Sonderband 2. International Council on Archives. Dritte Europäische Archivkonferenz, Wien 11. bis 15. Mai 1993. Tagungsprotokolle (1996)

3. Session / Séance. Sharing of Experience and Exchange of Staff / Partage d’Expériences et Echange des Personnes - Thibodeau, Sharon: The Pitfalls of Terminology and linguistic Barriers / Pieges de la Terminologie et Barrieres linguistiques (english 207 - français 217)

3. Session/Séance: Thibodeau, Pitfalls of Terminology and linguistic Barriers

the realities of modern recordkeeping and they must encourage archivists to engage in descriptive practices that allow the users of archives to:

1) identify systems of records,

2) identify all (or at least the most valuable) of the records of „a particular person, family or corporate body“, and

3) identify records resulting from a given government function.

One way to achieve these goals would be to adopt the broader, alternative concept of the fonds. Another way would be to retain the traditional concept of the fonds and preserve file systems (or series) intact by allowing for the possibility of intellectual allocation of a file system (or series) to the fonds of each „corporate body“ that had responsibility for generating or accumulating it „in the conduct of corporate activity“19. It may not be one of the above, but it is clear that some means must be found to dissolve the barrier presented by the fonds if it is not to impede the development of descriptive standards20.

Defining Categories of Descriptive Information

During early discussion of the development of international descriptive standards it was suggested that terminological pitfalls and linguistic barriers would most likely reveal themselves when the elements of descriptive information were examined. Surprisingly enough, this has not proven to be the case - at least as long as the examination is confined to the English language. As has been reported, the Ad-Hoc- Commission on Descriptive Standards undertook as one of its tasks a comparison of rules for archival description recently published in three English-speaking countries21. This comparison showed that English-speaking archivists generally agree on the identity of the elements of information that can combine to adequately represent a body of records. The results are summarized in Appendix B. The minor differences revealed by this comparison did not deter the Commission from attempting to incorporate these elements of description in a set of draft international rules for archival description.

19 Implementation of the first technique in the case of the vessel documentation system described in footnote 17 would mean that the „fonds“ would be: the records of the vessel documentation function of the federal government. Implementation of the second technique would mean that description of the fonds of the US Customs Service would include a reference to only part of the VESSEL DOCUMENTATION. Other parts of this system would be described with the fonds of the Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation and the fonds of the US Coast Guard.

20 A first version revised of the Statement of Principles Regarding Archival Description was adopted by the Ad-Hoc-Commission on Descriptive Standards Madrid, Spain, January 1992. The content of the glossary, in particular the definitions of description and fonds, hardly varies from the original version. Although several participants in the Montreal Congress of the ICA expressed concern that the revised Principles did not go far enough to meet the needs of archivists, the Congress nevertheless adopted them as the basis for formulating subsequent international rules.

21 See above note 6.

215