Q. How do you cite T-shirts?
A. You could write, for example: Last week on Ellis Avenue I saw a T-shirt that said, “I keep pressing
Escape but I’m still here.” That is, if you think it’s a
good idea to cite a T-shirt.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When one is citing an ancient source whose author is unknown or disputed and which is published in the original language,
is the editor’s name put before the title in footnotes and bibliography? Does the modern translator’s
name go first?
A. Some citations of ancient sources emphasize the original author (Plato), some the title (Inscriptiones Graecae), and some the modern translator or editors (Pauly-Wissowa). You can check published sources in your field to see how a particular
work is cited, since there is often a standard way to refer to a given work. If your source is too obscure for that, then
style it in the way that seems best to you.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When using the same five sources throughout the same paper, do I create a new endnote (using a new number) throughout the
paper (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.)? For example, if my paper has twenty-two citations, will I use endnotes 1–22?
Or do I just refer to the same five numbers throughout the paper?
A. You will need all twenty-two numbers, although it’s fine to shorten a citation after you’ve
given it once in full. The other method is used mainly for charts and tables, where you can recycle a single note number every
time it applies.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m struggling with the correct format for websites. It’s when the author is
unknown that I run into trouble. For a print source, we’d begin with the article title, but CMOS says that the website’s owner “may” be used as the author.
Does “may” mean “should”? How do we
distinguish between the website’s name and owner? For example, if I’m citing an
authorless article from CNN.com, do I begin with CNN.com as the author, and then also include CNN.com as the website? Can
you sort this out?
A. Of course we can. By “may” we do not mean “should.”
We mean that listing the owner as the author is an option. You can begin with the article title instead, followed by CNN (in italics) as the title of the web page. If you’d rather have an “author,”
however, CNN (not CNN.com) in roman type makes a fine one. CNN.com will appear in the URL you include.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In citations and references, what is the preferred format for codes and standards issued by scientific organizations? As
an example, “RASB Standard 531: Antigravity and what to do when it fails” (one
of many standards published by the Rebel Alliance Scientific Branch, each on a different topic and with a different number)
would be set differently by each of our several editing groups here, and we are trying to find common ground. Would you suggest
we treat it along the lines of (1) a book title, (2) a multivolume work, (3) an article in a periodical, or (4) something
else entirely?
A. To style documents that don’t fit neatly into one of Chicago’s categories, pick
out the main elements and list them in the familiar order: author or organization, title, place of publication, publisher,
date. Your standards look like a series of reports, so you could write something like this: Rebel Alliance Scientific Branch,
Antigravity and What to Do When It Fails, RASB Standard 531 (City: RASB, 2009).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hello—I need to correctly format an Australian law for a nonlegal publication. May I use the format
suggested in CMOS for British historical records? I realize that this is specific to UK publications, but it seems like the best approximation.
Q. I normally have cited at the beginning of a paraphrase. For instance, if I am using three sentences to express a scholar’s
point, I would reference after the first sentence. I recently was advised that this is not correct and that the last sentence
of the three is the sentence that needs the reference. Can you enlighten me on which is correct?
A. If your paraphrase is obviously a summary of this scholar’s work, and if you make it clear to readers
where the summary begins and ends (and why wouldn’t you?), either location for the note callout will
be fine.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When I am citing a periodical that does not provide the page number, but does provide the volume and issue, is it necessary
to cite the issue number (e.g., Hameed 2009, 3:1)? Or how should this be cited?
A. Since the issue number (or month) will appear in the reference list citation, “Hameed 2009”
is sufficient in the text citation.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What do you do about reproducing a table found in a work you are citing? Can it be used and cited the same way text can be?
A. There is some debate about this. One camp perceives a table as text and would cite it as you would a passage in a book or
journal, without special permission (especially if you are merely using the data within the table). Another camp recommends
getting permission, especially if you are reproducing wholesale a table that has a unique design or layout or interpretation
of the data. If you have any doubts, seek the advice of your publisher.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am editing a nonfiction trade book for an author who wants to use endnotes that begin with specific words in the text but
that have no note numbers in the text. We are in rather strong disagreement about this. First, what do you call this style?
Second, is this the new standard in trade publishing?
A. It isn't new; some University of Chicago Press books have used it. We call it “notes keyed to text.”
It's especially favored for books meant for a general readership, because it's a little friendlier than those scholarly note
numbers.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]