books i n t o f l v e main c lasses: 16
Theo l ogy Jur isd l c t f o n History
Philosophy tl tera ture
The f u l l tab le o f t h l s classification I s l n eighteen octave pages,
lmnanuel Kent (1724-1804), German philosopher, belleved
there are two factors in genvlne knowlcdgc:17 ( I ) Raw mfer ia l r
whlch are senses of experiences, and (2) the synthetic organiz ing
actlv[t~es of mind, He distinguished four categories o f knowledge:
1 . Categories of quality whlch Include u n i t y , i . e . , the
mind unltes various sensations in to unIty o f an organ, p l u r a l i t y ,
f . t . , the mind ident i f ies and synthesizes each one, and the
total i t y .
2, Categories of q u a l i t y whlch Include reality, negation,
and Itmi tat ion.
3. Categories o f re la t ion whlch include inherence and
subsistence or substance, causal l t y and dependence and c m u n t ty.
4. Categories of m d a l l t y whlch include posslbllity vs.
impossib~lity, existence vs. nonexiotence, necesslty vs . contingency,
He said that things should be put together before they
can be apart. And one cannot see things together unless they are
put together.
L I B R A R Y CLASSlFlCATlONS
The objective of I lb rary classiflcation Is the economy
and Increase In the efficiency i n t h e use of materials. Lrbrary
classlflcation brings things whlch are Ilke and separates those
which are unllke. Another purpose o f I l b r a r y classlficatlon Is
t o establish somc sort o f relatlon between subjects In literature
so tha t t h l s relation allows rnaxlrnum helpfulness In locating Infor-
mation, Rlchardson dlstlnguishes hine types o f classlflcation as
follows: I8
I , Loglcal c l a s s l f i c a t l o n o r arrangement accordlng to the
degree o f likeness.
2. Geomtrlcal classification, or the arrangement according
t o the position f n space.
3. Chronological classiflcation, whlch arrangement Is accordlng
to the posit lon i n time,
13
4. Genetic classiftcation or arrangement accordlng to the
orlgln,
5. H l s t a r f c & l classl f lcat lon, whlch 1s the chronologf cal , gemetr lcs t and genrtlc c tass i f l ca t lons ,
6 . Evolutionary ~Iarsiftcatfon, which arrangement Is
accord l ng to the dcgret o f comp l exl t y . 7. Oynamlc classification or arrangement according to the
order o f power.
8, Alphabetical classlflcatlon or arrangement accarding
to the f i r s t letter o f names.
9. Hathematlcal class1 f Icat ion or arrangement according
to the order of numrtcal symbols.
There are a number o f factors that a f fec t the select lng of
type of arrangements. H i l l s mcnttons e lgh t factors , as follows: 19
I . Type o f the users.
2. Frequency of the users.
3 . Size of the collection.
4. Physical character1 s t I cs of materials for instance,
mlcro form, pr in ted materials, etc.
5. Language of the materials.
6. Value of the matrrlalr.
7. Date of prlntlng, and
8, Temporary slgnlflcance.
The f i r s t l ib rary clessiflcatlon In American libraries was
developad by Thomas Jefferson, president of the United States, u h
mdl f led the Baccrnian Class1 f icat ton. Later Wi I 1 lam furrey Harrls
devised a class1 ficstlon system far a pub1 Ic school I lbrary I n
14
S t . Louis i n 1870. He was a follower of Hegel and the main classes
of h i s scheme were as fo l lws: 20
1 . Science, which Includes phl loaophy, religlon, soc ia l ,
political, and natural science, and useful ar ts .
2. Arts, which includes flne a r t s , poetry, l i terary
miscul l any .
3. H t s t o r y , uhlch Includes geography, t r a v e l , clvil history
and b l b t lography,
Helv l l l Dewey (1851-1931). librarian of the Amherst College,
brought the idea o f declmal c l a s s l f i c a t l o n . The f i r s t edltion of
Dewey Decfmal Clasrlfication was published i n 1876. 2 ' ~c was
fnfluenced by Har r is ' c l a s s i f \ c a t f o n . I t has a relative index
which g i v e s the location wi th relatlon to subjects. One of the
features o f DOC Is t h a t I t provldes detail for those Iibrarles
which need such lengthy class numbers. I t Is one o f the most
widely accepted ctasslflcatlon schemes tha t has been translated
Into many languages. There are ten maln classes which reflect the
area of specialization:
000 Generalia 500 Science
1 00 Ph 1 1 osophy 660 Techno logy
200 Religion 700 Art
300 Social Sclence 800 L i te ra ture
400 Language 900 History
Each maln class i s subdivided lnto ten subclasses, and each subclass
l n t o ten sub-subclasses and so on. I t has practical usefulness,
simplfclty, and mnemonic features.
15
Charles A m 1 C u t t e r (1837-1903), the l i b r a r i a n of Boston
Atheneaum, brought the Idea of d ic t ionary cataloging. 22 The Rules
for Dictionary Cataloque was pub1 ished i n 1876. H i s classl f t ca t lon
Is known as "expansive clas~iflcatlon.~' He was influenced by
Spencer and Comte. I t Is a p rac t i ca l arrangement and consists of
seven schems. The f lrst one, whlch has e ight maln classes, i s
dcslgned for l i b r a r i e s o f one hundred vo~umes and the second one has
f i f t e e n main classes, which I s for larger I l brarles, and the other
schemes fo r l a r g e r I tbraries, Although the f i r s t ed i t i on o f t h i s
clrssIfication was published I n 1879, the c rea to r o f t h i s c l a s s i -
f i ca t i on d ied before he could finish up the l a s t scheme.
In 1894, two Belgians, Paul O t l e t and Htnri Lafontaln,
developed the Dewey Oecimal Class t f l ca t i on to be used I n special
I lbrar ies a l l over the world. 23 This c lass i f i ca t ion I s known as
the Universal Decimal Classlflcatlon (UDC). I t has a r e l a t i v e index
and the main classes are m d i f l c a t l o n s of Dmey Decimal ClassIfl-
cat ion's maln classes. The notat ion allows varlous combinattons
according to form, per iod and language.
The Llbrary o f Congress C l a s s i f i c a t i o n was developed i n
the Library o f Congress when t h i s I l b r a r y mved i n t o a new and
larger que r te t s In 1897. It I s the product of teanwork done under
the d l r e c t o r s h l p o f Herbert Putnam, I ib rar lan o f the Library of
Congress. This classlflcation appeared between 1899-1939, 24 Each
class was publtshed separately. I t has twenty-SIX posslble main
classcs, although not a l l of them are being-used presently. The
maln classes of the t f b r a r y of Congress Classification are as
fal I ws :
16
A General P Languageand Literature
B Phl losophy Q Science
C - F Hfstory R Hedlclne
G Geography 5 Agriculture
H Soclal Sclences T Technology
M Music U-V Mflttary and Naval Sclence
N Fine Arts Z Biography
James Duff Brown (1862-1914), B r i t i s h librarian, pubiishcd
his classif~cation In 1894 as Qulnn-Brmn Scheme. Later , In 1897,
the classiflcatlon was published as the "Adjustable Classifica-
tion.'' F i n a l l y , I n 1906, It was published as t h e "Subject Classl-
f l c a t l ~ n , ~ ' He belleved that every form of knowledge can be traced
to a principle from whlch It has developed, The sequence of main
classes Is based upon mat ter , I I f t , and mfnd record. 25 Hatter
and force generated I I fe and l I fe I n turn produced mind and f i n a l ly
record, He sa id that everything r e l a t l n g to a topic can be put
in a constant place. The maln classes i n t h i s scheme are as f o l lw s :
A Gcnaralla
8-C Physical Sclence
E-F Biological Sclcnce
G-H Ethnology
I Ecology
J-K Phi losophy
L S o c l a l a n d P o l i t i c a l Science
M Language and L i t e ra tu re
H L l terary Forms
0-U H I story
X Biography
Shi al l Ramsrnr! t a Ranganathan (1892-1972) , f ran Ind la,
brought a new approach to classification. His classif icat lon
i s known as Colon Classlflcatlon. I t s f i r s t edition was published
in 1933. H i s theorles o f facet analysls brought a revolution in
classification theory and Ranpanathen re la ted all
facets to "f l ve fundamental concepts"--personal i t y , matter , energy,
space, and time--which generally i s known as PMEST, The order
i s accardlng t o t h i s decreasing pr tnc fp le , that i s , personal i ty
i s the most concrete and t ime 1s the most abstract.
The Bibliographic Classiflcatlon was developed by Henry
Evelyn B l i s s (1870-1955). He was the librarian of the College of
the C i t y of New York and durlng about t h i r t y years of working In
t h i s library he developed t h i s c lass l f l ca t fon , The f i r s t e d i t l o n
of B l b l iographlc Clarr ification was pub1 lshed i n 1935.'~ 01 155
used twenty-s ix l e t t e r s o f the English alphabet f o r the main classes
and arabic numerals for form dlvision, The important aspect o f
h i s c lass l f l ca t lon i s the idea o f b a s i c and subordinate classes,
and also the Idea of "Conscensus." All classes i n this scheme are
based upon four bas lc areas of knowledge:
1. Science . Techno 1 og y
2. History 4. A r t s
This classIflcation i s very popular i n providing d i f f e r e n t needs
In d i f fe rent l ib rar ies . I t i s mnemonic, has a br ief notat ion
and I s unique in having f l e x i b i l i t y by p r o v i d i n g a l t e r n a t i v e loca-
t ions.
Amng the above classifications whlch arc described the
L i b r a r y of Congress Class1 f lcat ion (LCC) and the Dewey Decimal
ClassIficatlon (DOC) whlch are used by many llbrarles and are
glven In the catalog cards of E n g l l s h materials In - NUC w i l l be
compared here. These two classification systems have sorrm s i m l -
laritlts and differences as fo11ows:~*
a) Siml lari ties
1, Both o f them have pract ica l usefulness by provtdlng
k k shelving !ocation,
2. Both of them provide r e l a t i v e locations,
3. The main classes of LCC and DDC reflect the area
of specialization.
4 . They have many problems I n comnon.
b) Differences
I . DDC may be used for any 5 i z t l l b r a r y whlle LCC
was developed orlglnally for I l b r a r i e s o f several million books,
although It can be used for any size 1 lbrary ,
2, LCC has mixed notation, I.c., uses both alphabet
and numbers, while DOC Is pure notation, i . c , , uses only arabfc
numbers (with few exceptions).
3 , The length o f base of LCC I s longer than DDC, i . e , ,
while in LCC there are twenty-six passlble main classes, there are
only ten main classes i n DDC.
4, DOC originally was developed by one person, wh i le
LCC was developed by a group.
5. DOC i s in a few volumes (three volumes for the 18th
edltion) white LCC Is i n several volumes.
6, DOC has many mnemnic features, whl le LCC has
few mnemonic features.
7. As the number of subdlvislons Increases, DOC
becomes too long so that In practice I t i s dlfflcult to be used,
whllc LCC does not have th is problem.
8, DOC was based on the Harris Ciarslflcation which
i n turn was based upon inverted Baconlan Class~f~catlon, while
in preparing LCC a l l schunes were reviewed and It I s Influenced
by a l l o f the prevlous schemes,
A l l c ~ a s s f f i c a r l o n shcemes may be grouped according to
the purpose: 29
I . Traditional, dtductlvc, systematic classiflcarlons.
LCC and DOC arc amng t h l s group,
2. Hon-traditional, lnductlve, syndetlc class1 flcatfons,
UDC, Colon Classlf lcatton, and varlous faceted classifications
arc among t h l s group,
The aim o f a11 these classlflcatlons, I n spltc of d i f -
ferent c r i te r la o f grouping, i s the same. All o f them t r y to
brlng related materials together, B u t any c l a s s l f i c a t f o n system
has Its own l irnltatlons, The c o w n limitation of all these classi-
f i c a t i o n schemcs i s that they are l inear and unidtmensianal. They
provlde only one approach to Information retrieval. Subjec t headings
add another approach to ret r t eva l of i n f o m t ion.
NATIOhAL UNION CATALOG
Many bibliographlcal sources have been developed In the
United States during the l a s t hundred years t h a t certainly influenced
the development o f llbrarianshlp to a great extent . Amng these
the NattonaI Unlon Catalog (NUC), as the central record of the - holdings of the materials In the major research IIbrarles In the
Unfted States and Canada, i s an amazing endeavor of Ilbrary cocrpera-
tlon. Cronln calls it: "a key t o a l l knowledge and lnformatlon I n
book form i n th i s century."30
The h istory o f - NUC goes back t o many years ago. The f i r s t
suggestton of centralized cataloging was by Charles Coff in J m e t t ,
librarian of the Brown Unlverslty and the Smithsonian Inst i tute . 3 1
H i s idea was to prepare stereotype blocks for cataloging cards t o
be used l a t e r for printlng and adopting cards.
Later on, Publishers Weekly began to publlsh t i t l e s l i p s
which were prepared by the I l b r a r l a n s . But t h l r plan ceased a f te r
one year a t a loss. In 1876, Helvl l Dewey, I n a conference, proposed
the preparation af printed t i t les to be used by I ib rar les . I n 3887,
ALA publishing sectlon began p r i n t i n g ca ta log cards fo r American
Catalog but again th ls program was not continued because there
were not suf f ic ient subscrlptlons.
Corn mentions two factors whl ch f a c t 1 i tatc t h e l nterrhange
o f catalog cards: 32
1 . Uslng the cataloging standards which f o l lowed the
publlshlng of Cut ter 's Rulcs for Dictionary Catalogue.
2 1
2. l n t r o d u c t l o n o f standard cards which began a f t e r the
s t a r t l n g o f the p r l n t l n g of cards by the L i b r a r y o f Congress,
The foundation o f NUC was l a l d as soon as the L i b r a r y o f - Congress s t a r t e d p r i n t i n g cards. I n 1901, Herbert Putnam, the
l f b r a r l a n o f the L i b r a r y of Congress, s t a r t e d the exchange of
L ib ra ry o f Congress p r l n t e d cards for cards p r l n t e d by other
~ l b n r i e s . ~ ~ This was the f l r s t step towards preparat lan of a
union cata log. Besides L l b ra ry o f Congress t t s e l f , there were
four other I l b r a r l e s i n t h f s exchange program: New York Publlc
L i b r a r y , Boston Pub1 l c L i b rary , Harvard Un i vers i t y L i brary , and
Crarer L i b r a r y In Chicago. In the f l rs t quar ter o f the twen t ie th
century any attempt I n t h i s regard was located a t the Ltbrary o f
Congress Card D l vlsion.
Although by 1926 t h i s union catalog was increased ta near l y
tmr milllon, s t i l l i t was Inadequate for research needs. As a
response t o the American L i b r a r y Assoclat Ion, John 0. bckefel l e r ,
Jr. gave a g i f t of f l v e thousand d o l l a r s for f i v e consecutive years
to the L i b r a r y o f Congress. During 1927-1932, m r e than s i x m l l l l o n
cards were added. In 1932, the D i v i s i o n o f Union Catalog was
es tab l l shed a t the L i brary of Congress.
Using the p r l n ted cards by l i b r a r i e s brought the problem
o f shortage o f space. As a result there was an Increase I n the
demand for p r l n t ed book cata log. On the o the r hand the need for
research on the p a r t of reference I l b r a r i a n s and scholars demanded
having a book catalog. Therefore the L l b r a r y o f Congress, as a
response to these needs, began to pub l i sh the ca t a log o f cards
represented by t h i s I 1 b rary as o f J u l y , 1942, j4 i t i s the
22
reproduction of a series o f about two m i l l ion cards. Many o f the
cards I n t h i s catalog have been prepared by libraries other than
the L i b r a r y o f Congress, On the other hand, many books i n the
Library o f Congress had no p r l n t e d cards. Therefore t h i s l i s t
was something more and something less than the holdlngs o f the
Library o f Congress. Thfs catalog was issued under the auspices
o f the Assocl at ion of Research Libraries and came ou t i n 167 volumes.
I t covers the period from 1898 t o J u l y 3 1 , 1942. The abbrevfatlons
f o r the l lb ra r les w h i c h had sent the pr in ted cards to the t l b r a r y
of Congress were given for the cards l i s t e d in th is c a t a l o g .
Due to the Increase i n the amunt o f budget f o r the Union
Catalog, the holdlngs o f several other libraries were included In
the Union Catalog. To solve the problem o f continuation, i t was
suggested to have supplements every few years. I n March, 1946,
Halsey Wlllfam Willson, In a pamphlet entftled A Proposed Plan for
Ptintlng Library o f Conqress Cards l n Curnulattve Book Form, suggested
a wetkly supplement t h a t could be cumulated a t the end of t h t
second week, then m n t h l y and annually s i m i l a r to the Cumulatlve
Book Index, The L i b r a r y of Congress modlfled these recommendations
and the final decision was publlshlng a monthly catalog with
quarterly and annual cumulation, Therefore, i n 1947, the Llbrary
o f Congress began to publ ish the Cumulative Cataloq of L ibrary
o f Conqress Pr in ted Cards. T h i s was in nlne monthly Issues, three
quarterly cumulations, but no annual cumulation, In 1948, a supple-
mentary catalog for cards issued August 1 , 1942, to December 31 ,
1947, was pub1 ishcd i n forty-two Th is catalog had 2,600
anonymus and pseudonymous entr ies t o help i n locat lng Information
I n a better way.
I n 1948, the Unlon Catalog was officially changed to the
National Unfon Catalog. Between 1948 to 1950 the holdlngs o f Yale
Unlversi t y L l brary , North Carol lna Catalog, and Unlversi t y o f
Carol tna were e i t h e r rnlcrofllmed or copied and Included i n t h e
National Unlon Catalog,
The next cumulative l l s t o f the Library of Congress, prlnted
cards for 1948-52, came out i n 1953 i n a twenty-four volume catalog
under the t i t l e Library o f Congress: Author ~ a t a l o ~ ~ ~ For the
1949 annual cumulation the t! t l e was changed to L ib ra ry of Congress
Author. Then, i n 1953, the name was made simply Llbrary of Congress
Cataloq. The reason fo r the f! r s t change was the deci s Ion to
publish a catalog arranged alphabetically by the subject. The
t i t l e of t h l s publication was L ibrary of Congress Subject Cataloq. 37
The reason for the second change was to issue the catalog according
tu iypes o f materials, Therefore the t i brary of Congress Catalog
divided I n t o Bmks: Authors, Books: Subjects; Films, Haps and
A t l asses and Hus 1 c and Phonorecords ,
The L i b r a r y of Conqress Author Catalog i s the f i rst five-
year cumulation supplement which includes works cataloged by the
L ibrary o f Congress, as wel l as l i b r a r i e s contrlbutlng i n a coopera-
t i v e program dutlng t h i s perlod. The entr ies not only include
books, but pamphlets, maps, music scores, s e r i a l s , motion pictures
and f i l m s t r i p s . However, l.=nguages other than Roman, Cyrllllc,
Greek, and Hebrew alphabets were excluded.
24
Entries contain main and added entrles with t h e necessary
cross references. The main e n t r y card Is the complete reproductton
o f the cards whlch cons i s t s of the bibl iographfcal descript ion,
tracing, LCC and OOC number and the L l b r a r y of Congress card number.
However, the subject headings and c lass 1 f f cation numbers are those
assigned a t the time o f cataloging these tltles; they do not reflect
any la ter changes. Arrangement i s alphabetical by the name o f the
authors, For the f i e l d of medicine and re la ted subjects the Armed
Forces Medical L ib ra ry Cataloe, later known as the National Library
of Medicine Cataloq, Is regarded as the supplement. Any cards tha t
do not have the classlftcatlon number are e i ther from a l a w I i b ra ry
or they are prepared by other libraries who do not use one of these
classtftcat~on numbers. On the other hand D D C are assigned to
publ icat ions of general i n te res t .
In response to the recornendat ions of the ALA Board on
Amerlcan L i b r a r y Resources and Association of Research t lbrar les
on July 1 , 1956, the L i b r a r y o f Conqress Catalog--Books: Authors
was expanded to include not o n l y reports o f printed cards prepared
by t h e L i b r a r y of Congress but other tl tles reported by other
libraries o f Horth America, The resul t was the National Unlon
Cataloq, 1953-57, publishad i n twenty-eight v o l u ~ n e ~ . ~ ~ This i s
a l i s t of t h e holdings o f f l v e hundred American I l b r a r l e s . Addf-
t lanal l o c a t i o n s far t i t les are g iven to facilitate research. I t
contains e n t r i e s for books, parL1phiets, and maps i n a11 languages,
w r i t t e n I n the Roman, C y r i t . : ~ , Creek, G a e l l c , o r HebraIc alphabet.
I t has main e n t r i e s , ZssrnLial 3 c ~ e d en t r ies and cross references.
25
Volume 27 of t h i s catalog conta ins mus ic and phonorecord ( t i t l e s )
and the last volume i s m t l o n p i c t u r e s and f i l m s t r i p s .
I n 1961 the Nat ional Union Catalog, 1952-55 was pub1 ished
under the auspices o f the Comnlttee on Resources a f the American
t i b r a r l e s of the herlcan L i b r a r y Assoclatfon. This is the Ifst
of a l l monographs pub1 lshed i n 1956 and l a t e r as repor ted to the
Union Cata log Divislon o f the L ib ra ry o f Congress. I t includes the
ho ld ings o f s i x hundred librarles. I t was est imated tha t up to
50 percent o f the cataloging i n l i b r a r l e s i s r e l a t e d t o the ten
~rectdlng years. So t h i s ca ta log was pub1 [shed to help locating
of the t l t l e s . I t lnc ludes e n t r i e s for books, pamphlets, maps,
at lases and broadsides repor ts he ld by the L i b r a r y o f Congress and
many other I i b r a r l e s , But i t i s l i m i t e d tomnographs , The s e r i a l s
pub1 I c s t i o n s , mas te r ' s theses, page a n a l y t l c s , and also reprfnts
in Arabic, C y r l l l l c , Hebraic, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Malayan,
or I n d i e alphabet were excluded. A l s o m o t i o n p i c t u r e s , f i l m s t r i p s ,
phanorecords, B r a i l l e books, and musfc scores are not inc luded i n
t h i s catalog, Each l i b r a r y I s identified by a l o c a t i o n symbol.
The twelve-year cumulat lon, with a d d i t f o n a l locations,
o f the %was publ ished i n 125 volumes i n 1967. The 1968-72
cumulat lon was publ ished I n 1973 I n 119 volumes, the NUC 1973
i n 1974 l n s ix teen volumes, and f l n a l l y , t he HUC 1974 was pub l ished
i n 1975 i n n ineteen votumes.
To have the Nat ional Union Cata log of the prt-1956 years,
the NUC Pre-1956 publication was s t a r t e d i n 1967. It i s es t ima ted
t o be i n 620 volumes and w i l l i n c l t ~ d e more than eleven million
t i t l e s o f m r e than seven hundred research Ifbraries.
26
The L lbrary of Congress Catalog--0mks: Subjects , which was
orlglnally L i b r a r y of Congress Catalog Subjects are published as
fol lws:
20 w l u m s
22 volumes
25 volumes
42 volumes
9 w l u m s
1 1 vol umes
IS volumes
16 volumes
FUNCTIONS OF THE HATIOWL UNION CATALOG
The Natlonal Union Catalopcan be used I n a v a r i e t y o f ways
by the Ilbrarles and scholars. Functions may be summarlzed as
fol lows: 39
1 . I t h e l p s the acqulsltlons I l b r a r l a n I n veriflcatlon, as
a guideline In selectfon, and avoldlng duplicatlon.
2. The cataloging function of the - NUC helps the cataloguer
to f ind the cataloging information for the tltles without having
to go through t h e whole process of cataloging. Therefore, natural l y
there w i 1 l be more uni form1 t y and standardization I n cataloging
prrct i ce,
3. The references and research functlon of the - NUC Is to
help the reference l i b r a r i a n to d i r e c t services, Find and recognize
othar t i t l e s that are not avaf lable i n h i s l i b r a r y . i t also helps
i n locating materials for i n t e r - l ibrary loan.
27
4. F i n a l l y , It re1 ieves l i b r a r i e s from considerable costs
of keeplng a p u b l i c catalog. I t w i l l also serve as depository
catalog; hence, i t w i l l save a lot o f space, and costs o f filling
and keeping the catalog up to date w i l l be reduced.
To summarize, the development of cataloging and c l a s s i f l -
cation or ig inates from the ear ly attempts of phllosophers to classlfy
knowledge. lncreases i n recorded knowledge required library classi-
f lcat ion and the production of catalogs, LCC and DDC are examples
of such endeavors t o organize l l b r a r y materials. % a s a
reservoir of information i s another attempt to f a c i l I t a t e re t r ieva l
of inforrnatlon I n a v a r i e t y of forms.
Chapter 3
RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURE
I n t h i s study the Persian works, or Persian materials,
are defined as a l l the titles listed i n the L ibrary of Congress--
Books:Subjects, under those subjects l i s t e d i n Appendix A ef th is
report. The headings i n t h i s l i s t are der ived from the Library of
tonqress Subject Headings, 8 th edition,40 as w e l l as headings found
i n preliminary study of N& subject headings assigned to works
entered under "IRAN" i n theauthor catalog. In addition t o author
catalog the e a r l i e r editions o f the subject l i s t were also con-
sul ted.
The 1973 edition of the L i b r a r y of Congress--0ooks:Subjeets
was selected as the basis of the study because It includes the
complete tracing. I t i s a subject approach, and permits access
to materials v i a the subject.
The popu l a t ion of the study cons i s t s of (498 t i t l es) Persian
materials and (2756 t it les) American materials l i s t e d under the
subject headings given i n Appendix 0 of t h i s report. These t i t l e s
a r e those which are l i s t e d under s i m i l a r subjects selected i n the
f i r s t sample. By similar subjects Is meant Education i n I ran vs.
Educatton i n U . S . , Persian P m t r y vs. American Poet ry , and so on.
A sample of 5 percent of the f i r s t population of Iranian
materials, i . e . , f i f t y titles, was selected randomly, by using the
28
29
random tables, and was compared wi th another f i f t y t i t les , approxi-
mately 2 percent of the population of American materials. To do
the random sampling, each t i t l e In both populations was given a
ser ia l number and then, using the random tab les , sample one and
sample two were selected.
The fo l lowing procedures were used i n doing th is research:
I , The subject headings were checked i n the L ibrary o f
Conqress Cataloq--Books:Subiects and the t it les listed under these
subject headings were counted and given a serial number, Any subject
heading not l i s t e d in t h i s catalog or l i s t e d but not having any
t i t le under i t was recorded to see haw many of the subjects are
1 l ke l y t o be found.
2. A f t e r selecting the F i r s t sample, those subject headtngs
selected I n t h i s sample were matched to f l n d the slmllar subject
headings i n the American m a t e r i a l . For example, "Pets ian Drama"
was selected i n t h e f i rst sample, so "hnerlcan Dramaff was selected
as one of the subject headings to be examined I n the second sample.
In t h i s way the l l s t for the second sample was prepared.
3. Again the titles Ilsted under the subject heading
l i s t s of t h e second sample were counted and were given ser ia l
numbers. Then f i f t y t i t l e s (1.81%) were selected i n the random
selection, A l l the subject headings selected i n both samples
arc marked by aster isks (*) i n Appendix A and Appendlx 8.
4. The titles selected i n both samples were grouped
according to language to f i n d the answer to question 2 ,
5. A l l the t i t l e s w e r e exarnlned to see which of the tltles
have both LCC and DDC, which have only one, and whfch have none.
Those that had both LCC and DDC were compared with the table o f
language d i s t r i b u t i o n to see i f a l l of them were in English and
also to see if it matched the percentage of Enql ish language.
Then the findings were grouped i n a table.
6 , Those t i t l e s i n the f i r s t sample which had both LCC
and DDC wcre grouped by each c l a s s i f lcat Ion scheme respect lvely
t m see i f there was any dif ference when they were grouped by any
one of these schemes. As there were several differences, the
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n numbers assigned to these t i t l e s were re-examined
to see i f the difference was due to assigning d i f f e r e n t c l a s s i f i -
cat ion numbers for the same subject. Then they were checked
against the L ibrary af Congress C lass i f i ca t ion Schemes and Dewey
Decimal Classificatlan Schemes to determine the classes of titles
in each classif ication. Any f lnd ings were tabled to show these
differences.
7, The number of subject headings assigned to each t i t l e
were counted far selected t i t l es i n both samples. The number of
subject headings were grouped as 0, 1 , 2, e tc . and they were matched
to see which me of the samples has more subject depth.
8. The number o f notes i n both samples was counted and
grauped according to the number of notes per t l t l e , and the resu l ts
were compared,
9. The selected t i t l e s in the f i r s t sample were checked
against the NUC Additional Lesation 1 9 7 3 ~ ' to find our where these
materials are mostly located, Than locations were grouped alpha-
b e t i c a l l y and the l i s t is g i v e n in Appendlx C.
Id. Finally, the number ef added entries was counted and
cmpared for both samples. I n addit ion, the average af added ent r ies
for bath samples was calculated.
ASSUMPTIONS OF THE STUDY
In t h i s study there are several assumptions that should
be considered In deriving any conclusion. These assumptiens are
as follows:
1. tn cataloging and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f Persian materials,
i t should be assumed that subject headings and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n
numbers are careful ly assigned t o these materials, so tha t any
dif ference that appears i n grauplng by each classification scheme
i s mainly due to the difference of the classification rather than
assigning the number, or misinterpretation of the subject cata-
loguer,
2. I t should be assumed that the U . S . Library of Congress
Catalog--0mks:Subjects ref lects a high percentage of the - HUC
so i t re f lec ts any conclusian about the l a t t e r .
3 * T h i s study selects the 1973 edition of the above men-
tioned catalog, i t i s assumed that there 1s no d i f ference between
each year.
4 , The f ina l assumption i s that , i n s p i t e of tbe d i f -
ference in the percentage of the total population fn both samples,
as they are equal i n number they re f lec t the character is t ics of
the to ta l popu 1 a t ion,
L!HlTATIONS Of THIS STUDY
There are certain Iimltatlons i n t h i s study that should
be considered in derivtng any conclusion or general lzat icn:
1 . As there i s no subject approach to NUC, t h i s study - uses L ib ra ry of Congress Catalog--8ook:Subject i n I leu of the
NUC, Although the percentage of materfals in t h i s catalog i s 7
a l m s t equal to the NUC, the conclusions a re l i m i t e d to a cer ta in - extent.
2, As t h l s study uses the subject catalog for the study
of WC, i t should be noted that there are several subjects such
as f i c t i o n that do not lend themselves to any subjects. Although
t h i s catalog l i s t s even such titles It i s posslble the number of
books listed In t h i s catalog i s less than the actual number i n
the Author Catalog,
3 . This study dots not do anythlng w i t h the main e n t r y ,
so thcre might be differences in the determining of the main entry
that might make a difference fn r e t r i e v a l o f information i n either
sample. These differences, i f any, arc dlsregarded.
4. The number o f t i t l e s In the second population i s too
large In respect to the f i r s t population, therefore the number of
samples does not make the same percentage of the1 r populat ion.
To e l iminate th is problem the number of headlngs I n the second
sample was reduced to those which were comparable and where there
was a stmilar subject heading to that selected i n the f i rs t sample.
JUSTlFlCATlON OF THE STUDY
1. The Importance of t h i s study w i l l be for those Iibrarles
which use NUC for searching cataloging and class i f icat ion Infomat Ion - of the Persian materials, because they w l l l know the probablllty
of finding the LCC classlffcatlon, the chances o f f inding a t l t l e ,
e tc .
2, This study polnts out the depth o f indexing, the average
o f added entr ies and many other comparisons. Any f inding i n t h i s
regard w i l l be s guideline f o r lmpravlng the cataloging data, i f
there I s any d e f l clency,
3. The analysis o f the locat ion w i l l be a clue to know
where would be the best place to f i n d mre information about Iranian
m t t r l a l r . So a person interested I n doing research may be willing
to know where mruld be the nearest chance of f inding such information.
4. The comparison of the LCC w l t h DOC w i l l reveal the
d l f f r rences of using either o f these c l s s r l f i c a t i o n schemes. T h l s
w i l l be very useful to understand whlch one w u l d be bet te r f o r
Perstan materials. I f someone Is golng to expand and research the
possibility of adopting these classlfieatlon schemes to s u i t I ranian
needs, he may gain an Idea from the analysis o f t h i s study to know
whlch scheme I s better for concentrating research on areas of
Iranian in terest .
5. Thls study w i l l examine one o f the aspects of the
National Unlon Catalog. This w i l l be useful for knowing the e f f l -
clency of f l n d l n g Information through t h i s source, so that I f there
is any deficiency, It w u l d come to the attentlon o f the authorities.
Chaptar 4
ANALYSIS AN0 INTERPRETATION OF THE COLLECTED DATA
F o i l w i n g the research method described i n the previous
chapter, the following flndlngs were roached for t h i s study:
1 , The f i rst question o f this study was to determlne
the d is t r lbut lon o f Persian materials according to subject. Out
of 125 subject headings o f Persian materials whlch were checked
agaf n s t the L I brary o f Congress Catalog--6ooks:Subjects 1973* 4 1
subject headings were not found. That Is 32.8 percent of the
total subjects t r ied. As t h i s l i s t was prepared by consult ing
both the Library o f Conqress L l s t of Subject Headinqs and previous
editlons of the - NUC, there are actually m r e subject headings than
the holdings of one part icular year. Another p a r t o f t h i s problem
1s partly due to the fact that subject headings change through
time as classlficatlon schemr do, but these changes are not
ref lected In the cataloging data o f the NUC entries.
In s p l t t o f the fact t h a t subject headings change through
t l m , the fact that 32.8 percent of the subject headings were not
found I n the 1973 edrt ion of the subject catalog indicates tha t
there 1s a difference between subjects o f books included In t h i s
catalog from one year t o another, This Is par t ly due t o the fact
that materials publtshed i n these areas In a given tlm may mt
ntcessarlly be those publlshed another t ime .
However, i t should be mentioned that the number o f t it les
Ilsted under different subjects o f t h e catalog was not uniform.
Usually under subjects o f 11 teraturc and h istory there were more
boaks than a subject such as "Horses-- Iran." To show the d i str i -
butlon of the sample by subject the Llbrary of Congress main
classes were selected as a basis for Judgement. According t o
t h i s c r i t e r i a the d is t r ibu t ion i s given in Table 1. The maximum
percentage i s 44 percent which belongs to language and l i t e r a t u r e .
The n e x t highest percentage belongs to class D (22 percent) and
the rest of the subjects are in the minori ty.
Table 1
Subject D t s t r t b u t ion of t h e FI r s t Sample Accordlng to Library o f Congress Haln Classes
Sub f ec t Number of Tltlss Percent of the Total
Class A (General ~ o r k s )
Class 0 ( ~ i s t o r y )
Class H (Social science)
Class L {Education)
Class N (Fine A r t s )
Class P (Language and ~i terature)
Class S ( ~ ~ r i c u l cure)
Class Z (0lbllography)
LW (no class number assigned)
Total
2, The second purpose of t h i s study was t o investigate
the proportion o f each language i n the selected samples. Table 2
shaws that 60 percent of the materials I n the sample o f Persian
materials were in the Persian language and 28 percent i n the Engl ish
language. The other languages i n the sample were French, Arabic,
Russian and Turklsh. There was one t l t l e , or 2 percent, o f the
material which was bilingual,
Table 2
Proportton of the Language In the Sample of Persian Mater ia ls
Language Number o f T I tles Percentage
Pers l an
Engf l s h
French
Arab I c
Russian
Totals
A comparison o f the Table 2 wi th Table 3 , the d i s t r i b u t i o n
o f the language In the second sample, shows that there are higher
percentages o f m a t e r i a l 5 i n the English language. Eighty-six
percant o f t h e materlals are i n English while In the f l r s t sample
60 percent were In Persian and 28 percent In Engllsh. Whtla the
37
f i r s t sample consisted o f the Persian, Engl ish , Russian, French,
Turkl sh and Arabic languages, the second sample consls ted o f
E n g l i s h , Japanese, Russian, Belglan, French and German,
Table 3
Proportion of the Language i n the American H a t t r l a l s
Ca tegor i es Number of T i t l e s Percent of the Total
Engl l sh
Japanese
Russ l an
Belglan
French
German
Totals
3. Another question i n t h i s study was to invest igate what
proportion of the selected t i t l e s have c lass i f i ca t ion numbers.
Knowing that the L i b r a r y o f Congress does not asslgn Dewey Decimal
Classification numbers to foreign t i t l e s , the aim of t h i s question
was to see I f the t l t l c s whlch do not have DOC numbers are equal
to the number o f t i t l e s in t h e languages other than EnglIsh. The
distribution of both samples according to the availablllty of
c lass i f ica t ion numbers i s shown in Table 4.
I n the sample of Persizn m a t e r i a l s 30 percent of the titles
had both LCC and DDC numbers which i s equal t o the number o f English
titles p l u s s bilingual (English-Persian) t i t le i n the tab le of
dis t r lbut fon of language. Eighty-six percent of the American
mater ia ls had both LCC and DDC numbers whlch i s exactly equal
to the percentage of Engtlsh language i n Table 3.
Table 4
Distribution of Both Samples According t o the Aval lability o f the Classlflcation Number
ClassificationSchcmes Numberof Percent Numberof Percent T i t l e s i n the T i t l e s i n the
F i r s t Sample Second Sample
Titles having both LCC and DDC 15 30 43 86
Titles having only LCC 3 1 62 7 14
TItles having neither LCC nor DOC 4 - 8 - 0 - 0 -
Tota ls 5 0 100 50 100
The dif ference I l s s i n the a v a i l a b i l i t y o f the LCC number.
While 100 percent o f the mater ia ls In the American m a t e r i a l s had
LCC numbers, i n the sample o f Persian m a t e r i a l s only 92 percent
had LCC numbers. F u r t h e r invest igat ion shows that the 8 percent
difference belongs to the t i t l e s which are about law subjects which
the Llbrary o f Congress does not provide w i t h classlficatfon numbers.
4, The fourth purpose o f t h i s study was to invest lgate
similarities and differences between the L ibrary o f Congress Class!-
flcatibn number and the Dewey Decimal C lass i f i ca t ion number when
both of these class$ficatlon schemes are a p p l i e d for a given Perslan
t it le , As i t was shmn i n Table 4 , o n l y ' j 0 percent of the Persian
m a t e r l a l s i n the sample had both LCC and ODC numbers, These ti tles
were separated and they were arranged according to the c l a s s i f i -
cation number. fable 5 shows the arrangement of the t i t l es according
to Dewey Decimat Class i f i ca t ion 's main classes. As i t 1s shown
i n t h i s t a b l e , when these materials are arranged by DDC main
classes 40 percent o f mattrfals are in h ls tory , 20 percent i n
social sclence, 13.33 percent I n language, and the rest of the
materials are scattered I n technology, general i t ies, a r t s , and
I lterature, each having 6,66 percent of the t o t a l of the tltles.
Table 5
Arrangement of Selected T i t l e s i n Persian Haterials Sampler According to DOC Main C.tasses
Number o f fttles
Percent of the Total
000 (Generalltles)
300 (Social ~ c i e n c t s )
400 (Languages)
600 (T schno logy)
700 ( A r t s )
800 (Literature)
900 (HI story S ~eography)
To ta 1
*those main cl asses of DOC that were not =ss I gned to the t i t l e s I n the sample (those t i t les having both LCC and DOC) are not mentioned b r e .
Arrangemnt o f the same materials according to the Library
o f Congress classification's main classes reveals differences of
40
the grouping o f the same material by another c lass l f l cat ion .
Table 6 represents the arrangement of the t i t l e s In Perslan mater ia ls
which had both OOC and LCC class1 f lcat ion arranged by LCC main
classes.
Table 6
Arrangement o f Selected Titles i n Persian Materials Sample According to LCC Main Classes
* Main Classes Number of
T i t l e s Percent o f
the Total
0 (History)
H (Social ~ciences)
L (Educa t ion)
N (Fine A r t s )
P (LI terature d ~anguage)
S ( ~ ~ r I cul ture)
Z (01 b l iography)
To ta 1
* Those main classes o f LCC which were not included I n the selected tit les o f Perslan materlals are not mentioned,
The comparison of Table 5 and Table 6 shows that:
(a) While according to DDC 40 percent of materlals are
classlfled as h jstory , according to LCC only 33 .33 percent of the
materials are classified as h lstory .
(b) While in DDC classification 20 percent o f the materlals
a r t c t a s s i f i e d as social science, i n LCC 6,66 percent are regarded
to be soclal sctence and 6.66 percent as education.
4 I
(c) Uhile according to DDC there are 13.33 percent of the
mater!als i n the language and 6.66 percent In l i terature, according
to LCC 26.66 percent of the materials are class l f i e d as 1 I terature
and language,
(d) While according to the DOC 6.66 percent of the m a t e r i a l s
are regarded as a r t subjects, according to LCC 1 3 . 3 3 percent of the
materl als arc classified as art subjects.
(el Although technology i$ not shown I n Table 6 but as
agrlcul Lure Is s subdlvlsion of technology i n the Dewey Decimal
Classiflcatlon. There Is no d i f ference In t h i s p a r t . S i m i l a r l y ,
there i s no difference in the percentages of generalities Iwhfch
includes bibliography) and blbllography In LCC.
There a r t tmr reasons for there dlfferences:
1 . Differences i n the base or the number o f main classes
of these two classtflcation schemes. In LCC education i s regarded
as a maln class whlle i n DOC i t Is a p a r t of Social Science c lass .
SlmIlarly Geography and History In ODC are In one class, whlle i n
ttC t h e y are separated as d i f fe rent main classes. C t terature
and language In t C t are regarded as one class whfle I n DDC Language
and L f terature are two d i f ferent classes.
2. Another reason for differences i s classifying a certa in
t i t l e I n two different subjects when using both LCC and DOC:
-- A t i t l e which war given a polltical science number
in DDC (327) was classified as h i s t o r y i n LCC.
-- A t i t le which was classified as history i n DDC was
g i ven a l i tera ture and I anguage number 1 n L C C .
42
-- Another title which was classified i n DOC as h istory
was classified as fine ar ts i n LCC,
To show these dlffercnccs the main classes of both classi-
flcatlons as shawn I n Table 5 and Table b are combined i n one
table, Table 7 represents the differences of using d i f f e r e n t
classiflcat~on schemes.
Table 7
Dtstrlbutlon of Selected T i t l e s I n Persian Haterlals by Haln Classes of LCC and DOC
DC 00 300 400 600 700 800 900 Total Gtner- Social Lan- Tech- A r t s Litera- Hlstory
LC alitics Scfence guage nology ture Geography
H bocl a1 Scl encc)
H (Fine A r t s )
P (L i terature & Language)
z . ( ~ 1 iography) 1
Total 1 3 2 1 1 1 6 i 5
Table 7 not only shaws the difference that i s caused due
to the appl icat ion of each c l a s s i f i c a t f o n but i t shows differences
that are caused by c l a s s i f y i n g c e r t a i n titles i n two d i f f e r e n t
subjects. The number of selected t i t l e s in Persian mater ia ls ,
i.e., those t i t l es which had both c lass i f i ca t ion numbers, are
tm small to make any gentra l lzat ions, but certa in ly these d i f -
ferences In c lass i f ication show that further research on the
classification schemes and cmparison of the resul t o f using them
w u l d be an in te res t ing subject. Particularly, further study on
the appl icat ion of LCC and DDC on Persian materials may be use-
f u l to find out which one would be more suitable to be used for
classifying Perslan materials.
5. The f i f t h question of thls study was to investigate
the depth of subject indexing of Persian materials i n canpartson
to s imi la r mater ia ls related to American subjects. The number
o f subject headings i n both samples was counted and they wire
grouped accordIny to the number o f subject headfngs assigned ta
each tItle, Table 8, on page 44, represents the d is t r ibut ion of
both samples accordlng to the number of subject headings.
The man for both samples can be calculated as follows:
Table 8
Canparison o f the Subject Indexing i n Both Samples
Numbarof N u n b e t o f T I t l e s Percent Hunberof T i t l e s Percent Subject I n the F i r s t In the Second
Head l ngs Sample Samp 1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
The contparlson of the mans of the two samples ind icates
that, relatively, the h e r i c a n materials have a deeper subject
treatment than Persian materials.
6 . The s i x t h question of t h i s study was to investigate
the extent o f blbllographical information other than descrtptlon
of the author, t l t l e , fmprlnts and collation. This study was
interested to know the amount of addltlonal Information that was
provided I n the notes. Therefore the number of notes i n both
ramples were counted and they were grouped according to the number
of notes per t l t l e . Table 9 shows the comparison of notcs i n
t r ~ o samples.
Table 9
Comparison o f Additional Information i n Catalog Cards of Both Samples
Number o f Notes Number of T I t i e s Percent Number of T i tl es Percent Per Tf tle in the F l r s t i n the Second
Sample Samp I e
0 9 18
I 24 48
2 12 24
3 5 10
Total 50 1 00
The average o f notes i n each sample i s c a l c u l a t e d as follows:
The comparison o f the two mans for addltlonal information
shows that Perslan materials have r e l a t i v e l y larger numbers of
notas per t i t l e . Par t o f t h i s difference may be due to the fact
that i n many Persian materials the content i s given or the cover
tltle Is nsntioned to shaw the difference o f t i t l e page w i t h cover
title.
7. Another purpose of th is s tudy was to f i n d out the
location of the major libraries where one can obtain the materials
about Iran. To f u l f l l l this purpose, the maln entries o f selected
titles were checked In 1973 but K, further location was registered.
Then t i t l e s mre checked against t h t Reqlster of Further k c a t l o n s
f n NUC for 1973* fable 10 presents the locat ion o f Persian per - title in the ranplc af ParsIan m a t t ~ l a l l .
Table 10
Per Tltle Locations o f the Persian H a t t r f a l i Sample
Pet Tltle Location Nwber of T I t les Percent
1 locatlon
2 locations
3 locations
5 locations
6 locations and more
Total
The alphabetical l i s t of t h s r l ibraries Is gfven i n
Appendfx C of t h i s report.
8. F i n a l l y , the last questlon In t h i s study was to investl-
gate what other approaches other than subject approach are available
I n the catalog cards of Persian materials I n comparison w i t h
American matertals. To determine the answer to this question,
the added entrles I n both samples were counted and were grouped
acccrrdlng to the numbcr o f added entries per t i t Ie, Table 1 1
# / fm8?8S the numbcr of addcd s n t r l t s i n both samples.
Table 1 1
Comparlsan of Added Entries of Both Samples
Number o f Added Number of T i t l e s Percent Number of Titles Percent. Entries Per T i t l e In ths f t r s t i n thn Second
Sample Samp l
5
8
Total
The average of added entr lcs for both samples 1s calculated
as fol lows:
The comparison o f average of both samples shows that the
average of added entrtes for both samples are equal.
The tw samples of Persian and Amerlcan mater ia ls were
selected randomly and were compared as It was described In the
preceding chapter, Regarding the assumptlcns and Itmitations o f
t h i s study the following results were obtalned.
1 . The dlsptrston of subjects throughout the L i b r a r y of
Congress Catalog--8ooks:Subjeets d i f fe rs from one year to another
because many subject headings were not found in the 1473 edit ion
w h i l t there subjects were gathered by consulting different edltfans
of t h i s catalog. However, under some subjects more titles are
llsted and probably these subjects r c m l n rmre or less constant i n
every edltlon. These subJccts are mostly Persian literature and
the hlstory of Iran,
2, The wmpositlon of both languages dlffers, While
60 percent o f the t i t l e s In the Persian mater ia ls sample were
I n Persian and 40 percent In other languages, i n the sample of
American materials 86 percent were In English and only 14 percent
in other languages, Whl l e 28 percent of t h t Perslan materials
were i n English, there were no Persian titles i n the American
material sample.
3. The higher percentage of Engl 1 sh language mattri al s
in t h t second sample resulted i n a higher percentage of catagorfes
of t i t l e s having both LCC and DOC, mainly because the L i b r a r y of
Congress assigns Dewey numbers to English tltles. The analysls of
the classiftcatlon number of both samples s h e d that comparatively
larger numbers of tltles i n the Amerlcan materials have c lassi -
f ication numbers.
4. The analysis of tftles i n the Persian materials that
had both DOC and LCC numbers s h e d that grouping of t i t l e s by
e i ther of these classifications makes a difference In positIan
of a t i t l e as being i n a c e r t a l n main class. P a r t of these d i f -
ferences Is due to differences of the maln classes I n each classl-
f ication scheme and part of i t Is due to the f a c t that l n the
curds o f t h e sample dl fferent class numbers ( 1 ,e., d i f fe rent con-
cepts) were assigned to a given subject.
5. The subject depth of h r l c a n materials w i t h an average
of 1.50 i s greater than Perslan materials which have the average
of 1.18 subject headings per tl t l e .
6. On the other hand t h e average number of notes I n Pers Ian
materlals was higher than the average of notes of American materials,
i .e. , 1.26 per t i t l e notes for Psrslan matertals vs. 0.56 for
American materlals.
7. The number o f added entrlss In both samples was equal.
The above comparison shows that Persfan and American
materials arc equally treated In the Library of Congress Catalog--
8ooks:Subjects and, assuming that t h i s catalog represents a higher
percent o f the t i t l e s i n E, t h i s study concludes t h a t Persian
and American materials are approximately equally treated i n the
NUC. Many differences In the analysts of the samples of the study - are due to the di f fcrences i n the cmpos i t ion of the 1 anguage In
each sample. Further invest igat ion on the locationof Petslan
materials showed that 24 percent of the mater ia ls have more than
50
one location and 12 percent have mre than three locations, The
l i s t of these locations Is given i n Appendix C ,
RECOWENOAT t ONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
The Investigation of Perslan m a t e r i a l s in this study showed
t h a t there are other problems to be studled In this regard, The
fa1 ! w i n g s tudles a t e recommended as future research topics:
i. Investigatton an Persfan materials In diffrrent editions
of the L ib ra ry of Conqress Catalog--0mks:Subjects and understanding
the reasons for subject change from one year to another.
2. Comperlsm o f I sample o f Ptrslan materials I n t h i s
catalog w i t h a sample of the t i t l e s In - HUC that are about I ran
t o see if thls catalog Is reptesent ing the E. 3. Canparison of Perslan materials classlfIcetlon numbers
i n a larger sample t o see the differences of using e i ther of these
classf fications.
4. Study on salsction of main entr ies for Persian materlals
i n d i f fe rent cmtalogs t o sae I f there I s unlfarmlty i n selecting
Perslan nams as main entrler,
5. Ccmparlson of Perslan materlals w i t h anather language
other than English t o see what would be the difference.
6 . Usl ng the same study by dl rect approach to - NUC through
determining a series of w i n entries and selecting a sample from
MJC . -
REFERENCES
Iu, 5. 6570 the Aerorprse Hedl cal Research Laboratories. Information Storaqe and Retr ieval: A Survey (Uashi ngton, 0, C. : U. S. Government Prlnt lng Offlce, 1963), p. I ,
'A. C. Forkett. The Subject Approask to Information (Hamden: Archon Books and 011va BV
3 ~ . 0 . Neadham. Orgdnlring Knwlcdse in Librar ies , an lntrodustion to lassi if i ~ ~ e u t s c h , 9641, p . 9.
Ash, Subject Colloctlon; A Culd. to Special Book Collactlons and Sublect Emphasis as ~e~-by ?cqe, Pubtic and Special Llbrarles and Museums i n the United States and eanada,(4th ed.] ( ~ e w York: Bowker, 19741, p. 908.
5 ~ a s ~ e r Shari fy , Catalog l n p of Pars i an Works, Ins1 udlnp Rules for Trans1 i t rat lon, Entry and Descrtpt Ion (Chlcago: h r l can Lf brary Association, 1959), p. 1 .
6 ~ . S. L ibrary o f Conarerr Catalog--Bookr:Subjests, A Cumulative L i s t of K r k s Represented b 1 n ted Cards 1973 (Washington, 0. C.: The L f b
7 ~ h a r l f y , op. s l t . , Preface.
8 k u s h m g Ebra i n l , and Chain Indexinq: Fomul Farsi [PI ttsburg: Unlvtrsl ty o f P I t tsburg , 1970, Ph.0, D l ssertatlon) 2-Po-
lOKeith Davison, theory o f Classlflcatlon: An Exanlnatlon Guldsbook (London: Blngley, 1966), p. 46.
"8ohden 5. Wyn~r, 4ntmdustlon to Cataloqlng and C1assl- f Ication, 4th ed. (Rochester, Ncw York: Libraries Unl l m i ted, 1971 1, -93.
12w. C. Bcnrick Sayorr, A Hanual of C l a s s i f i s a f ion for Librarians, 4th ed. rev. (London: Andre Deutsch, 1967), p. 110,
w
I7wynar, op. c l t . , pp. 194-95.
I 8 ~ r n e s t Cushlng Richardson. "Classi f icat ion: Theoret leal and Practlcall' ( ln ~ t a d e r i n ~ l a r r l f i c a t l o n and Descriptive Cata- loqinq, ed. by Ann F. Painter . Washington, 0. C.: HCR/Hicro Card Edlt lon, 19721, pp. 35-43.
J H I I I , A Hodern Voutllna of Library t l a r r i f l c a t l o n , 6 t h ed. (London: Clopman & H a l l , 1968). Chapter 1 .
2 0 ~ a y e r s , op. c l t . , pp* 124-25.
21~ecdham, op. cT t . , pp. 94-104.
22~helma Eaten, The Development o f C lass i f l ca t lan In America ( i n The Role of C l a s s l f l c a t l o In the Modern Amerlcan L ibrary . Papers P r e s p i no 1 s Graduate schocrl of Library Scltnce; November 1-4, 1959. Champaign, I1 1: l l l l n i Unlon Bookstore, 19591, pp, 8-3.
Z4wynsr, op. c i t . , pp. 242-62.
Z5~ncvclopcdl'a of ti brar ies and Infomat Ion Sci en Vol. 3 ( ~ a w Yorh:
27~cedhan, op. c i t . , pp. 104-108.
28~aul S. Dunkln, Catslaqlnq U.S.A. (chicago: Amcrican Library Assoclatlon, 19691, pp+ 102-03.
2 9 ~ n n F. Painter , Modern C l a r s l f l s a t i o n Theory ( I n Reader in Classification and D e ~ c r i p t i v e Cataloging, op. c l t . ) p p . m 6 .
30~ohn W , Cronin, I1The National Unfon and L l b r a r y o f Congress Catalogs: Problems and Prospects," L ib . A , , 34:77-96, 1964.
3 1 ~ o h n M. Dowron,ItA H l r tory of Central lzed Cataloging," L i b , Resources L Tech. Ser. 11:27-43, P. Winter, 1967.
3 2 ~ . F, Stousrt, L i b r a r y Catalogs Changinq Dimension (Chi cago: Un i vers i t y Press, 1964) , p. 78.
3 3 ~ . G , 0, Backewell, A Manual of Catalogins Practice (Oxford: Pergemer Press, 1972). p. 21 .
3 4 ~ . 5 . Library of Congress, A Cataloq of Books Rcprcrcnted by L t b r a r y o f Congress Prlnted Cards Issued t o July 3 1 , 1312 (Ann Brbor, Michigan: 1942-46 ) , 167 vols.
3 5 ~ . S. Ltbrarv o f Conaress. A C a t a l o ~ o f Books Re~resent td
j6u. 5. Library of Congress ,Author Catalog: P Cumulatlve L l s t o f Works Represented by ~i b r a t y r 1948-1952 (Ann Arbor, Hichlgan: J, U. Edwards, 19531, 24 v .
3 7 ~ . S . Library o f Congress Cataloq 0mks:Sub]ccts 1950- ( ~ n n ~ r h r r
38tJatlonal Union Cataloe. A Cumulatlve Author L i s t Repre- sented by l i b r a r y o f Congress Prlnted Cards and T I tles Reported by Other American t l b r a r i e s 1956- (washington: The t l b r a r y ) ,
40~. 5. L i b r a r y o f Congress. Subject Cataloging D l v i s ion. L l brary of Conqrtss Sublect Hcadlngs, 8 th ed. (Washington, D. C. : h e L l b r a r y , 137€), 2 wls.
b l ~ a t tonal Unlon Catalog REqlstcr of Additional Locat ions 1973 ( ~ a s h ' l n ~ t o n : L lbrary o f Congress, 19751, 2 vols.
Christ, J. H. Concepts and Sublcct Headinqs: Their Relation i n Information Retrieval and Llbrary Science. Mctuchen: Scarecrow press, 1972. 174 p.
Cronin, J. U. "The National Union and Llbrary of Congress Catalogs: Problems and Prospects," L l brary Quarter ly , v , 34, 1964, PP. 76-96.
Proposal f o r the Natfanal Union Catalog, Over 1956 ~ n p r i n t r . London: Monsell, 1967. 96 p.
Deoal, A . R. "lnterrelattd Theories and Organization of Knowledge," Herald of L i b r a r y Sclence, 12: 198-200, AP-Jt , 73.
Ounkin, Paul 5. Cataloging U.S,A. Chicago: American Library Assocl a t Ion,
Foskett, A, C , The Subject Approach to Information, am den: Arcten Books, 1969. 310 pb
Hickey, Oorolyn J. Problems i n Organlzlng Library Collecttons. New York: W k e r , 1972, 206 p.
Hills, J. A Hodern Outltns of L l b r a r y tlessificatlon. 6th ed, London: Clophen and Hall, 1968.
Hurphy, A. H. "Use of Copy that Camera In Card Production Unlversl ty Library , L ibrary Resources and Tech. Scrv. i3:231-38, S u m r 74.
1968-1972 Yulnguennlol edi t ion of the Natlonal Union Catalog, L i b r a r y o f Congress Information Bul let in , 33:A 213-16 all 74,
Painter , A. F., ed, Class1 f icatlon: Theory and Ptact ice. Drexel L lbrary Quarter ly 074 Issue.
Painter, Ann F. Readers i n Classificatton and Descript ive Cataloginq Washington, O , C.: HCR/Micro 23rd Editlon (3721 320 p.
Ranz, Jim. The Printed Book Cataloque I n American ~lbrarles: 1723-1500, Chicago: ALA, 1964. 144 p.
Richmond, Phyllis. Transformation and Organization of Information Contents: Aspects of Recent Research i n the Art and Science of ~lrJslfication. 107,000 presented at the FED Conference to Washington, 0, C. 1965.
Rowland, Arthur Ray. The Catalog and Cataloglng. Hamden: Shoe Str ing Press, 1969, rn
Sayers, W, C . 0, A Hanual of C l a s s i f i c a t i o n for Librar ians. 477 cd. Completely Revised and P a r t l y Rewritten by Arthur Haltby. London: Deutsch, 1969. 404 p.
Shore, Louis, "The National Union Catalog of the Unl ted States ," L l b r a r y Association Record, Vol, 55 , 1953D pp. 178-82.
Strout, R. F. L ibrary Catalogs Chanqing Dimensions, the Twenty-el ghth Annual Conference o f Grodus t 1; brary School. Chicago: Universi ty of Chicago, 1964. I27 p.
Symns, A. K, "Enlarging LC Copy: a Nm System," Library If ~226-33. Su-r 74.
To Heet the Lnformatlon Crises: k w Methods of lndexlng and Sublect Analysis ( I n Doyle, L. B. Inforrmtlon Retrieval and Processing, Los Angtles: M e l v i l l e Publlrhlng Company, 1919, pp. 170-88.)
U. S. L ibrary of Congress - General Reference and B l b l iography D i vislon -- Natlonal Union Catalog Reference and Related Services. Camp. by John U, Kimball. The Ll&rary,- '
U. S, Library o f Congress Catalogs. National Union Catalog Reqlster of Additlonat Locations. Washlnqton, D m C.: The Library, 2 v. m5.
Wynar, Bohdon S. Introduction to Cataloglng and Classiflcation. Rochester, New York: Llbrarles Unlimited, 1971, pp, 192-202,
SELECTED L l S T OF PERSIAN HATERIALS
The subject headings I d t n t l f l e d by a cross (x ) were not
found In the 1973 td l t ton of the Library of Congress Catalog--Books:
Subject. Those subject headings wl t h an aster isk (*) on the left
side lndlcates that i n the process o f random sampling I t was
selected i n the sample o f Perslm materials.
Agricultute--Economic Aspects--Iran.
Agrlcul turs--Iran.
Anthrop-Ccography--Iran.
Architecture, lranlan.
Arch f tecture-- l ran.
Art, Iranian,
Art-- l ran.
Authors, Iranian.
Banks and banking--Iran.
01 r t h control-- l ran.
Budget-- l ran.
Catalogf ng of Persian Li terature.
Children's l i te ra ture , Persian.
Ci t ies and towns--Iran,
C i t t c r and tcwns--planning--Iran.
Cltttanship--1ran.
* C i v i l law--Iran.
X C i v i l service--Iran.
X Cfvl i i t a t i o n , I ranian.
* Cammrcial Ian--Iran.
Comnunity devclopmnt--Iran.
Cooperation--I ran.
Costs and standards of I lv ing- - I ran.
Criminal law--Iran.
X l h m s t i c relations--Iran.
X Earthquakes-- I ran,
X Earttwork--Iran.
* Educatton--Iran.
X Excavrtlons ( ~ r c h e a l o ~ ~ ) - - l r a n .
X Factories-- l ran,
Farm produce-- l ran.
Fert 1 l i zers and manuresm- l ran.
X Flags--Iran.
* Food consumptlon-- l ran.
Food supply--Iran,
Fo t ts t and forestry-\ran.
Forest ecology-- l ran.
Geology--Iran,
X T;overnmtn t owners hl p-- l ran.
Horses-- l ran.
I1 l l tracym-Iran.
Illuminatlon of books and manuscripts--1ran.
l n c m tax-- I ran.
Industrial Im and Ieglslation--Iran,
1 ndur t ry-- I ran.
Industry and state--Iran.
Inheritance and transfer taxo-Iran.
Insurance, Health--Iran.
Insurance, Social--1 ran.
lnternatlonal tabor Organlzatlon--Iran
I nves &men t s , Fore l gn-- l ran.
Investments, Forelgn--taw and ItglslatIon--Iran.
I ran.
I ran I n the Hadith.
Iranian languages
l ran1 an I 1 teratura.
Iranian philology.
Iranian studlsom
I ran l ans . Labor laus and legislat ion-- Iran, ,
Labor supply--Ifan.
Land tenure-- I ran.
L a w - l ran.
L i breries-- I ran.
Manpower-- l ran.
Hanuscr i p t s , Pers l an.
Maritime Law--Iran.
Market survey-- l ran.
Harketing--Iran.
Marketing of l ivestock--1 ran.
Hi l 1 t a ry offenses-- Iran.
Hi l i taw rervlce, Compulsory--1 ran.
Hlnes and mfnlng resources--Iran.
Mining law--Iran.
Hems-- l ran.
Mamas, Persian,
Names, Persona 1 -- I ran.
National Incam--Iran.
Old Perslan fnscrfptIons.
Old Perslan language.
Optimum traden-Iran*
Paint fag, I ranlan.
Peasantry- l ran.
Persian c a t .
Pers 1 an drama.
Persian f ict ion,
Persian Ful f Reglons
Perslan Gulf States.
Persian imprints.
Pe rs i an I anguage.
Pers lm 1 i terature.
Persian periodicals.
Persian phtlology.
Persian poetry.
Persian prose I 1 terature .
Ptrslan w i t and humr.
Petroleum Industry and trade--Iran.
Petroleum law and leg is la t ion .
Philosophy, Perslan.
Physicians--tlcensed--Iran.
Poets, Perslan.
Polltlcal part ic ipat ion- - I ran,
Postal service--!ran.
Pottery-- l ran.
Pottery, I rani an.
Press-- t ran,
Prfces--1 ran.
Property--Iran.
Publ i c heal th-- 1 ran.
Quatrains, Persian.
Quotat Ions, Pers Ian.
Ra i l road 1 aw-- l ran.
Raln and ra in fa l l - - I ran .
Recording and tegist rat ion- - I ran.
Rel lglon--I ran,
Shippf fig--! ran.
Social class-- l ran.
Soi !$-- I ran,
Tales, Persian,
T a r i f f - - I r a n .
Taxa t I on-- l ran.
Trade marks--Iran.
Vocational education--Iran.
Water, underground--! ran,
SELECTED L IST Of AMERICAN SUBJECT HEADINGS
The following l f s t 1s the l ist of subject headings which
were selected to be equal to those subject headings whlch were
selected i n the process of random sampling for the Sample of Persian
materials. Thosa subjects which were not comparable were eliminated.
The cross ( X j on the left slde means that the subject heading was
not listed i n the 1973 edltlon of the Library of tonqress Catalog--
Books:Subject, Those hcadlngs Identified by an aster isk(* ) are those
which a r t selected I n the process of random sampling of the second
sample.
Amri can drama.
Amrlcan 1 i terature
Amcri can per lodl ca I s.
American poetry.
American prose l i te ra ture .
Archi tecture--U,S.
A r t , American.
Budge t--U. 5.
C i v i l law--U.S,
Comnercial law--U.S.
Education--U.S.
Food consmptlon-4.5.
International Labor brganlzation--U.S,
Hanuscri p t s , American.
Taxation7-U.S.
* U.S.
--Description and t r a v e l ,
--Forelgn relations,
- -Hi story.
--intellectual I l f e .
--Polltfcs and government.
LIST OF THE LOCATIONS O f THE P E R S I A N MATERIALS
OF THE SELECTED SAHPLE
The following l i s t Is the alphabetical l i s t o f the l i b r a r i e s
whlch had the Perslan materials as indicated by the sample. The
abbrev la t ion i n parentheses are the locatlon symbols used i n - NUC.
The column 1 represents the number o f t i t l e s i n these l i b r a r i e s
as Indicated by the samples. Column 2 shows the percent of the
total tttlcs, I t should be noted that as a l l t i t l e s I n the sample
had LC card numbers they are avat l a b l e I n the L i b r a r y o f Congress,
Therefore a t least one location for each t i t l e i s the L ib ra ry o f
Congress,
Name o f the L i b r a r y
Brooklyn Pub1 lc L ibra ry (NB)
Ccn t e r for Research 1 i braries --Illinois ( IcRL)
Hatvard Uni vers i ty - Cambri dge (HH)
Louisiana State U n i v e r s i t y , Baton Rouge (LUI
Hichlgan State Univers i ty - East Lansing (HI EH)
Horth Carolina State Univcrslty a t Ra le igh (NcRS)
Number ( 1 1 Percent (2)
Name o f the L ibrary Number ( 1 1
Oh to State Uni vers i t y , Columbus (OU) 1
Percent (2 1
Pennsylvania State Unlversi t y , Unl v t r s i ty Park (PS t )
S t , Louis Public Library 2
State Un ivers i ty of New York a t Buffalo [NEtuU)
U.S. Department o f State L ibrary 1
University of British Columbia, Vancouver-Canada (Ca8Ve~)
Unlvcrsl t y o f California, Santa Barbara (cuse) 1
University o f Illlnols, Urbana ( l u ) 1
Univers i t y of Kentucky, tex i ngton (KyU) 2
University o f Michigan ( ~ i u ) 1
Universjty o f V l rginla, Char ie t tesv l ! le ( V I U ) 1
University of Washington, Seattle (Waul 1
V l r g l n l a Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg (VIBlbv) 1 1
Uashlngton U n i v e r s i t y S t . Louls (H-SW) 1
Yale Unfversi ty , New Haven ( C t Y ) 5
Yale Universf ty--Kl l n e Science Library (ctY-KS) 2