Q. I’m editing a novel in which a character stutters on the first word of a sentence. Are both instances capitalized (e.g., “M-My name is” or “M-my name is”)? And do I use a hyphen or an em dash?
A. CMOS is silent on how to write a stutter, but Chicago style tends to favor lowercasing when there’s a choice. Neither style is likely to cause a problem for readers. A hyphen is normally used between letters; an em dash would work if whole words are repeated.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What is the name of the typeface that is used on your website?
A. It’s called Lyon. You can read about it in the colophon of CMOS Online or in the print edition.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In CMOS 8.174 you state that the title of a work should not be used in a sentence as though it’s interchangeable with the subject matter. I agree wholeheartedly, but I’m getting repeated resistance from a writer I work with. I’d love to have a succinct rationale to give her to reinforce my position (ideally one that doesn’t sound unprofessional and snarky). It comes up in situations where the writer needs a headline or email subject line and uses “Your Tips for Getting Ahead are here!” or the like. And then it becomes clear in the body text that follows that a document titled “Tips for Getting Ahead” is being offered.
A. It’s hard to argue with someone who doesn’t see the point, which is admittedly a bit subtle. But if you are able to edit your colleague, a professional, snarkless approach would be to style her heads so they work as real sentences: e.g., “Your Tips for Getting Ahead Are Here!” When this isn’t possible, don’t worry. In most cases, the head will convey the right meaning regardless. If you save your argument for when real confusion would result, your colleague might be better able to see what you mean.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I would like to know whether hyphenated words should always fall on the same line of a sentence. Is it OK to have the prefix at the end of one line and the rest of the word on the next line?
A. In printed materials it’s rarely possible to avoid hyphenating words at the end of all lines. In almost any book, you will see hyphens peppering the edge of the right margin. When a word must be hyphenated at the end of a line, it’s best to divide it at a logical location, such as after a prefix. You can read about word division involving prefixes at CMOS 7.40. More on word division is found at CMOS 7.36–47.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I see that CMOS considers a line consisting of a single word or part of a word to be an “orphan.” I understand that a line that consists of only part of one word would look strange and be undesirable, but is it really necessary to avoid one-word lines in all cases? If the word is short (one or two letters), it does look strange, but I think longer words look fine and are sometimes helpful in “stretching” text that needs to fill a full page.
A. Actually, the CMOS definition of an orphan is the first line of a paragraph that appears as the last line on a page. (Please see CMOS 2.116 or under orphan in the glossary.) Paragraph 2.116 further advises, “The last word in any paragraph must not be hyphenated unless at least four letters (in addition to any punctuation) are carried over to the final line.” So yes, longer words (or parts of words) are fine as the sole content on the last line.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m editing a biography. The author has used a rather journalistic style of writing to indicate the ages of members of the family, e.g., Mary, 12, Ellen, 10, and John, 3. Apart from the general rule of spelling out zero through one hundred, I believe this kind of list is stylistically inappropriate in a discursive work, and would prefer to see it written. For example, Mary was then twelve years old, Ellen was ten, and John, three. Do you agree?
A. We do agree. Your preference aligns with Chicago style, which is favored by humanists, novelists, and other creative writers. See chapter 9 (Numbers) for confirmation. Please note, however, that to many people newspaper-style numerals are familiar and easy to read, and they are not incorrect.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. If a copyright page needs to appear at the end of a book (because, for example, p. iv needs to be used for sponsor information), does the copyright page need to appear in the table of contents? CMOS 1.38 explains why the copyright page is not included when it precedes the TOC (“[TOC] should include all preliminary material that follows it but exclude anything that precedes it”), but it’s not clear whether the copyright page should be included when it falls at the book’s end. Thanks!
A. A copyright page at the back of a book does not need to be included in the contents list, especially if the copyright page is unnumbered. But there’s no rule against including it, in which case the page should be numbered.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. The Chicago Manual is a thick guide that is difficult to follow. As a student and researcher, I find it difficult to find the appropriate citation for the cover page, in-text citations, and paper formatting. As a student in the library science field, it would be nice if the 17th edition of the Chicago Manual lacked these problems. If you are a newbie looking through the Chicago Manual, you don’t want to get a migraine or go blind from reading it.
A. It seems to me that you’re using The Chicago Manual of Style, which is for preparing manuscripts for publication, instead of Kate Turabian’s A Manual for Writers, which explains how to prepare class papers and theses in Chicago style. CMOS does not cover the formatting of student papers, but Turabian gives detailed guidelines. See also the For Students pages at the CMOS Shop Talk blog for the answers to many basic questions about paper writing, including paper setup.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am editing manuscripts for publication in an international scholarly journal. The journal uses CMOS. The British author has cited a book’s edition published by a British publisher, for which the title uses the British spelling (Thy Neighbour’s Wife). For the bibliography (and notes), should the British spelling be changed to US spelling, for consistency? I am inclined to retain the British spelling.
A. That’s exactly right. It’s essential to retain the British spelling. No editor has the right to copyedit an already published work!
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In the June 2017 Q&A you state that when giving the ISBN number, the format may be identified as cloth, paper, or e-book. Does this imply that cloth is synonymous with hardcover? What if, like Hope and Crosby, a book is Morocco bound?
A. Yes, cloth is pretty much synonymous with hardcover. If a book is leather-bound, a publisher might choose to say so, of course (leaving Hope and Crosby out of it).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]