Q. I would very much like to have software that would automatically format text for Chicago style. Does such a thing exist?
Where would I find it? Thank you.
A. Readers have mentioned to us a handful of programs—including EndNote, RefWorks, and Zotero—that
they say can be helpful in formatting notes and bibliographies in CMOS style. Unfortunately, a problem we frequently encounter in manuscripts is the accidental use of notes style for bibliographies
and vice versa. Even though everything looks perfect and consistent on the surface, we have to return the work to the author
for repairs. So be careful what you wish for, and be sure to check your work carefully.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Perhaps the most important quote for the paper I am writing comes from the footnote of something someone wrote in a scholarly
journal. Is there a particular way I should have to endnote this since the quote comes from a footnote?
A. Yes. In addition to the page number, give the note number: 256n4.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. A student of mine has quoted two different popular periodical articles by the same author, written in the same year. We are
stumped as to how the in-text citation and the reference list entry should look. It seems simple with books (e.g., 2009a,
2009b). But with periodicals, date information beyond the year is given in the works cited list, right? Any suggestions?
A. The trouble is, journals use various incompatible means for dating individual issues, whether by month, season, or number,
so the order of publication is not always apparent. For this reason, it’s best to disregard information
other than the year in styling author-date citations. The simple method you use for books works best for journals as well:
order the titles alphabetically and assign a letter to the year.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am reviewing musicological literature for my next book. I found the following in one source: “Systematic-objective
repetition of a peculiar sonic construct on appropriate instruments as well as in proper contexts loops the targeted mind/s
in a revolving grove.” My experience and training have me reasonably certain the author meant groove and not grove, and that in citing, I ought to follow grove with [sic] and a note suggesting the likelihood of groove. On the other hand, the author, by slim chance (and in search of a novel metaphor), might really have his minds looping in
groves. What does CMOS suggest?
A. You are the best one to judge, so I would advise you to go with your inclination to add [sic] and suggest that groove might have been meant. Or simply write “[groove?]” instead of [sic ].
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I work for the Texas State Library Talking Book Program. We serve people who have disabilities that prevent them from reading
standard print or that prevent them from holding a book or turning pages. I have a blind patron who contacted us with a question
about how to cite a Braille book in Chicago/Turabian style. Is there a standard format for how to cite Braille books? Since
she is working on her dissertation she wants to cite things as fully and completely as possible to make sure that she is providing
all the necessary information to her committee and in her published paper.
A. I’m sorry CMOS doesn’t have a specific example of a citation of a book in Braille, but your patron is in a good position
to decide which elements are useful and add them to a standard citation. The important thing is to be clear and include the
information that readers will need to understand the citation and locate the source.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Do I need to repeat author names and year of publication in the same paragraph if I have already mentioned and referenced
the authors at the beginning of the paragraph?
A. If it’s clear that everything you’ve written after the first mention is still
referring to the same source, then there’s no need to repeat—although you might
consider moving the citation to the end of the paragraph. If you’ve mentioned anyone else in between,
or offered your own commentary, then you have to name the first source again.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. How many works to include in a single citation? The following in-text citation includes too many works, to my taste: (Hong & Kuo 1999; Holton 2001; Rowden 2001; Reichert 1998; Gravin 1994; Holt et al. 2000; Griego et al. 2000; Thomsen & Hoest 2001; Goh 2003; Porth et al. 1999; Gardiner & Whiting 1997; Watkins & Marsick 1998). Does anyone have a rule that can be helpful in deciding (1) how many works are too many? (2) what you do with the works that have to be deleted? Suggest incorporating them elsewhere?
A. Author-date style can get ugly, and your wish to trim this string is understandable. But the right number of works is however many works the writer needs to list in support of the point she is making. It’s not a good idea for an editor to whittle down a writer’s source citations. Readers in the disciplines that use author-date style are used to being interrupted by it; they seem to appreciate the economical delivery of the information.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Using the notes and bibliography style of citation, how does one cite a 1972 reprint of a Government Printing Office publication of a collection of Native American treaties in a freestanding publication entitled Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, 7 vols.? Charles Kappler served as editor for at least volume 2, which is the only one that I have used. Volumes 1 and 2 were originally published in 1904, though the entire set has a date range of 1904–1980.
A. CMOS treats reprints at 14.114, authors and editors of multivolume works at 14.122, and public documents that are freestanding publications at 14.291. That’s a lot to juggle, but using the examples at those locations, you can fashion something reasonable. In a note citation, it’s not necessary to provide information about the entire multivolume series; it’s enough to cite the volume you are referencing: Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, vol. 2, ed. Charles Kappler (1904; repr., Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1972).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When using the author-date method, how do you cite a special issue of a journal (one that has an issue title and editor)? In particular, how is the title of the special issue formatted: quotation marks, italics, capitalized?
A. Chicago styles the title of a special journal issue in roman type with quotation marks and headline caps. Please see the examples at CMOS 14.178.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am editing a book on a Western painter, and the author insists on including birth and death dates for every person cited,
which makes for very bumpy and annoying reading. I’d like to include the dates in footnotes to make
the reading smoother, but does this lessen the academic value of the text?
A. On the contrary. If this is a trade book, the writer might fear that footnotes will look too academic and turn off readers.
Try to find out why the writer objects. If the objection is to footnotes per se, try for endnotes. If the objection is to
moving the dates out of the text, then you’re probably stuck.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]