Dear Pedant: I would like to write to someone about one of the jobs I have this summer, however, I'm not actually sure how to spell what I hear. I coach at a camp where kids attend, so is it called a kids' camp or a kids camp? I tried substituting "kids" with other words in my mind to try to differentiate whether or not "kids" is in the possessive form or not, and it doesn't help me. Is it the kids' camp or a camp of kids? It's driving me insane, please help! -- A Coach Needing Coaching in Canada
P.S. Now that I'm reading this over, would the quotation marks be appropriate when I was referring to the word "kids", or was I originally correct in thinking it works better with the single quotation marks (I'm not sure what they're called) 'kids'? If not, what IS the use for those single tick marks? Thanks!!
Dear Coach: You can sometimes use nouns as adjectives: Toronto residents, rather than Toronto's residents, for instance. But in this case I much prefer kids' camp. It looks naked without the apostrophe. It is, after all, a camp of kids. The book of the boy is the boy's book, not the boys book.
Yes, the quotation marks are appropriate when referring to words. They are often needed. Try saying Is the word "word" wordy? without them: Is the word word wordy? Single quotation marks are called just that. And they are used in almost all books when characters are quoted, and in newspapers and elsewhere when "someone you are quoting 'quotes' something".
Dear Pedant: We have a sign at work that greets visitors. We have two people coming with the same last name of Smith. Should the sign read: "Welcome Smiths" or "Welcome Smith's"? This is causing a huge argument! Thank you! Dan
Dear Dan: Now why is it causing a huge argument? You are all literate people, and know the apostrophe is used to indicate the possessive (Bill Smith's house) and omitted words or letters (didn't, for did not, and so on). So why would you write "Welcome Smith's"? What is the possessive element? Are you saying "Welcome Smith's feet, nose, whatever"? (And if you think about it, putting the apostrophe there indicates only one Smith -- as in the boy's house. For the plural it should be "Welcome Smiths' feet" etc, as in the boys' house.) So no, it cannot be a possessive. What is left out, then? Why, nothing. It is a simple plural -- so you add an "s". "Welcome, Smiths". More than one book? Books, not book's. More than one boy? Boys, not boy's. (This rule holds true for words ending in a vowel: two dilemmas, not two dilemma's; four pizzas, not four pizza's.) So, one Smith, two Smiths, 200 Smiths.
Dear Pedant: I have a question about punctuation marks. The question is, what's the sign of, "_" called? The reason that I am asking is because once there was somebody told me in the Cable company it's called what; I did not write it down. The next time when I asked them, they said it's called, "underscore". I don't really like the word "underscore". I know some signs have different names of it. As a punctuation website, can you tell me the other name for the sign,"_"? I am really hoping that I will receive good answer from you. I am longing to receiving a reply from you. Yours truly, Mary
Dear Mary: I'm afraid I have bad news: it's called an underscore. You may have been told it's an em dash or an em rule, but neither of these sits on the line, or under a word.
Dear Pedant: I understand that most places say that rather end a sentence with etc. just state what else there is to say! Regardless, in my line of work, it isn’t always possible to avoid. My question is, when using etc. at the end of a sentence, is it appropriate to use a period at the end of the abbreviation and then one to close the sentence? Thank you. Andrea
Dear Andrea: No. Never use two "stops" together at the end of a sentence, whether they are two periods or a question mark and a comma or whatever. We sometimes see things such as this in the press: "How are you?," she asked. That should be: "How are you?" she asked. Similarly, one stop, in your case a period, after etc.
Dear Pedant: In signing a Christmas card, which is proper? Should it be signed, Travis, Keri, Colton and Carson or Travis, Keri, Colton, and Carson. Thank You!
Dear Travis, Keri, Colton and Carson: I think that salutation answers your question! However, the version with the comma after Colton is not wrong. Its use here is known as an "Oxford comma" for reasons I won't bore you with. Suffice to say, custom has it that the comma in a list represents the word "and", so you could sign your card Travis and Keri and Colton and Carson. Putting commas after the first two names replaces the "and". So if you put one after Colton you are saying "and and".
Dear Pedant: I was reading your web site and had a question I thought you might be able to answer. We have just updated our corporate business cards and a staff member stated that the following was incorrect because the comma and period followed each other consecutively (see the abbreviation for Drive). Is this improper use?
6390 Greenwich Dr., Suite 170
San Diego, CA 92122
I appreciate any guidance you could provide. Sincerely, Rick Gordimer
Dear Rick: It's not pretty, is it? It is technically correct as long as you adopt the proposition that abbreviations that do not end with the final letter of the word need a period (so Prof. but Mr). You'll find most punctuation authorities hold that when multiple punctuation involves an abbreviatory stop, as here, it yields to the period that ends a sentence, but is retained alongside other marks (as in "Dogs, cats etc., were playing in the yard"). Many style guides these days do not, however, insist on periods after abbreviations (so it's Prof Smith). The unfortunate part of this in your case is that Dr. without the stop would look more like the abbreviation for doctor. So, keep both marks if you wish. They are correct. But to eliminate the odd look, why not spell it out? 6390 Greenwich Drive, Suite 170. You eliminate the period, and in effect add only two characters (the i and the period take the same room).
Dear Pedant: Have you ever heard of a semi-colon being used after the salutation of a business letter? If you have, what was this style of letter called? I have been looking everywhere and can only find a colon used? Thank you, Confused
Dear Confused: It's a new idea to me. And it would be unjustifiable. English custom is to use the comma or nothing; some European countries do, I believe, use the colon; and others (Germany, for instance), use the exclamation mark. But no semi-colon, no. It sounds very much like someone mixing their semis and their colons. (By the way, you should not have had a question mark on your closing sentence. It is a statement, not a question.)
Dear Pedant: I heard that when addressing someone in a letter that colons are used in English and a comma in French. Such as:
Dear Dr. Mark:
Cher Dr Mark,
Is this a true rule or just a matter of style. Your input would be much
appreciated. Janet
Dear Janet: No, it is not true. Despite my use of the colon to greet correspondents to this site, there is no such rule. (My colons are a matter of choice.) In fact the standard, traditional form in English is
Dear Dr Mark,
with a comma. The French do some things differently, however, such as using double chevrons to indicate quotation marks. And the Germans really go for it:
Liebe Dr Mark!
(Don't forget to end your questions with question marks. The sentence after your two examples needs one.)
Dear Pedant: In the subject line of a letter
RE: Claimant: John Doe
would this be correct format? Colon after both RE and Claimant? Kathy
Dear Kathy: I wouldn't think it necessary. I'd be inclined to make it
RE: Claimant John Doe
In fact you could make it
Re claimant John Doe
and not be wrong. (Speaking of John Doe, how do the apostrophe abolitionists cope with John Doe's lunch? It becomes John Does lunch! And what about the butcher's shop with the sign We're the Best? Were the Best!)
Dear Pedant: When someone says "She's a friend of John's" (as I do all the time), this is redundant: either the "of" or the "'s" is sufficient to indicate possession, but here both devices are used to perform the same function. Is there a historical explanation for why we do this? E.g., does this indicate the clashing of two separate systems of grammar?
Also, why do we say "Aren't I?" instead of "Amn't I." Is it just because it sounds better? Thanks, Grammar Dude
Dear Grammar Dude: The "double genitive", as it's known, has been part of the English idiom since the 14th century. But it is not simply a double possessive. It is a functional part of English grammar. It serves two purposes: (1) emphasis. This is the effect of paraphrasing not Ted's fault as no fault of Ted's, which unpacks the phrase and foregrounds the noun rather than the person. In conversational examples such as That book of Bill Bryson's is his best yet, the construction helps adjust the local focus. (2) clarification. Clearly, a painting of Jackson Pollock and a painting of Jackson Pollock's mean different things. The first says it is a portrait of Pollock, the second that it is a work by him. The duplication of the genitive marker is thus not redundant, but clarifies the fact that the second construction is a possessive genitive.
As for "Aren't I?", both aren't and ain't are probably descended from an't, (not amn't) used during the late 17th century as the regular contraction. Sound changes in the 18th century affected the pronunciation of the vowel a before nasal consonants, raising it in some dialects and lowering and retracting it in others. Aren't represents the second in terms of British (r-less) pronunciation, though not general American. So an't I? was pronounced ahnt I?, and quickly respelt aren't I?
Dear Pedant: Which is correct? Charles William Davis III or Charles William Davis, III? Thanks, Dawn Kirkpatrick
Dear Dawn: The first, without the comma, is correct. It's Charles William Davis III. You wouldn't dream of writing King Henry, VIII, would you? Or Pope John Paul, II. We should keep punctuation, as I say below, to a minimum. Do we need a comma in your example to avoid ambiguity? No. Do we need one to indicate a missing "and"? (As you do in lists: red, white and blue.) No.
Dear Pedant: What a wonderful site! I sometimes think short sentences look too choppy when you use too many commas, so I have a question on this one: "I think at this point he was still confused in that respect." Should it be "I think at this point he was still confused, in that respect," or no comma at all? Thanks for your help!
Dear Help! No comma at all. He was confused in that respect. I'm a great believer in keeping punctuation to a minimum. We should use it only as a set of road signs on the highway of communication -- and if you have too many road signs you tend to lose your way and crash.
Dear Pedant: There seem to be some uses of the colon that the grammars I've read don't mention. For example, I wonder what you think about the use of the colons the final paragraph of The Last Battle, by C.S.:
"All their life in this world and all their adventures in Narnia had only been
the cover and the title page: now at last they were beginning Chapter One of
the Great Story, which no one on earth has read: which goes on for ever: in
which every chapter is better than the one before."
Also, do you think my use of the colon is correct in the following
sentence? "One couple, for example, dissolved their marriage by mutual
consent, after the Greek custom: the Jewish law allowed only the man to
divorce."
I find the colon here more satisfying than a semi-colon, but I wonder if it is
actually correct. Thanks, Grammar Dude
Dear Grammar Dude: Wow, this is certainly getting into the niceties of punctuation! First, apologies for the late reply here, but I have been away. Second, I have no problem with your second example, in which the colon is acting as a warning, if you like, that you are about to expand on what has gone before. A semi-colon would not be wrong here - it would probably be the mark of choice for most people - but I feel comfortable with the colon. As for C.S., I think he's getting a bit idiosyncratic. His first, after "page", is fine, because what follows it delivers the goods, to use Fowler's phrase, invoiced in the previous clause. But the next two are, I feel, aberrations. You could equally - and preferably in my view - use commas. He's using the mark as an all-purpose device, much as many people these days use the dash. Not sure what to use? Throw in a dash!
Dear Pedant: With respect to your solution that we hyphenate the following phrase in this way -- "itchy trigger-fingered gunman" -- doesn't this leave some ambiguity as to whether it's (1) the finger or (2) the gunman that's itchy? Thanks, Grammar Dude
Dear Grammar Dude: No. If you remove itchy - it's only one adjective in a list - you are left with a trigger-fingered gunman. Huh? Makes no sense. So itchy must modify the trigger finger, not the gunman.
Dear Pedant: We've chatted before, but now I would like to you look at this page, http://www.thecore.nus.edu.sg/sts/ccst02/usage.html, and share your thoughts on this man's suggested of punctuation. That second sentence with the final period outside of both sets of quotation marks looks very odd to me.
This next link especially intrigued me. http://www.dixienet.org/ls-homepg/orthography.html I had mentioned a long time ago that I grew up in Texas where we were taught a sort of British modification to our punctuation. Later that was shot down in college. If what these people claim is correct, then no wonder I've been so confused with these crazy grammarians.
The American Civil War (War Between the States) left such a dent on the country, that I can easily believe what these people say. I have some samples of writing from my Northern line but none from my Southern line, so I can't say for certain how they wrote. But I knew I had seen the word "Saviour" all my life, and then last night I found it in Merriam-Webster's 1984 edition as the second version. Apparently, this continued to be used throughout the South.
I am so darn confused now about how to write that I don't know if I'll ever recover from this one! I can easily believe that, after they burned our towns and fields, the North decided that we shall be one country and our identity shall be Northern. Makes so much sense now. Now I can't decide whether to keep a hybrid punctuation or finish the "kill" by going Southern again!
Nice chatting with you again. Kathryn
Dear Kathryn: The first site, with respect to the people of Singapore, where it is based, is (a) ambiguous and (b) wrong. It claims the British use 'single quote marks' and, if they are quoting something in quotes, 'they use "double" marks'. This applies only to books. It does not apply to newspapers, magazines, and other mass media, which, like British people who use e-mail (and other forms of communication), use "double quotation marks" and single marks "to quote 'something' in quotes".
As for the form Mary remarked, 'I loved Catherine Lim's story, "Anton"'. you are quite right about the final period. It should be Mary remarked, 'I loved Catherine Lim's story, "Anton".'
On the southern US use of "u" in colour, honour etc, well, that's up to the League of the South I guess. Perhaps they don't know that 90 per cent of such words have no "u" in their original Latin: color, honor, favor etc. Perhaps they don't know that the French "u" was gradually being dropped in English - it had gone from governour, horrour etc - when Dr Samuel Johnson published his dictionary in 1755, effectively "freezing" spelling as it was at that time, so the Brits ended up with colour and horror. If I were you I would pursue the line of least resistence and of greatest common sense: color, honor, favor. And Christ will not be insulted by Savior. He doesn't mind being called Retter in Germany, el Salvador in Spain, Zbawiciel in Poland or Sauveur, with a "u", in France.
Dear Pedant: Do I place a period after Esq. at the end of a sentence. Example: We were invited to the home of Mr. John Smith, Esq.. Thank you. Karen
Dear Karen: Yes, you do place a period after Esq - but only one, the one that belongs to the end of the sentence. So if you remove one of the two periods from the end of your example you will be correct. Tip: Never use two "stops", one after the other. Just because you need a comma before the closing quotation mark, for instance, in such situations as "It was a good night," she said. does not mean you keep it if another "stop" is involved. Some people think it should be, "Was it a good night?," she asked. with a comma after the question mark, but in fact the question mark is a stronger, weightier stop. You need only the question mark. In brief, at the end of a sentence it is, for example, News Corp. not News Corp..
Dear Pedant: I was just wondering if you could please tell me what the difference is between the comma and the semi-colon and when it is appropriate to use each. I would really appreciate it. Justine
Dear Justine: How long have you got? Take a deep breath and read on:
The semi-colon is a sort of traveller’s rest on the way from the comma to the full stop, a sort of halfway house between the two. It is stronger than the comma, but weaker than the full stop, so its uses are limited.
It has two main uses. The first is as a list separator, when it does the job of the comma when commas are in the same sentence performing a lighter task. This usually happens when you list items in a series and some of the items have to be split up into sub-items. For instance:
Here is the list you asked for: two electric secretaries, a flutter button, a miniature fingernail warmer and a boss in a pear tree.
All we need here is gentle separation between the items. The semi-colon would be too heavy-handed. But what if you add something to one of the items in the list? Can you still use a comma? Consider:
Here is the list you asked for: two electric secretaries, both with flutter buttons, a miniature fingernail warmer and a boss in a pear tree.
Are the electric secretaries complete with flutter buttons, fingernail warmers and a boss up a pear tree? Presumably not. Presumably the flutter buttons work only when they come with the electric secretaries and have nothing to do with the other items on the list. So we need a stronger separation between the main items in the series, and the next step up the hierarchy of punctuation is the semi-colon:
Here is the list you asked for: two electric cadets, both with flutter buttons; a miniature fingernail warmer; and an editor in a pear tree.
The comma is now happily separating two items in a larger item, and the semi-colon has swung into action as the main separator. But we must ensure we continue the semi-colon throughout the list (and not, for instance, use a comma after warmer) to give the same weight to each item.
The semi-colon is a useful punctuation mark in lists of names and offices where commas can confuse. Those present included the secretary of the State Tricycle Board, Mrs Cecilia Bigwheel; the president of the Tricycle Builders Union, Ms Julia Spoke; and the junior vice-president of Children’s Rights, Mr Arthur Anklebiter.
Dear Pedant: I started searching the internet with one goal in mind; however, when I came across your page, it captivated me. GREAT PAGE! The initial goal was to learn the correct method of comma and period usage (not related to sentences) within quotes, e.g., Move the "X," "Y," and "Z" axes to the position marked, "Fixture." As opposed to: Move the "X", "Y", and "Z" axes to the position marked, "Fixture".
Another question that came to mind: Is a comma proper punctuation in a salutation, e.g., "Dear Pedant,"? I see this used so often today; and it is contrary to what I had been taught 150 years ago. ;-)
Thank you for your time and effort, Bob Toronto
Dear Bob: Many thanks for your words of praise. Such things are rare these days.
As to the comma after the salutation, I must have been taught earlier than your 150 years ago, because I learnt to use a comma not only with the salutation, but also with the sign-off:
Dear Sir,
Please send three widgets.
Yours faithfully,
The Pedant
But I also learnt to use commas when addressing envelopes:
Mr Bob Toronto,
Quebec St,
Montreal,
Canada
Electronic scanning has put an end to that.
In the end, I think it's a matter of personal choice. I must admit that despite what I was taught in the Middle Ages, I no longer use commas with salutations.
Dear Pedant: What is the proper use of commas when company names end in Inc., Co., or P.A.? Should there be a comma after Inc. - as in: "XYZ Co., Inc., is a widget manufacturer" or should it be "XYZ Co., Inc. is a widget manufacturer"? Does the same punctuation rule for proper names apply to business names? For example, "John Doe, M.D., is an internist" or "Jim Smith, Esq., is a real estate lawyer."
Dear Lawyer: There should be no commas at all in "XYZ Co. Inc. is a widget manufacturer". There should be commas around M.D. for Dr Doe, but not around Esq. (which equates to "Mr") -- so, "John Doe, M.D., is an internist" and "Jim Smith Esq. is a real estate lawyer".
Dear Pedant: Who invented the question mark? Have a great day, Marcy.
Dear Marcy: Wo! Is that one heck of a question? Why not also ask who invented the period, the comma, the semi-colon etc? (Not to mention brackets.) ;) Oh well, if you must: The term "question mark" is only about 150 years old, but the ? symbol is much older and was earlier known as the "mark of interrogation". The question mark is a descendant of the punctus interrogativus used in 10th century religious manuscripts. It was originally used to indicate voice inflection. (Greek used and still uses a colon/semicolon to indicate a question.) I'm afraid the name of the monk who invented the punctus interrogativus has not come down to us. Does that answer your question? ;)
Dear Pedant; I have trouble with hyphens. Please show me where they are to be placed in the following sentences:
1: Due to the breakdown of society there are troubled
biologically related and semi biologically related human units.
2: He was confronted by the itchy trigger fingered gunman.
Thank you, Etude.
Dear Etude: First, your salutation ("Dear Pedant") should be followed by a colon, not a semi-colon.
Second, the functions of the hyphen are to link and separate. In your examples, we need them to link. But as you ask, precisely where do they go? In your (1), I would place only one hyphen, between semi and biologically. It is an established convention that we do not use hyphens in compounds with an inflected adverb or adjective as their first element: badly displayed goods, fully fledged scheme, slowly running stream, biologically related human units.
In your (2), the compound that needs to be tied together is trigger fingered. The sense tells you it is not the trigger that is itchy, but the trigger finger, and since those two words form a compound adjective for gunman, it becomes the itchy trigger-fingered gunman.
By the way, I would recommend Because of, not due to, at the start of your (1). Due to means attributable to, and you're not going to say "Attributable to the breakdown of society there are troubled etc" are you?
Dear Pedant: What is the proper use of [his] in the following sentence? Do I use the brackets? Where can I find information backing the answer? By securing this position, Alan "was able to establish a secure foundation to build on [his] education, and to some degree, a sense of financial independence."
Dear Independence: The purpose of such bracketed words (often a pronoun, but sometimes other word classes) is to make the quoted material readable by replacing or inserting a word or words that were not in the original. In your example, the "(his)" -- and round brackets are more usual than square, which are usually reserved for editorial additions to the text -- gives readers a readable sentence, while at the same time making it clear the education was Alan's. "His" in this case probably replaces "Alan". If you were to be true to the original, you would have By securing this position, Alan "was able to establish a secure foundation to build on Alan's education, and to some degree, a sense of financial independence." The construction is often unnecessary, however, and sometimes overdone. As for where you can find information backing this answer, I am sorry but I can't help you. Neither Fowler's nor other style guides seem to touch on it. Perhaps another reader of Dear Pedant can help? !
Dear Pedant: Hello, Have you ever heard of a smart quote? Thanks. Susie.
Dear Susie: Yes, indeed. The "smart" quote is the one you get in Word and similar wordprocessing programs, the quotation marks that look, at the opening of a quotation, like 66, and at the end like 99. Like a period with a curled tail. The other quotes, those we get in e-mails and HTML pages, are just straight up and down, without the curled tail. They are NOT called dumb quotes!
Dear Pedant: I live in Texas but was taught a slightly British style of punctuation and never knew it until a few years ago. My habit was always to put a period or comma inside the closing quotation mark unless the quotation mark pertained to matter not part of the overall sentence. When I went to work for Baylor University, professors and co-workers began marking errors on my papers regarding punctuation and quotation marks. It seems strange to have achieved both a bachelor's and a master's degree without anyone commenting on my punctuation until now.
Perhaps my question is really two-fold. First, I agree with British style regarding quoted material. I find it logical. The Chicago Manual of Style, while recommending American style, says the periods and commas inside all closing quotation marks are rarely misunderstood and should not be changed unless there is cause for confusion.
It strikes me as sloppy in that one is not required to know the difference between the quoted material and the end of the sentence. Why not just punctuate logically in the first place to avoid the entire possibility of a mix-up? Because of this, my writing will probably reflect both British and American style. Am I wrong to mix styles like this? Some examples:
1. "I was just scouting the area," said the trooper, "when that hillbilly told me 'I have a gun and know how to use it.'" 2. "I was just scouting the area," said the trooper, "when that hillbilly told me 'I have a gun and know how to use it'." 3. "I was just scouting the area," said the trooper, "when that hillbilly told me 'I have a gun and know how to use it!'" (The hillbilly is excited.) 4. "I was just scouting the area," said the trooper, "when that hillbilly told me 'I have a gun and know how to use it'!" (The trooper is excited about what the hillbilly said.)
My other question (which I honestly don't have an answer for): When listing a series of things in quotation marks, where does the comma belong? An example would be paintings. In the Treasure Room you will find "Annunciation", "Madonna and Child", and "The Serenade". Kathryn
Dear Kathryn: The writer of an essay (on the comma!) in Time once said that punctuation marks are the road signs on the highway of communication. They are there to stop us getting lost, not knowing whether to turn left or right or go straight on. Like you, I much prefer the so-called British method, but our preferences do not make the US method "wrong". There is no right or wrong (although there is, of course, right and wrong in the use of the colon, semi-colon and other stops). The British way to me, as to you, is logical. As for your examples, I would use (2), because the period belongs more to the full sentence than the quote-within-a-quote, and both (3) and (4) work in the contexts you describe. The excitement does seem to attach to the hillbilly in (3) and to the trooper in (4). The bottom line: use whichever version appeals to you as long as your meaning is clear.
The professors and co-workers who have marked your papers wrong simply do not understand that there is no "right and wrong" in this area, merely preference. Refer them to Robert Burchfield's discussion of the subject under "quotation marks" in The New Fowler's Modern English Usage. He argues, as you would expect, for the British system, but acknowledges the American one. Why can your markers not acknowledge the British one?
As for the list of things in quotation marks, I'd use different typography: In the Treasure Room you will find Annunciation, Madonna and Child and The Serenade. If you want to use quotation marks, the commas are fine where you have them. They certainly don't belong inside the marks.
Dear Pedant: If an exclamation point is included in the name of a place, as in "Lumberjacks! Pancake House", is it also included in the character's speech when writing a story? "Let's go to Lumberjack's!" or "Let's go to Lumberjack's! Pancake House."
Dear House: I'm afraid so. It's an insidious way such places use to draw attention, but it is their registered name and the exclamation mark must be included. You'll note, however, it is not just Lumberjacks! and others seeking patronage. Messrs Rogers and Hammerstein added one to their inimitable Oklahoma!, which forces us not only to write about an exclamatory Oklahoma! in the middle of a sentence, but also to use two stops together, the exclamation mark and the comma, as I did after the first reference in this sentence. I would have to say we're stuck with this when quoting characters in stories, too, even though it adds unnecessary emphasis when it appears at the end of a sentence (your first example). Of course, you could always have another character come back saying, "Why the emphasis?" followed by
"What do you mean?"
"You emphasised it. You said, 'Let's go to Lumberjacks!'"
"Well no, not really. The emphasis is in their name. They have an exclamation mark on the end."
But that, perhaps, would detract from your plot! *s*
Dear Pedant: Q: Which comes first the ! or the ?: "He said what!?" "He said what?!" A: It is not regarded as proper punctuation to have two final stops (the full stop, or period, is the third) together. I'd keep the question mark, in this case, and provide emphasis, if you feel you need it, with italics. Q: Is there a space between words and the dash: "He went to the store‹but forgot what to buy." "He went to the store ‹ but forgot what to buy." A: It's common to do it thus: "He went to the store - but forgot what to buy." You will find some publishers, however, of books and magazines, do without the spaces and run the words hard up against the dash on each side. Q: Is there a space between words and the ellipsis: "He said that the lock was broken...or something." "He said that the lock was broken ... or something." A: Standard practice, even in books and magazines, is to have spaces each side of the ellipsis. Q: "He said the lock was broken...." "He said the lock was broken ...." A: Again, standard practice is to have a space.
Dear Pedant: Is it three months' jail or three months jail? Is it Magistrate's Court or Magistrates Court? What about three dollars worth of sweets? Should dollars carry an apostrophe?
Dear Apostrophe: Fowler wrestled with the answer to your first question and concluded we do need an apostrophe. "Years and weeks," he said (and by extension, months), "may be treated as possessives and given an apostrophe or as adjectival nouns without one. The former is perhaps better, so as to conform to what is inevitable in the singular -- a year's imprisonment, a fortnight's holiday." So, I make it three months' jail. For your second question, you could treat Magistrates as an adjectival noun (as in Townsville citizens rather than Townsville's citizens), but I prefer the Magistrates' Court -- it is a court presided over by magistrates (and there is usually more than one of them); and for your third, I'd rewrite, either as $3 worth of sweets or sweets worth $3 (no one ever spells out three dollars, do they?)
Dear Pedant: There is a rule about quotes at the end of a sentence: put the closing quote after the period. This is illogical, as the period ends the sentence, not the quote. Thus:
He said "ouch."
He said "ouch".
The first example never ends the sentence (but it does end the quote). The second example seems so much more logical to me.
I do not know how to correctly punctuate this sentence:
He said "Why is the sky blue?".
which I have punctuated according to what seems logical to me (the ? is part of the quote, the period ends the sentence). I suspect my punctuation of this violates some rule.
Also, something like:
Why did he say "The sky is not green!"?
or
When did he ask "Why is the sky blue?"?
seems so much more orderly if you end the quote with its own punctuation inside the quote mark, then end the sentence outside the quote mark.
Who makes these rules, and where can I try to argue that this is a dumb rule?
Dear Rule: As a wise grammarian once said, punctuation marks are the road signs along the information highway. They are designed to help you understand what is written, and not get in the way. To take your examples one by one:
The period should go inside the final quotation mark only if the whole sentence is quoted.
So: "He said ouch."
But: He said "ouch".
This is standard practice throughout the English-speaking world.
In
He said, "Why is the sky blue?"
and other constructions that look as though they need two punctuation marks, remember this: one does the job. In
When did he ask "Why is the sky blue?"
you have to decide which question mark looks best, the one inside the quote or the one that ends the sentence. Or, to avoid the problem altogether -- probably the best course -- go into indirect speech:
When did he ask why the sky was blue?
One thing is certain: You cannot have two punctuation marks at the end of a sentence, even if one is inside a quotation. It's like having two stop signs facing you at an intersection.
Dear Pedant: Is a parenthetical "you know(?)" in a colloquial, conversational context, such as "You know, this evening is going to be hell.(?)" or "Tonight will be no fun, you know.(?)" considered to be an interrogation requiring a question mark at the end of the quotation or not, or does it vary?
Dear Vary: It depends whether you are asking a question. Most speakers of English use "you know" (or "y'know") merely as a filler, as a device to use up time while their brain searches for the next word or phrase, much the same as "um" and "er". When you say "You know, this evening is going to be hell.(?)" or "Tonight will be no fun, you know.(?)" are you making statements or asking questions? If the latter, yes, you need a question mark. (And no period, or full stop, since the question mark is an end-of-sentence mark anyway.) I guess you could also use a question mark if you are seeking confirmation -- "Tonight will be no fun. You know?" -- but even then it's a question, isn't it? You know?
Dear Pedant: Hi, I was just reviewing your site and noticed you are using British punctuation (quotes INSIDE end punctuation) rather than American. Is this a British site? Either way, I'd recommend you say which it is in your introduction on your main page, and if it's American, you're doing your quotation marks wrong. :)
Dear :) : I was not aware of the British/American distinction. It is my practice, and practice recommended by Fowler and most other guides I have read, to put quotes inside end punctuation only when the quoted matter is "a fragment". Like that. "When the quoted matter is a full sentence, the end quotes go outside the end punctuation." Like that. See the penultimate question/answer on this page for a fuller discussion. (This site is neither British nor American, by the way.)
Dear Pedant: Referring to book names and poem titles, what do you underline and what do you put quotes around? Would you put quotes around chapter names?
Dear Names: Standard typographical practice is to put book and poem titles (and film titles, TV show names, the names of works of art and other things in similar categories) in italics. This is usually indicated in handwriting or typescript by an underline. Chapter names could be in quotes or merely run in roman with initial capitals (Chapter 4: The Decline of Communism). But as I say, this is standard typographical practice. Publishing houses, universities, colleges etc often have their own style rules.
Dear Pedant: Re the placement of quotation marks relative to other punctuation marks, bad advice and unsound logic.
Dear Logic: See The New Fowler's Modern English Usage,OUP, page 646. See also common usage in books, newspapers and magazines throughout the English-speaking world. (I tried to email you direct, but my post was returned address unknown.)
Dear Pedant: In quoting a quote, is it proper to use " " or ' '? I am writing a paper and I am clueless.
Dear Clueless: It depends on the "style" of the medium. Most newspapers and magazines, you will have noticed, use double marks, "like this", whereas books use single marks, 'like this'. If your paper is to be published you should follow the style of the publication. If not, it doesn't really matter, although "double quotes" are a more common practice. You must also remember that when "quoting something 'inside' a quote", you must use the opposite mark, as shown here. Hope this helps.
Dear Pedant: Where does the punctuation mark go after final quotation marks? Inside or outside?
Dear Outside:It depends whether the material inside the quote marks is a full sentence or just a quoted word or phrase. For instance, in She said he was "morally unsound". the inverted commas precede the full stop because the full stop belongs to the whole sentence, not just the quoted words. But in "You are morally unsound." the whole sentence is quoted, so the full stop belongs inside. There is debate over this, but that, at least, is the way I prefer it.
Dear Pedant: Is it right to put commas around names in such contexts as "British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, today decided . . ."?
Dear Coma: No. You must be able to remove words between comma pairs, which act like pairs of dashes or brackets, and leave the sentence making sense. In your example you would be left with "British Prime Minister said today . . ." which is clearly not English. If you want commas, you should put an article ("a" or "the") at the start of the sentence. Otherwise, it should be "British Prime Minister Tony Blair said today . . ."
Got a question about punctuation? Send it to me here: dearpedant@hotmail.com
Get your own Free Home Page