Q. Hello. When the author uses the same source for five consecutive notations, should I give each a number and list it five times consecutively in the notes, or should I put only one number at the beginning (or end) of the paragraph, thereby listing it only once in the notes? Also, if the notations are apart from one another, I would have to give the source multiple numbers, I’m sure, but then do I re-reference the source, or can I say, for example, “113. See note 72,” or some such? Thanks!
A. Within a single paragraph, one note number will do. In subsequent paragraphs, use “ibid.” to refer to the work most recently cited. You can read about how to use the Latin abbreviation “ibid.” (from ibidem, “in the same place”) in CMOS 14.29 [16th ed.].
[Update: Chicago now prefers shortened citations in favor of ibid. For examples, see CMOS 14.34.]
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I cite a number of works that were written long ago, such as Locke’s Second Treatise on Government. The straightforward way to cite such a work is by the date of the edition employed (Locke, 1987: 201). I find this ugly and uninformative, however. Is there a permissible way to indicate the date of original publication, such as (Locke, 1689 [1987]: 201)? Thank you for your assistance.
A. Yes, you can do that. Please see CMOS 15.40. Chicago style puts the original date in brackets and omits the comma after the author’s name. The first date determines placement in the reference list.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. CMOS says to use the city listed for the publisher on the title page or copyright page of the book. If more than one city is listed, use the first one. Our magazine publishes a list of science books in each issue. One of the major publishers is Springer. Most of the Springer books we list have “Berlin Heidelberg New York” on the copyright page—the only place I can find a location listed. We traditionally have listed New York, as we are an American publication. However, some Springer books we list say only “Dordrecht, The Netherlands” on the copyright page. Should we cite different cities depending on what is listed on the copyright page? This looks inconsistent to me—to list different cities for the same publisher.
A. It may be annoyingly inconsistent for Springer to publish books in different countries, but no, it wouldn’t be right to say that a book was published in New York if in fact it were published in Dordrecht, or vice versa.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I was recently penalized by my history professor for conforming to the CMOS even though we are required to do so. His comment: “Footnotes require a full reference for the first citation of a source—then subsequent footnotes/endnotes utilize the form you employed.” I appealed, citing CMOS. In reply, my appeal was summarily denied: “Sorry, but there is no history prof I know who would accept footnotes in that form at the undergraduate or graduate level . . . just the Americans being their usual sloppy selves, I guess. . . . If I teach the course again I will have to present a more rigorous set of rules, of the sort employed in actual practice.” Your comment would be appreciated.
A. I doubt that comment from a Chicago editor would make an impression on your professor, who seems rather sure of himself. Students are always at the mercy of their professors, who may consider any changes to be a sign of decaying standards, even changes designed to make text more concise or consistent or reader-friendly. The fact is, there are contexts where full citations at the first instance are important (for instance, if offprints are likely to be made of individual chapters without the inclusion of the bibliography), but in other contexts, they can be considered a duplication of effort. Your professor has admitted fault in not giving clear instructions, but to be safe, perhaps next time you can ask for approval of your citation method before you finish your paper.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am copyediting a scholarly journal in the humanities and have a question about footnotes referencing a website. I always
check the URL to ensure that it is still accessible and still goes to the appropriate information. Typically the author provides
an access date as part of the footnote. My question is: When the URL is still accurate, should I revise the access date to
the date that I checked the URL, or leave the author’s original date in place?
A. Since the author is citing information that appeared on a particular date, it’s important that you
not change it. One purpose in giving a date is to let the reader know that the author didn’t have access
to information that may have been posted at the site after that date.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am doing a research paper for my history class in college and I am supposed to put in the Chicago form of bibliography
and citations. I am trying to find the way that I am supposed to put this in but it is proving very difficult at the moment.
Can you help on this?
Q. I would like to document, in a bibliography, information received in an academic class. Please send me the format for this application. Thank you for this service.
A. Please see CMOS 14.217 (“Lectures and papers or posters presented at meetings”): “The sponsorship, location, and date of the meeting at which a speech was given or a paper, slides, or poster presented follow the title. This information is put in parentheses in a note but not in a bibliography.” E.g.,
D’Erasmo, Stacy. “The Craft and Career of Writing.” Lecture, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, April 26, 2000.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. How do you cite a resource in a Chicago-styled bibliography that happens to be a B.A. student’s thesis submission for her master’s degree?
A. It’s no more relevant to the citation that the student submitted the work for a master’s degree than if she submitted it to a publisher for publication. It’s a paper, and should be cited as such until it turns into an MA thesis. Please see CMOS 14.216.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am working on a manuscript for a book where the author is quoting a poem he has written, but has not yet published. I believe
there should be a citation so as to verify he has not used someone else’s poem without permission and
also to give him the credit of being the author. What would a proper citation look like?
A. I’m afraid I can’t agree that you need any form of citation. I do agree that
it would be a service to readers to indicate somewhere that the poem is by the author, either at the beginning or end of the
poem, in the text, or in a note, if there are notes.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am including several books by the same author in a bibliography. Two of them were written when his last name was Smith. The last was written after he had changed his name to Jones. He is generally referred to as Jones nowadays. Should I put them all under Jones, even though the name on the title page is otherwise?
A. It’s better to use the name that’s on the title page. Please see CMOS 14.82 (“Alternative real names”): “When a writer has published under different forms of his or her name, each work should be listed under the name that appears with the work—unless the difference is merely the use of initials versus full names. . . . Cross-references are occasionally used.” Examples:
Doniger, Wendy. The Bedtrick: Tales of Sex and Masquerade. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
———. See also O’Flaherty, Wendy Doniger.
Overstone, Lord. See Loyd, Samuel Jones.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]