Q. I am editing a series of essays (18th century to present) that have been translated from the French and, later in the series, from other languages. Naturally, word meanings have changed over time. Also, English words and French words, for example, might come from the same root but do not have the same meaning—even in the same century. The translator’s notes on language are copious. He has been numbering them as footnotes, but CMOS says they should be asterisks, not numbers. If there are more than three translator’s notes per page (a quick review shows 8 on some pages), the number of asterisks will be unwieldy. Please advise!
A. Use only one asterisk per page; subsequent translator’s notes should use other symbols, in the traditional sequence (* † ‡), doubling the symbols if there are more than four notes. Please see CMOS 13.28. There are several other ways to integrate translator’s notes into those of the original. Please see CMOS 13.54 for the other methods.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hi! I have a citation question. Text B included an excerpt of Text A, which the author of Text B translated. The translation exists only within Text B; it’s not in any other published work. I want to cite the translation. When doing so, do I need to include Text B in the citation? Or, do I simply cite Text A as translated by author of Text B?
A. If I understand you correctly, you are citing a passage found in Text B and written by Author B which happens to be a translation of someone else’s text. Thus you must credit Author B in addition to Author A.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Can a citation be too long? And how do you know if it is?
A. If you run out of paper? If your computer crashes? (Is this a trick question?) A citation is probably too long if it looks silly or contains more information than necessary. You are probably the best judge of this.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When writing a paper, do you footnote information that you have learned in multiple sources?
A. If what you learned is common knowledge, then there’s no need to cite sources, but if it’s something that most people would need to look up or that different sources treat differently, then you should identify which sources you used. Obviously, this calls for judgment and partly depends on who your readers are and what you can expect them to know.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m wondering how to style a webinar series name and the title of an episode in that series. Should the series name be italicized and the episode title be in quotes?
A. CMOS is silent on webinar titles, but your suggestion is one possibility. Or you could put the series title in regular text (but without quotation marks), like book series titles and titles of academic courses.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am wondering why one needs to provide the URL for a journal or newspaper if one consults it online, but not the name of the library, say, if one consults it in print form? Typically everything about the articles is the same, and so the place where one found them should be irrelevant. Indeed, if I understand the logic, if one downloaded the PDF of a book, one would need to provide the URL, but if one made a PDF of a book and then read that, one wouldn’t have to. What am I missing?
A. The name of the library where you found a book won’t be much help to anyone who doesn’t already patronize that library. Sharing the URL for a source you consulted online has the potential to give readers instant access to that source.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have a question about copyright notices in image credit lines. CMOS 3.33 says that credit lines “occasionally” require a copyright date, but I’m not sure when they do and when they don’t. The first example doesn’t have a copyright date, while the second example, which is formatted identically in other respects, does. Is this determined by the permission grantor, or are there other factors involved?
A. It is indeed determined by the permission grantor, who may specify that the copyright date be included in the credit line. For advice on a specific situation that isn’t clear, please consult an attorney who specializes in intellectual property law.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. If a portion of a book is quoted in text and the author and the name of the book are given in the text (e.g., “Sensory perception is a matter of selectively throwing away information,” write Terry Bossomaier and David Green in their book Patterns in the Sand), is there a need for an endnote, as well?
A. You do need a complete citation when you quote someone else’s work in text. It needn’t be in the form of an endnote, but an endnote (or footnote) is an excellent way to add the publication information (publisher, date) and page or location number of the quotation if you can’t squeeze it all into the text.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Is there any acceptable way for an author to distinguish between endnotes that convey additional information and those that simply provide a reference citation? I get very tired of chasing down a dozen who-cares citations to occasionally glean a gem of real information.
A. It’s fairly common for writers of scholarly books to use footnotes for discursive material and endnotes for citations. But to flag two different types of endnotes somehow in the text? That seems potentially fussy and confusing.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In an essay, an author cited a report by an organization that has, since that report, changed its name, and later the author cited a second report written and published by the organization under its new name. Should the entries in References be under two different names, or both under the new name, perhaps with the first including a note such as, “Formerly . . .”?
A. The author should cite each report under the name that appears on the report. Annotating the new name with “Formerly . . .” is a good idea. Add cross-references, if necessary:
New Name. See also Old Name
Old Name. See also New Name
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]