Q. I am editing an e-book that uses footnotes and endnotes. The author would like to use the footnotes to provide additional
information that may be of interest to the reader. As a result, the footnotes are often long and require multiple citations.
I’m not sure how to cite multiple sources in a footnote. Should the paraphrased statements be followed
by the full citation in parentheses? Should the citations stand alone? The best option, I believe, is to include the material
in the text of the book, but the author is greatly opposed to this.
A. It’s usual to have multiple citations in substantive notes. Their order should follow the writer’s
order of argument. There’s no need to put the citations in parentheses or group them at the end of the
note. Citations can be worked into the syntax of a sentence or stand alone as if they were sentences themselves (separated
by semicolons or periods). Sometimes one or more citations begin a note and are followed by explication.
As for moving the discursive note content into the text, your author might feel that the content is peripheral, in which
case it’s best to leave it in the notes.
You would benefit from looking at the notes in a variety of scholarly books at a library or bookstore. The figures in chapter
14 of CMOS might also be helpful.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Concerning in-text citations (e.g., Jacobs 1990, 32), CMOS says that when an author’s name appears in the text, it may be omitted in the parenthetical citation (1990, 32), and that when one cites the same item more than once in a paragraph, the author and year of citations after the first may be omitted (32). Suppose a paper makes continued reference to one work throughout an entire section, spanning several pages. May the author and year be omitted throughout after the first citation? Or should they be cited once per page, or once per paragraph, or once per sentence? Or perhaps anytime there is an intervening alternative citation?
A. Certainly repeat the author and date after an intervening alternative citation. Repeat them every time they are needed, either as a reminder or when it isn’t clear otherwise who is being cited.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have a question about citing archival documents for an organization whose name has changed. The records in the archive
are under one name, but the name during the period discussed in the paper was another name. We want to ensure that readers
can get back to the actual documents. One option we discussed is including text in the first note that explains this difference
in names.
A. Exactly. Explain in a note or as an annotation to the citation itself. Withhold the information only if you wish to cause
confusion and wild goose chases.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am editing a thesis, and for the bibliography I have arranged titles by the same author in alphabetical order. Librarians at the university have told me that these titles should be in chronological order. Is there an error in the Chicago Manual of Style Online?
A. Chicago style for ordering titles in bibliographies is alphabetical. However, if you are in fact editing a reference list instead of a bibliography, the order would be chronological. (See CMOS 14.2 or our Quick Guide to determine which you are editing.) Please note too that most universities have rules and guidelines for formatting citations, and not all follow CMOS.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m using Shelley Jackson’s short story “Skin”
as a primary source in an article I’m writing, but the story is published only as tattoos on the bodies
of volunteers (one word per volunteer). How do I cite this work?
A. Cite it the same way you would “cite” your sandwich or your miniblinds or the
fluff under your bathroom rug—not by trying to pretend it is a bibliographic source, but simply by telling
what it is. In the text or in a note, write something like “Shelley Jackson’s
‘Skin’ is a story published only as tattoos on the bodies of volunteers (one word
per volunteer).”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hi—I’m editing a MS where the author has included the page reference for a quotation
as follows:
. . . a performative intervention that would “challenge the conceptual categories that frame”
such historical encounters (Merrill 2006, 65).
Is the citation placement correct? In APA the citation immediately follows the quotation, e.g.,
. . . that frame” (Merrill 2006, p. 65) such historical encounters.
But as the author has adopted this generally as a style, I’m thinking it might be right according to
Chicago (with which I am less familiar). Can you help, please?
A. CMOS does not dictate a single approach to placing citations, but if you move a citation, you must be careful not to change the
nature of the attribution. Presumably your writer wants to attribute the entire thought to Merrill 2006, but APA style obscures
that point (in addition to separating the verb from the direct object). If you move citations in this MS, be prepared to explain
why, and ask the author to check that you haven’t introduced any problems.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have a question about in-text citations. In my reference list I have website sources that do not have a date of creation
or a last modified date. How would I cite these references in the text? Would I use n.d. or the access date following the author in the parentheses?
A. Yes, n.d. stands in for a date that can’t be determined. The date of access may be relegated to the reference
list, unless it’s relevant to the discussion in the text.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In a reference list I’m editing, page ranges don’t seem to be provided for chapters
in edited volumes. Should I query the author for page numbers?
A. Ideally, the page ranges would be included, but it’s up to you whether to ask for them, require them,
or merely point out where they’re missing. Consider how many ranges are missing, how much else there
is for the author to tend to, and how much you think the author would care about this if it were pointed out. (You can sometimes
guess this from the general level of meticulousness in a manuscript.) You don’t want to peck an author
to death, and it’s not a disaster for readers to be without this information, so you might decide to
let the matter go.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Our group has chosen The Chicago Manual of Style as a reference for our university translation project (textbook on international trade). What I’d like to know is whether, since we have chosen CMoS, it now supersedes the capitalization rules used by the publishing agencies of works cited in the text. For example, would it be “Customs—Trade Partnership Against Terrorism” as it appears on their website or “Customs—Trade Partnership against Terrorism,” following CMoS rules for lowercasing prepositions?
A. The latter. Choosing a style guide means that you will edit your documents to conform to that guide. It’s actually one of the primary purposes of having a guide. Titles in original published works feature various display styles—all caps, small caps, italics. There’s really no way a writer or editor can be expected to research and reproduce the exact appearance of the title page of every book. Since you’ve decided to follow CMOS (yay!), you will lowercase “against” per CMOS 8.159.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. How do I acknowledge that a quotation is a translation made by myself? (I’m writing in Dutch; all sources
are in English.)