Q. We often refer to Chesapeake Bay as “the bay” on second mention (e.g., Chesapeake Bay is one of the largest estuaries in the world; we often visit the bay to conduct trawl surveys). My question is whether it is correct.
A. Chicago style lowercases “the bay” as you do, but uppercasing it is not incorrect, and you are likely to see it capped in various publications.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When pointing to a particular rule within a set of rules, would you capitalize rule? I.e., Federal Rules of Evidence, rule 103, or Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 103? Thank you.
A. Chicago style lowercases generic usages like “rule 103,” but such words are routinely capped in other style manuals, and it’s not wrong to cap them.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. There is much inconsistency regarding the capitalization of the term evangelical used as an adjective or noun. What do you advise?
A. We advise consistency, but that sometimes involves consistently using different treatments in different contexts. Lowercase as a rule, reserving caps for proper nouns or adjectives when referring to a particular denomination or congregation: the Evangelical Church embraces that tenet. I go to First Evangelical; its mission is evangelical in nature.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hello style gurus—I’m editing a historical monograph. The author and I are trying to figure out if he should bracket the first letter of quotations if he changes capitalization. For example, “[T]he judge said” versus “the judge said.” I’ve looked at CMOS 13.21, but we’re not sure if that applies in a historical monograph. How can you tell if it’s obligatory or not? Thanks so much!
A. The brackets are obligatory only if the capitalization is part of the subject under discussion, which is rare outside of legal or textual criticism documents. Please read further at CMOS 13.18–21.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Are terms of endearment capped when used as a form of address, for example, in “Bring me my shoes, Precious” or “Turn off the TV, Darling”? I believe this used to be a rule, but with the trend toward “down” styling, most editors perhaps have thrown it out.
A. Chicago’s preferred style has always been to lowercase pet names, but you can’t go wrong unless you’re inconsistent, since the issue is guided by preference rather than rule. Please see section 8.39 of the 15th edition. (The issue is not addressed in the 16th or 17th editions.)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am making certificates of awards where the recipient’s name is in all caps. One recipient spells her name desJardins. On an all-capitalized document should the first letter of the last name still be a lowercase d?
A. There’s no rule; people do what looks best. Some names look fine with a single letter lowercased (McCOUGHLIN), but more than that risks looking like a mistake: desJARDINS. Another option is to put the particle in small caps: DESJARDINS. Before you make your decision about how to treat these rogue letters, consider all the names in the list.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Sometimes, in spiritual circles, people like to capitalize words like Love or Truth or Divine. For example, “that which is ultimately beyond the mind itself, but is what I call the Divine” or “this deep Love that resides within you at this moment.” My feeling is that capitalizing these “concept” words gives them an air of importance and sacredness, and they are quite often written with this intention. But they really aren’t proper nouns. Are there any guidelines for using such capitalizations? And even more important, what about using both capital and lowercase throughout a book-length manuscript with some policy of consistency?
A. We like consistency, but the problem is that even in a book with spiritual content, not every use of Truth or Love will merit caps: sometimes the terms will have a generic meaning. Writers and editors of such content must work mindfully when they uppercase and lowercase so as not to confuse readers. There will naturally be gray areas where either styling would do. In many documents, the safe choice (and Chicago style) is to simply lowercase everywhere, since uppercasing everywhere would almost certainly lead to inappropriate capping in some cases.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am most comfortable lowercasing job titles after people’s names (e.g., John Smith, director of marketing), but I struggle when the title is something like this: John Smith, William G. Brown Professor of Education. It seems that the latter example is some kind of appointment, and I’m wondering if it should be treated any differently or if, following CMS, it would be correct to write, John Smith, William G. Brown professor of education. Thanks!
A. There is definitely a difference; a named chair is a proper noun, and the entire title must be capped: John Smith, William G. Brown Professor of Education. Please see CMOS 8.28.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When writing out a person’s title that includes a hyphen, when the first letter would be capitalized, should the word following the hyphen also be capitalized (e.g., Co-Founder)?
A. Chicago does not hyphenate co- words (CMOS 7.89, section 4), and in Chicago style, the second half of a hyphenated word that begins with a prefix is lowercased, although there are exceptions. Please see CMOS 8.161, item 3.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. How is capitalization handled in questions of ambiguous geographical origin? I’m trying to rationalize the advice in chapter 8. Is it “German shepherd,” on the grounds that the term refers to the putative geographical origin of the dog, or “german shepherd,” in the same way that you have “swiss cheese” and “french dressing” on the grounds that the term is nonliteral, meant to evoke recall of a geographic place irrespective of the actual origin? (If this is confusing because German shepherds may originate from Germany, what about Australian shepherds, which have nothing to do with Australia whatsoever?)
A. CMOS can list only so many examples, and it’s no good wasting time pondering fine distinctions, so if your document uses some terms that Chicago lowercases and others you aren’t sure about, rather than agonize over possible inconsistencies, just look up the words in a dictionary: CMOS lowercases french dressing and swiss cheese, but Merriam-Webster uppercases them (along with Australian shepherd and German shepherd). Make your choices with a view to minimizing inconsistencies, and record them in your style sheet.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]