It seems a topic only too appropriate for today: I ran across scare quotes today in a page proof. They were used inconsistently, so I dug into my trusty Chicago manual to see the scoop and what rules might apply. As usual, I never open that book without learning something. "Scare quotes," according to CMOS 17 … Continue reading Scary “Scare Quotes”
I am a fan of the Oxford comma (also called the series or serial comma): parsley, sage, rosemary[,?] and thyme. Or at least I thought I was. Recent conversations and reading have led me to think again about where I place my comma allegiances, and why. My go-to example in favour of the series comma … Continue reading Serious Serial Comma Silliness
How a day spent grappling with "2" and "two" taught me something about numbers, numerals, and life Sometimes I appreciate the technical side of editing. I don't mean editing technical documents, necessarily - I mean the technical aspects of grammar and style that give me the illusion that I can tell right from wrong. As my … Continue reading Nit-picking Numbers
Recently, in reviewing an academic article, I came across the following sentence in the notes to a table: "Industry and year-specific intercepts are not included for brevity." At first glance, the meaning might seem obvious, but let's look again. Are you including the intercepts or not? Because this could mean two things: that the intercepts … Continue reading Comma Confusion: To Include or Not to Include?
I found out today that Editors Canada members now receive an online subscription to the Chicago Manual of Style. Bonus! ... even if I just bought my own copy of the 17th edition, um, last week. Ah well. It's good to have options, and I am indeed grateful for the benefits of membership I am … Continue reading The Plurality of Pluralization