The Library of Congress >> Especially
for Librarians and Archivists >> StandardsThe Library of Congress >> Especially
for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards
HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List
DATE: January 15, 2026
REVISED:
NAME: Renaming of Subfield $a in Field 041 in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format
SOURCE: OCLC, in consultation with OLAC
SUMMARY: This paper proposes removing the term "separate title" from field 041 (Language Code) of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format.
KEYWORDS: Field 041 (BD); Language Code (BD); Subfield $a, in field 041 (BD); Separate title (BD)
STATUS/COMMENTS:
01/15/26 – Made available to the MARC community for discussion.
In reviewing field 041 (Language Code) for OCLC's paper 2025-DP14, we noticed three issues that were not central to the discussion paper, which was focused on the relationship between fields 041 and 008/35-37. We described these three issues in the discussion section of the paper. MAC asked that these issues be addressed in two discussion papers for the Midwinter 2026 meeting. This paper addresses ISSUE 1 from 2025-DP14: The use of the terms "separate title" and "separate titles" for field 041. OCLC has worked in consultation with OLAC on this paper, as OLAC is the cataloging community focusing on audiovisual formats.
In our previous paper, one of the questions we asked was "What does 'separate title' mean in the name of subfield $a (Language code of text/sound track or separate title) and in the example explanations?" No MAC members provided a definition of this term in feedback submitted prior to the meeting or at the meeting. Most responses indicated the term should be reviewed and specialist communities consulted.
One exception to this feedback was that of the RDA Steering Committee. They provided this feedback : "It is our understanding that this term is meant to indicate when the resource being described has separate titles in different languages. That is, different language expressions of the same or different works are embodied in the manifestation described by the MARC record. It would be very useful for transforming MARC into RDA if this aspect of a resource could be made separate from the situation where multiple languages are used in a single expression, e.g., 'If a motion picture or video recording has dialogue in multiple languages (different characters speaking different languages)'." We are confident that is not the meaning of the term, which is known in official RDA as a parallel aggregate (and often called "parallel text" in cataloging situations), and we believe retaining the term "separate title" would have little utility in transforming MARC into RDA even if it did mean that because a publication with the complete text in English and French and a publication with different text in two languages (e.g., mostly in English with some text in French) would be coded the same way in field 041: $a eng $a fre.
The term "separate title" is used in the name of subfield $a (Language code of text/sound track or separate title) and two other places in the field 041documentation:
The term "separate title" is not explained anywhere in field 041 or anywhere else in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format. Based on our research, we discovered that this term was used in USMARC in field 041. We consulted a digitized 1988 publication of USMARC format for bibliographic data : including guidelines for content designation. All the current uses of "separate title" on the 041 page appeared the same way in that publication of USMARC, including the name of subfield $a. In the Content Designator History for field 041 in USMARC, it lists $c Languages of separate titles (VM) [OBSOLETE] and says, "In the visual materials specifications, subfield $c was made obsolete in this field when subfield $a was redefined to include languages of separate titles in 1972. Prior to that time, subfield $a was used only for languages on a soundtrack." We also consulted a digitized 1970 publication of Films, a MARC format, which contained this instruction on use of the 041 field: "This field will be used when any of the following conditions exist: 1) the soundtrack has different language versions; 2) the accompanying sound (discs, tapes, etc.) has different language versions; and 3) the overprinted titles (subtitles) or separate titles (for silent films) are in different languages." This usage in Films, a MARC format indicates "separate titles" mean the same thing as "intertitles" in the current MARC 21 041 field information. Thus, the term "separate title" should have been removed in subfield $a and other places when subfield $i was added for intertitles by proposal 2019-05.
We also searched many cataloging documents current and obsolete for the phrase and variations of it like "separately titled." The term "separate title" is not used anywhere in RDA, ISBD, or AACR2. The terms "separately titled works" and "separately titled part" are used in AACR2 instructions to describe content within a resource that has its own title. The phrase "separate title" is used in AMIM 2nd edition twice with the same meaning as the terms in AACR2. Even in AMIM, a cataloging standard designed for older film formats, the term "separate title" is not used to mean intertitles for silent films.
Because our proposed changes do not change the current practice involving subfield $a, we believe it is merely a renaming, not a redefining or redescribing of the subfield.
In field 041 (Language Code) of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format, make the following changes:
(Note: changes indicated by strikethroughs and underlining)
Replace term "separate titles" with "intertitles" in this bullet:
- The overprinted titles (subtitles) or intertitles
separate titlesfor silent films are in different languagesClean version
- The overprinted titles (subtitles) or intertitles for silent films are in different languages
Rename subfield $a to delete "or separate title" and replace the slash between "text" and "sound track" with an "or:"
$a - Language code of text
/or sound trackor separate titleClean version:
$a - Language code of text or sound track
Two examples use the term "separate titles" in the explanation. We propose removing the term from the eighth example, making it a clear example of a sound track in multiple languages. We suggest deleting the ninth example because it does not show field 041 so it is not helpful to include this example under subfield $a of field 041.
Revision:
008/35-37 eng
041 0#$a eng $a fre $a ger $ a ita
[Audiovisual item with sound trackor separate titlesin English, French, German, Italian.]
008/35-37 eng
[no field 041]
[Sound track or separate titles in English only.]Clean version:
008/35-37 eng
041 0#$a eng $a fre $a ger $ a ita
[Audiovisual item with sound track in English, French, German, Italian.]
There are no BIBFRAME implications in these proposed changes.
5.1. Do you agree that the term "separate titles" in the 041 Field Definition and Scope means "intertitles" and should be changed to "intertitles," which is used in the name of subfield $i (Language code of intertitles)?
5.2. Do you agree that the term "separate title" should be deleted from the name of subfield $a?
5.3. Do you agree that the eighth example in subfield $a should be modified to refer only to a sound track with four languages?
5.4. Do you agree that the ninth example in subfield $a should be deleted as it does not provide an application of field 041?
5.5. Are there any potential consequences to this proposed change that have not been considered?
5.6. Would MAC be open to fast-tracking this to a proposal?
HOME >> MARC Development >> Discussion Paper List
| The Library of Congress >> Especially
for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards (01/15/2026) |
Legal | External Link Disclaimer | Contact Us |