[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[New search]
To: "Snavely, Deborah" <dsnavely@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: ellipsis
From: Thomas Regner <tom_regner@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 07:43:53 -0800
CC: "'framers@xxxxxxxxx'" <framers@xxxxxxxxx>
Organization: N.E.T. http://www.net.com
References: <CB049873931DD21196950001FA44A13A5D35DA@sw720x020.visa.com>
Sender: owner-framers@xxxxxxxxx
Snavely, Deborah wrote: > Can anyone here confirm whether switching to the UK dictionary flags > incorrectly used closed punctuation? (Closed "word," punctuation seems to be > more a US default style, while open "word", punctuation is, I'm told, a UK > default style.) Much debate has raged over this, especially amongst editors, over the years. The Chicago Manual of Style, favored by many, specifies enclosing both periods (UK: "full-stop") and commas in U.S. usage. All other punctuation, according to the CMoS, is to be placed outside of the quotation marks. There are problems that arise, of course, when quoting precise lines of code, for example, where using a tailing comma inside the quotes will not work if it is assumed that everything bordered by the quotation marks should be included. It is mostly a stylistic issue where many believe that putting periods and commas outside of the quotation marks is ugly. Many companies have style guides which specify which style of punctuation to use. This is usually an arbitrary decision based solely upon concensus of opinion. And so the battle rages. Some say that the only reason the U.S. adopted the "closed punctuation" method (your terminology) is because we in the U.S., having won the war, had therefore won the right to modify the language -- a decision which may have been borne of a desire to add insult to injury. Pure speculation... Best, -- Tom ** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com ** ** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body. **