T'ai chi classics

I own two translations of the so-called t'ai chi (or taiji) classics:
https://www.librarything.com/work/294415
https://www.librarything.com/work/29326870

They are translations of ten different Chinese texts from different ages (middle ages until 20th century).

They are definitely not the same work, as the translation matters very much here. The texts are cryptic and poetic, the translations necessarily approximate, and the commentary matters as well.

At the same time, they are translations of the exact same texts. I would like to link them somehow, but none of the work-to-work relationships seem to fit.

Any ideas?

Different translations make up the same work no matter how poetic they are. Translations matter for a lot of books but as long as the original text is the same, they stay together in LT.

Though if the commentary part accompanying the texts is distinct and significant enough, a case can be made for separation, with disambiguation note to explain what the difference is, what one has that the other doesn't, to justify them being apart.

If that sort of thing is going on, ideally there would be one work that was just the texts, then works that were text-plus-significant-commentary could have a relationship of 'contains' to that. The plus-commentary works wouldn't be related to each other since they're both presumably derived from the Chinese original, not from each other. But a disambiguation note could mention the other.

>3 Nevov: Agree but the description above sounds like different translations and not much more... And significant is the operative word here - different notes on the text does not make it different - it needs to be to the level of the Nortons to really become a separate text. Translations are always tricky with that...

Many works exist in translations of hugely varying quality. That is not a reason to keep them separate.

If they are combined (making the interlink relationship question moot), an option would be a Disambiguation note saying that the work comprises assorted translations of the 10 texts... if you want to make it apparent that there are different ones together. But as combining translations is the default it's not necessary. I don't know much about the field but would it be worth naming the 10 works in the Disambig note (or in Book details) if there exist other works that don't have the same 10, or only a portion of them?

Do these works pass the cocktail party test?

(Some of the translations I've seen of Chinese song lyrics wouldn't.)

I've never really understood the "cocktail party test". I wouldn't be able to communicate about any book at some cocktail party if we don't have any mutual language (for instance).

>6 Nevov: Yes - for omnibuses it is always useful to have the main contents in the Disambig note (minus introductions and so on) and use contains relationship for the ones which exist on their own (or for subsets of the 10).

>8 Nicole_VanK: This would be a cocktail party hosted by Plato.