I've been wondering why we use the (what seems to me to be) arcane construction
of "has also" in our notes. For example ...

      500     Each volume has also a distinctive title.

... found in the CONSER Editing Guide. It seems to me that using ...

      500     Each volume also has a distinctive title.

... would be a little less clumbersome to read and carry a bit less of the
magical incantation connotation. In our library the CONSER example is given
the respect of a "standard" and therefore followed. Is that the case in your
libraries as well? Is there a grammatical reason for this construction? A
historical explanation? Would librarians around the world rise up in arms if
I started typing "also has" instead?

Eric Celeste
Serials Cataloguing
MIT Libraries