7

In Indological literature there's the convention of having two separate bibliographies: One for secondary literature, which can be handled more or less straightforward by existing types and fields already present in biblatex(-chicago), and a primary literature one, for which in a previous publication project I had to resort to ugly hacks like abusing the title field for the name of the work and, optionally, its author, then hardcoding all the actual bibliographical information into the note field. How ugly was that, as in the following, which is roughly how I used to do it:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[authordate,backend=biber]{biblatex-chicago}
\usepackage{filecontents}

\begin{filecontents*}{pri.bib}

@misc{Kuṭṭanīmata,
title = {Kuṭṭanīmata \emph {of Dāmodaragupta}},
note = {\textit{Dāmodaraguptaviracitaṃ Kuṭṭanīmatam:  The Bawd’s Counsel, Being an Eighth-century Verse Novel in Sanskrit by Dāmodaragupta, Newly Edited and Translated into English}, edited and translated by Csaba Dezső and Dominic Goodall.  Groningen Oriental Studies 23.  Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 2012},
}

\end{filecontents*}

\begin{filecontents*}{sec.bib}

@book{DezsoGoodall2012,
title = {Dāmodaraguptaviracitaṃ Kuṭṭanīmatam},
subtitle = {The Bawd’s Counsel, Being an Eighth-century Verse Novel in Sanskrit by Dāmodaragupta, Newly Edited and Translated into English},
editor = {Csaba Dezső and Dominic Goodall},
translator = {Csaba Dezső and Dominic Goodall},
series =  {Groningen Oriental Studies},
number = {23},
location = {Groningen},
publisher = {Egbert Forsten},
year = {2012},
}

\end{filecontents*}


\begin{filecontents*}{biber.conf}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<config>
  <sourcemap>
    <maps datatype="bibtex" bmap_overwrite="1">
      <map>
        <per_datasource>pri.bib</per_datasource>
        <map_step map_field_set="KEYWORDS" map_field_value="pri"/>
      </map>
      <map>
        <per_datasource>sec.bib</per_datasource>
        <map_step map_field_set="KEYWORDS" map_field_value="sec"/>
      </map>
    </maps>
  </sourcemap>
</config>

\end{filecontents*}


\addbibresource{pri.bib}
\addbibresource{sec.bib}

\begin{document}
\nocite{*}

\printbibliography[title=Primary Sources, keyword=pri,heading=subbibliography]
\printbibliography[title=Secondary Sources, keyword=sec,heading=subbibliography]
\end{document}

example

For a new project I am now thinking to do it properly, but am not quite sure how to go about it. Maybe I could create new types, say @pri-book, for which I guess I'd have to copy the definition of @book from chicago-authordate.bbx, and extend it by two extra fields, e.g. pri-title, containing the Sanskrit title of the work, and the optional pri-author, which of course would also need to be defined, and change the order of fields for the year to be output at the end of the entry?

3
  • Could you say a bit more about what you mean by 'primary' and 'secondary' here? It is obviously not the sense I'm familiar with at all: here the primary and secondary literature apparently consists of exactly the same sources, differently formatted.
    – cfr
    Commented Feb 18, 2018 at 3:07
  • @cfr Yes, taking exactly the same book as example for both categories might have been a bit confusing. The idea is that if I talk about the Kuṭṭanīmata, quoting some of it, readers should understand what edition I am referring to, or sometimes it might even be manuscripts for unedited texts. Whereas I might deal with the same book as secondary literature when taking reference to something added by the editors, such as their introduction.
    – muk.li
    Commented Feb 18, 2018 at 3:20
  • 2
    Then it is just different formats for perfectly standard .bib entries? I don't see why you'd need special types here at all. One entry for the item and it gets formatted different ways. After all, that's sort of the point of Biblatex/Biber/BibTeX, isn't it? You don't change the database because you want a different format - otherwise, you might as soon use thebibliography.
    – cfr
    Commented Feb 18, 2018 at 3:42

1 Answer 1

7

Update

Here's a version that keeps the author and title separate. It copes with different languages OK. I've also kept your source map and used the source map to set the sortkey to title so that entries are sorted by title rather than author. The relatedoptions={dataonly,useditor=false,usetranslator=false} ensures that the related entry does not appear in the bibliography unless explicitly cited and the editor and translator appear after the title.

It's not super clever, but is a reasonably place to start.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[french,american]{babel}
\usepackage{csquotes}
\usepackage{xpatch}
\usepackage[authordate,backend=biber,language=auto,autolang=other]{biblatex-chicago}
\usepackage{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{pri.bib}
@misc{Kuṭṭanīmata,
  entrysubtype = {classical},
  author = {Dāmodaragupta},
  title = {Kuṭṭanīmata},
  related = {DezsoGoodall2012},
  relatedoptions = {dataonly,useeditor=false,usetranslator=false}
}
@misc{Title:fr,
  entrysubtype = {classical},
  author = {Author},
  title = {Title},
  langid = {french},
}
\end{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{sec.bib}
@book{DezsoGoodall2012,
  title = {Dāmodaraguptaviracitaṃ Kuṭṭanīmatam},
  subtitle = {The Bawd’s Counsel, Being an Eighth-century Verse Novel in Sanskrit by Dāmodaragupta, Newly Edited and Translated into English},
  editor = {Csaba Dezső and Dominic Goodall},
  translator = {Csaba Dezső and Dominic Goodall},
  series =  {Groningen Oriental Studies},
  number = {23},
  location = {Groningen},
  publisher = {Egbert Forsten},
  year = {2012}
}
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{pri.bib}
\addbibresource{sec.bib}
\DeclareSourcemap{
  \maps{
    \map{
      \perdatasource{pri.bib}
      \step[fieldset=keywords, fieldvalue=pri]
      \step[fieldsource=title, final]
      \step[fieldset=sortkey, origfieldval]
    }
  }
}
\DeclareFieldFormat[misc]{title}{\mkbibemph{#1}\isdot}
\newbibmacro*{pri:titleofauthor}{%
  \ifentrytype{misc}
    {\iffieldequalstr{entrysubtype}{classical}
       {\ifbibliography
         {\printfield{title}%
          \ifnameundef{author}
            {}
            {\setunit*{\addspace}%
             \bibstring{of}%
             \setunit*{\addspace}%
             \printnames{author}%
             \clearname{author}}%
          \clearfield{title}}
         {\printtext[bibhyperref]{\printfield[citetitle]{title}}%
          \ifnameundef{labelname}
            {}
            {\setunit*{\addspace}%
             \bibstring{of}%
             \setunit*{\addspace}%
             \printnames{labelname}}%
          \clearfield{labeltitle}%
          \clearname{labelname}}}
       {}}
    {}}
\xpretobibmacro{cite}
  {\usebibmacro{pri:titleofauthor}}
  {}
  {}
\xpatchbibdriver{misc}
  {\usebibmacro{bibindex}}
  {\usebibmacro{bibindex}\usebibmacro{pri:titleofauthor}}
  {}
  {}
\begin{document}
Filler text \autocite{Kuṭṭanīmata}.

Filler text \autocite{Title:fr}.

Filler text \autocite{DezsoGoodall2012}.

\printbibliography[title=Primary Sources, keyword=pri,heading=subbibliography]
\printbibliography[title=Secondary Sources, notkeyword=pri,heading=subbibliography]
\end{document}

enter image description here


Original answer

This looks like a good candidate for the related feature of biblatex. You can set the entrysubtype field to classical for your primary source to get the output you want without really doing anything clever.

Ideally you'd want to separate author and title of your Kuṭṭanīmata entry, but if you don't want to modify the drivers, you could leave everything in the title field as you have now.

How's this?

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[authordate,backend=biber]{biblatex-chicago}
\usepackage{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{\jobname.bib}
@misc{Kuṭṭanīmata,
  entrysubtype = {classical},
  title = {\mkbibemph{Kuṭṭanīmata} of Dāmodaragupta},
  related = {DezsoGoodall2012},
  relatedoptions = {dataonly,useeditor=false,usetranslator=false},
  keywords = {pri}
}
@book{DezsoGoodall2012,
  title = {Dāmodaraguptaviracitaṃ Kuṭṭanīmatam},
  subtitle = {The Bawd’s Counsel, Being an Eighth-century Verse Novel in Sanskrit by Dāmodaragupta, Newly Edited and Translated into English},
  editor = {Csaba Dezső and Dominic Goodall},
  translator = {Csaba Dezső and Dominic Goodall},
  series =  {Groningen Oriental Studies},
  number = {23},
  location = {Groningen},
  publisher = {Egbert Forsten},
  year = {2012},
  keywords = {sec}
}
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{\jobname.bib}
\begin{document}
Filler text \autocite{Kuṭṭanīmata}.

Filler text \autocite{DezsoGoodall2012}.

\printbibliography[title=Primary Sources, keyword=pri,heading=subbibliography]
\printbibliography[title=Secondary Sources, keyword=sec,heading=subbibliography]
\end{document}

enter image description here

11
  • Quite an improvement! Was it necessary to join the two bib files for the related feature to work, or why did you do that? And I might indeed want to separate the title and author for the primary reference entries, particularly so as it will be used for the sorting. For that I'd have to copy the relevant definitions in chicago-dates-common.cbx, changing them to \renewbibmacro, and modify them?
    – muk.li
    Commented Feb 18, 2018 at 5:53
  • 1
    Not necessary to combine the bib files. You can continue to use your current method for specifying which entries are primary and secondary and storing them in different bib files. I only did it the way I did to make the code a bit more minimal. I'll put an example together that produces the kind of output you want. Commented Feb 18, 2018 at 5:58
  • 1
    See updated answer. Commented Feb 18, 2018 at 12:51
  • 1
    Hmmm I would have thought it shouldn't do that. I'll look into it. You could add skipbib to the relatedoptions field. Commented Feb 23, 2018 at 10:00
  • 1
    Ah. I remember. by default relatedoptions is set to dataonly on so it doesn't appear in bibliography. But when we set it to something else, the dataonly option is overwritten. I'll update my answer. Commented Feb 24, 2018 at 0:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .