[Heb-NACO] בגלל

[Shinohara, Jasmin]

Thanks, Gabe. In romanization it is NEVER “majority rules”; the majority can often be wrong. ☺ Romanization is based on what is grammatically correct and the HCM-RDA, with the latter being bound by E-Sh., hence my question.

Kol tuv, Jasmin

From: Gabriel Angulo [mailto:gangulo at brandeis.edu]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 12:24 PM
To: Shinohara, Jasmin; Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] בגלל

Hi Jasmin,

It appears that most libraries opt for bi-gelal. Try a title search in connexion, you'll see that there are un-authorized variants.

Gabe Angulo

On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 12:09 PM Shinohara, Jasmin via Heb-naco <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>> wrote:
Hello Collective Wisdom, please remind me: if there’s an entry in E-Sh., even if it ends with a “see also”, is that sufficient justification for romanizing the word as a word as opposed to a compound? E.g. בגלל has a direct entry, so I’d think it would be romanized biglal (NOT bigelal because as a whole word, the sheva would be considered merahef, ignored in romanization), but the entry also says “see גלל”. So which is it: Biglal or Bi-gelal?

Thanks, Jasmin


---
Jasmin Shinohara
Hebraica Cataloging Librarian
University of Pennsylvania
Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center
3420 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206
T. 215-746-6397
jshino at upenn.edu<mailto:jshino at upenn.edu>

_______________________________________________
Heb-naco mailing list
Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/heb-naco/attachments/20190207/4134af80/attachment-0001.html>