Websites in a foreign language

By Anonymous on Fri, 11/21/2014 - 20:17

Forums

I have a few questions about citing an image of a vital record located on a foreign website. The original records are in Dutch, and they are contained on a Dutch language website.

Question 1) Should our citation contain words in that foreign language?  I have a digital image of what appears to be a birth register from the Netherlands.

For citing this online image of a vital record, I referenced the guidance given at EE 9.6, Online Images, and crafted the following citation:

Burgerlijke Standregister, 't Zandt, Geboorteregister 1848, p. 46, Nanning Bierma, 27 August 1848; digital images, Allegroningers.nl (http://www.allegroningers.nl : accessed 21 November 2014). [searched, Achternaam = Bierma, Voornaam = Nanning, Rol = 'alle rollen']

I chose not to include the extremely long URL that was returned after the search,(http://www.allegroningers.nl/personen/q/persoon_achternaam_t_0/Bierma/q/persoon_voornaam_t_0/Nanning/q/persoon_rol_s_0/0/q/persoon_rol_s_1/0), but thought it wise just to shorten it down to the root address, and provide the search paraments in editorial brackets which is the general way this website works.

I chose to use the Dutch rather than English when writing my citation.  I could have translated the Dutch words into English (Burgerlijke Register = Civil Status Register, Geeboorteregister = Birth Register, Achternaam = Surname, Voornaam = First name, Rol = Role) but I didn't think that was appropriate, and there is no English anywhere on this website, and so to throw English into translations into the main citation would serve to confuse.

I guess my worry is that future people vetting my work may look at this citation and wonder, "what in the world is "Burgerlijke Standregister, 't Zandt, Geboorteregister 1848"?  Should I someone annotate the citation with some sort of English translation in editorial brackets of what exactly this type of record is?

Question 2) Do you agree with my citation?  Is there any element I might have missed?  If you view the images I've uploaded, you'll see that MY Nanning Bierma is person number 10 on the search results page.  Should I someone notate that as well?

Thank you!

David

Submitted byEEon Sat, 11/22/2014 - 10:13

David, several sections in EE deal explicitly with how to handle foreign-language titles--starting with 2.23 in the "Fundamentals of Citation" chapter. Also see 2.60, 3.12, and 7.16 (the last of which gives a model for use when citing foreign-language record books.)  If you have the digital edition EE, you can simply run a search for "foreign language." If you are using the print edition, aside from the index, you can check the backside of the first grey page in each chapter for a list of topics covered in that chapter.

Re your final question: It would be folly for anyone to say, "Oh, yeah, you've covered all the issues splendidly for that particular source," without (a) having actually used the source; and (b) having used it often enough to be thoroughly familiar with its quirks. This Dutch record is not one with which I'm personally familiar and making a decision on the basis of one isolated page would not be wise. Perhaps Yvette Hoitink, a Dutch specialist who follows this forum, would be kind enough to weigh in.

Submitted byyhoitinkon Sat, 11/22/2014 - 15:39

Sure!

Here are my two cents:

  • "Burgerlijke Standregister" [civil registration register] is redundant if you're already citing a birth record. That's like saying that a birth certificate is a vital record in the US.
  • I don't see the added value of using the Dutch words in this citation. This is not an obscure manuscript where you need to cite the exact name. Anyone will understand you if you call this a birth record. 
  • 46 is the record number, not the page number. Records are organized by municipality, type, year and number so those would be the elements I would include. The name and date as well, for full identification. 
  • 27 August 1848 is the birth date, not the date of the record (28 August 1848). I would clarify that it is the birth date so people know that the record may be a few days later. Or you could include the record date (or both )
  • There are more places called 't Zandt so I would include the province and country for clarity. 
  • This website is created by the Groninger Archieven, who also keep the original records. I would include them as the creator of the website. 
  • I would include the fact that the website has a database as well as the digital images, since you need to use the database to access the images. 
  • I agree with the choice to use the short URL. With the information from the first half of the citation, the record is easily found.
  • If the target audience of your citation doesn't speak Dutch, I agree that adding the search instructions is useful. I would probably leave of the 'alle rollen' since that is the default option.   

My own citation to this source would look like this:

't Zandt, Groningen, Netherlands, birth record 1848 no. 46, Nanning Bierma, born 27 August 1848; database and digital image, Groningen Archieven, AlleGroningers (http://www.allegroningers.nl : accessed 21 November 2014), query: achternaam: Bierma, voornaam: Nanning. 

Now I have my own question for the editor: is it better to use the birth date or the record date in this instance? I usually just use the birth date, since using the record date can be confusing and lead people to think that that is the birth date. But if you want to retrieve the record, you would need to look under the record date, which can be as much as three days later than the actual birth. Not a problem in a small town like 't Zandt, but there could be hundreds of records in a city like Amsterdam. Which date would you include? I guess you could do "born 27 August 1848 (recorded 28 August 1848)" but that seems longer than it needs to be.

Submitted byEEon Sun, 11/23/2014 - 09:52

Yvette, thanks for the wisdom.

In answer to your question, certainly there's no harm in including both dates, with each one identified. But for citation purposes, the essential would be the registration date under which the record has to be sought--with an identification of it as the registration date to avoid confusion, as you have suggested.  Otherwise, the date of birth--like names of parents--would be part of the content of the record that we would record in our narrative or database entry.

Submitted byyhoitinkon Sun, 11/23/2014 - 08:59

I also posted a link to this discussion to a Dutch Facebook group dedicated to doing genealogy according to professional standards, and there the consensus is that citing both dates would be the best option to avoid confusion and give clear direction of where to find the record. 

Submitted bydpslageron Mon, 11/24/2014 - 00:17

Thank you both for your expertise.  I have much work to do in these record sets, and the citation examples and explanations will help me properly cite much work ahead of me.

David P. Slager Jr.