Q. Hello. CMOS 3.34 (“Crediting material obtained free of charge”) says “For material that the author has obtained free and without restrictions on its use, the credit line may use the word courtesy.” What exactly does “without restrictions on its use” mean? Does this mean that, if I’ve gotten permission to use a photo in a specific essay I’m writing, I can’t use “courtesy of” because the permission is only for that specific project?
A. Rights holders can put various restrictions on the use of items they give permission for: they can disallow cropping a photo or resizing or recoloring it or integrating it into a collage. They can prohibit a quotation from being used in an advertisement or from being altered in any way. They can prohibit resale, or repackaging, or use without full credit. If there are restrictions on your photo, they will be listed at the place you got it. Sometimes you have to click on a link to see the specific restrictions. If your photo is without restrictions and therefore does not require a credit, it’s polite to give credit anyway: “Courtesy of Terry Adams.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m wondering if there are other considerations for the order of author names on a third-edition book. The book is a high school textbook, and the first and second editions were written by a team of two authors (the same two for both editions). Both original authors are now retired, and the third edition is being written by a new author. All three will be listed on the new edition, since 60–70 percent of the new book is from previous editions. Would we treat the three authors as equivalent and still use alphabetical order? Or does the author of the current edition have some precedence and so get listed first?
A. Authors are normally listed according to importance, not alphabetically, and the order of the authors is best decided by the authors. If the authors agree to equal status, use alphabetical order.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Dear Sir or Madam: At paragraph 2.69 you say “To point out repetition.” And at paragraph 2.70 you talk about “inadvertent repetition.” I want to know what the repetition is like. In Japan, we don’t usually talk about repetition as a problem of publishing.
A. In English, repetition is sometimes useful for emphasis, but it can become a problem when a sentence or passage is repeated accidentally, when a point or argument is made more often than necessary, or when a word or phrase is used so often that it becomes distracting or tiresome. In these cases, we advise editing.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. My copyeditor has changed “as described below” to “as described following” and has changed “as noted above” to “as noted before.” Is my usage correct, or at least acceptable? I have never seen the usage the copyeditor has suggested. Is this usage becoming a trend, and what does CMOS think about it? Thank you.
A. Your usage is correct and acceptable; your editor’s changes are awkward and unidiomatic. Some overeager editors remove directions like above and below in the fear that once the text in question is typeset it might end up directly across on a facing page or at the top of a page overleaf, in which case the terms above and below will not be literally true. If your pointers refer to illustrations (whose positioning is beyond your control), such precautions are reasonable. Otherwise, it’s silly to think that readers don’t understand that above means “before” and below means “after.” One way to negotiate this might be to consider whether phrases like “as described below” or “as noted above” are truly needed. They suggest a writer who doesn’t trust his readers to keep reading or remember what they’ve read.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. This problem came up when copyediting a journal: on a page that is occupied by a broadside image and has a single footnote (to the caption of the image), should the footnote be oriented the same as the image and caption (i.e., 90 degrees from normal), or should it stay as regular?
A. It’s not usual to footnote a caption rather than simply run the note into the caption with “Note:” in front of it, so you won’t find a rule for this in CMOS. But to compound the oddity by having two strings of text at right angles to each other is probably not a good idea. It’s almost always best, if possible, to set all the type on a page in such a way that it can be read continuously without turning the book.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When listing page reference numbers for image credits at the back of a book, should the vertical list of page numbers default to the left or to the right? E.g., if page number 9 appears above page number 16, would the 9 appear above the 1 or above the 6? If page number 85 appears above page number 123, would the 8 appear above the 1 or above the 2 of 123?
A. You will find this done every which way. Generally, the right-alignment of numbers in a vertical list is important only when the numbers are quantities that might be tallied, such as in a table column. If the numbers include a decimal point, they may be aligned on the point instead of on the rightmost digit. When the numbers are enumerators, alignment is an aesthetic issue that is usually decided by a graphic designer.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I publish memoirs. One of my authors wants to include selected blurbs and reviews as part of the front matter. I’ve seen this done in other books under the heading “Advance praise for this book” or a similar heading. My questions to CMOS are (1) is it appropriate to include blurbs and reviews as part of the front matter, and (2) if so, where should they be placed? Thanks.
A. Many publishers include such blurbs. As you say, you’ve seen them yourself. Academic/scholarly publishers rarely do this; hence CMOS is silent. At a bookstore or library you can look at the latest memoirs to learn what’s in fashion.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I work at a university press, and during a meeting of project editors we had a disagreement about the correct placement of the glossary. CMOS recommends that the glossary appear between the notes and bibliography. Although we’ll accept this as your final answer, our question is why? Thank you!
A. Like many of the rules in CMOS, this one was begotten lo those many years ago. In an early edition of the manual, the glossary was placed just so, and then that edition begat the next. The next edition begat the following one, and the following one begat the one after, and so on down unto these very days. Obviously, someone at the dawn of time thought it was a good idea, and no one in all the generations since has found reason to mess with it. And so that is why.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I wrote a novel, and in the story there’s a fictitious newspaper that I made up. The Gazette. Repeat, not a real newspaper. When a friend reviewed the novel, she said I should italicize it, like real newspapers. Should I?
A. Yes, the fake newspaper should be italic. The world you are creating in your novel is supposed to seem real. You don’t want to pull readers out of that world by labeling some items in it fake.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I enjoy reading the monthly Q&A. The answers often seem to tell the questioners to use some common sense, that there isn’t one right answer necessarily for every situation, and that comprehensibility trumps consistency and being a stickler. Certainly, though, there are times when there is a right answer. Do you have a philosophy or recommendations for how to distinguish those situations from the rest?
A. We’re working on an app for that; meanwhile, you’ll have to trust your judgment.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]