Making Siberian Turkic Printed Collections Visible
https://doi.org/10.20913/1815-3186-2022-1-22-28
Abstract
In the age of big data, small collections are often overlooked. Too numerically few to cause waves, the issues and problems that affect them are rarely addressed by cataloguing institutions. In the present paper, the author focuses on one such collection – holdings of Siberian Turkic materials at the British Library – to explore how homogenizing trends impact the cataloguing of these materials. The author concentrates particularly on aspects related to MARC21 requirements and authority files, and how these work to occlude the unique printing histories of Siberia’s indigenous Turkic languages. The author concludes that these trends may be overcome by treating the collections qualitatively through the creation of collection guides, addressing the inconsistencies in MARC21 and Library of Congress authority files, and outreach to and engagement with contemporary Siberian Turkic communities.
About the Author
M. J. Erdman
British Library
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Erdman Michael James, PhD, Curator, Turkish and Turkic Collections
96 Euston Rd, London, NW1 2DB, Great Britain,
References
1. Bicheldei KA (2010) 80 years of Tuvan writing: formation, development, prospects. Novye issledovaniya Tuvy 4: 210–229. (In Russ.).
2. Borina LS (2015) The graphics reform in the USSR in the 1920s-1930s as a factor to form ethnic consciousness of the Turkic-speaking ethnic groups of the Sayano-Altai. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo Universiteta 395: 97–101. (In Russ.).
3. DeWeese D (2019) Persian and Turkic from Kazan to Tobolsk: literary frontiersin Muslim Inner Asia. The Persianate world: the frontiers of a Eurasian Lingua Franca. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, pp. 131–155.
4. Esipova AV (2017) National education and Shor writing. Rossiiskaya tyurkologiya 1/2: 64–73. (In Russ.).
5. Ferguson J (2020) Don’t write it with “h”! Standardization, responsibility and territorialization when writing Sakha online. Responsibility and language practices in place. Helsinki: Fin. Lit. Soc., pp. 131–151.
6. Harrison KD (1999) Name practices and ethnic identity in Tuva. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistics Society 35 (2): 69–79.
7. Hughes HK (2019) Cataloguing Kurdistan: imagining liberated geographies. Ethical questions in name authority control. Sacramento: Libr. Juice Press, pp. 99–107.
8. Johanson L (1999) The history of Turkic. The Turkic languages. London: Routledge, pp. 81–125.
9. Lenkart J (2017) Russian revolutions in print. Slavic Review 76 (3): 655–663. Madieva G and Tayeva RM (2014) The evolution of the Kazakh surnames: ‘for’ and ‘against’. Procedia: Social and Behavioural Sciences 116: 4798–4802.
10. Naumov IV (2006). The history of Siberia. London: Routledge. Purcell A and Sutherland T (2021) A weapon and a tool: decolonizing description and embracing redescription as a liberatory archival practice. The International Journal of Information, Diversity & Inclusion 5 (1): 60–78. DOI: 10.33137/ijidi.v5i1.34669.
11. Rufova ES and Sivtceva–Maksimova PV (2020) Historiographic analysis of the role of Christian culture in the formation of the Yakut writing system. Tarih Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi 9 (2): 346–354.
12. Saaia OM and Badarch B (2018) Tuvan orthography in the period of the Tuvan People ‘s Republic. Novye issledovaniya Tuvy 3: 138–150. (In Russ.).
13. Schönig C (1999a) The internal division of modern Turkic and its historical implications. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 52 (1): 63–95.
14. Schönig C (1999b) South Siberian Turkic. The Turkic languages. London: Routledge, pp. 403–416.
15. Stachowski M and Menz A (1999) Yakut. The Turkic languages. London: Routledge, pp. 417–433.
16. Tuck E and Yang WK (2012) Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 1 (1): 1–40.
17. Yılmaz KI (2018) Study and teaching of the Turkic languages of the Siberian group at Ankara University. Novye issledovaniya Tuvy 1: 122–142. (In Russ.).
18. Zakharova TV (2014) Еhe history of the Yakut alphabet. Severo–Vostochnyi gumanitarnyi vestnik 1: 5–11.(InRuss.).
Review
For citations:
Erdman M. Making Siberian Turkic Printed Collections Visible. Bibliosphere. 2022;(1):22-28. https://doi.org/10.20913/1815-3186-2022-1-22-28
Views:
369
Email this article 