Q. I’m editing the autobiography of a delightful, elderly R&B songwriter who writes of his song reaching
“#3” on the Billboard chart, but later writes of having a “top
ten” hit. Are there special rules for documenting music charting, or should we spell out all numerical
positions to be consistent with CMOS? In some paragraphs, he lists the many chart positions reached by his songs, so spelling out makes the section difficult
to read. I don’t want to hurt his feelings by telling him that we should just summarize his chart-topping
accomplishments or put them in an appendix. Egad—am I too tenderhearted to be an editor?
A. A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way. I’m sure you can
find a way to suggest that your author “showcase” (for instance) his stats in
an attractive table in order to eliminate the unsightly boogers (you can put this more delicately) in the paragraph you describe.
Otherwise, yes, it’s a good strategy to modify a style in a particular area of a manuscript if the prevailing
style becomes unwieldy, and in this case you could use numerals rather than spell out the numbers. You might also consider
styling chart position numbers this way throughout the manuscript.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In a work of fiction, should all numbers be spelled out in dialogue?
A. Spell out numbers in dialogue whenever it can be done without awkwardness. Years, for example, are better rendered as numerals. For more guidance, see CMOS 13.44.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When hours and minutes are mixed in a sentence that is describing a duration, are all numerals used? For instance, is it
“The spacewalk lasted 7 hours and 54 minutes” or “The spacewalk
lasted seven hours and 54 minutes”?
A. Chicago style allows for mixing numerals and spelled numbers if they describe different categories of objects (like hours
and minutes). All the numbers in a given category should be treated the same way. So both your versions are fine, although
our preferred rendering would be “The spacewalk lasted seven hours and fifty-four minutes.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hi—My Manual of Style is buried in a box at home after a move, and we’re having a debate at work. When should numbers be spelled out, and when should they be written in numerals?
A. Chicago’s general rule is expressed in CMOS 9.2: “In nontechnical contexts, Chicago advises spelling out whole numbers from zero through one hundred and certain round multiples of those numbers.” Since there are numerous exceptions and special cases, however, you really need to finish unpacking and read chapter 9. (I can’t believe you forgot to put CMOS in the “Open Me First” box with the toilet paper, box cutter, and Band-Aids.)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Our company has always presented costs to clients in both written and numerical form. For example, “The
cost for our services is two thousand one hundred fifty dollars ($2,150).” One client has pointed out
that the number in parentheses is negative and therefore we owe him money. How can we present numbers to clients in both written
and numerical form without using the parentheses, which may indicate a negative number?
A. Parentheses are occasionally used instead of the minus sign in tabular matter (e.g., spreadsheets) to indicate negative quantities.
In most contexts, however, parentheses set off text that explains or qualifies or amplifies the surrounding context—as
in your example and often in contracts and other legal documents. Parentheses used in this way have no bearing on any quantities
they enclose—monetary or otherwise. Continue presenting your costs as you always have.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When talking about “the turn of the century” (from 1899 to 1900), should it be “the turn of the nineteenth century” or “the turn of the twentieth century”? It seems that since the years 1800 to 1899 have been referred to as the nineteenth century, then the turn from 1899 to 1900 should be referred to as “the turn of the nineteenth century.” Please advise.
A. There is no general agreement about what a phrase like “turn of the nineteenth century” means. It does seem to suggest the “turn of the nineteenth century into the twentieth”—i.e., the change from 1900 to 1901 (or, popularly, 1899 to 1900). But it’s probably best to stick to the more general phrase “turn of the century” and to limit it to a context that makes the century in question clear—for example, in a discussion surrounding the immediate legacy of Theodore Roosevelt’s charge up San Juan Hill. See CMOS 9.32.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. You’ve stumped me. I teach a copyediting class at Emerson College, where I’ve assigned CMOS for years as a required text. This term, I gave my class a quiz on using numbers in which one of the questions was a simple True or False about spelling whole numbers one through ninety-nine. Some students got it wrong because, they insisted, their book specified numbers through one hundred. Sure enough, several students have one version of 8.3 and the rest another. Since everyone is using the fourteenth edition, we are very curious—not to say confounded. What’s up with that quirky 8.3? Are there any other differences I should know about? I’d appreciate any insights you can offer, especially since I have already ordered the book for next semester. Thanks!
A. Ah, yes, the infamous 8.3 of the fourteenth edition of CMOS. Earlier printings of the fourteenth edition applied sound logic. Look at the two-part rule: (1) the numbers one through ninety-nine are spelled out, and (2) the numbers one through ninety-nine followed by “hundred,” “thousand,” “hundred thousand,” “million,” and so on are also spelled out. It would be redundant to write in the first part that one through one hundred should be spelled out, because one hundred is covered by the second half of the rule (from which one can extrapolate that “one” followed by “hundred” should be spelled out).
Logical as this may have been, the wording confused many of us. So we changed the first part of the rule to make it clearer: spell out the numbers one through one hundred. The rule now confuses (almost) no one, even though it is a bit redundant.
In the fifteenth edition, we retained the clarity of later printings of the fourteenth. Starting with the sixteenth, we’ve clarified that zero is also spelled out (see CMOS 9.2).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. A quandary: I’m seeing September 11th (added “th”) in the New Yorker magazine, where editing is usually superb, but somewhat antiquated. The New York Times refers to the date as Sept. 11 or 9/11. Please give me a rundown of your recommendations for this particular date, including use as an adjective (September 11 tragedy?). Or is it still too soon to have a set standard? Thanks. I’m probably the 911th person to ask you this.
A. In written text, Chicago’s rule is to write a cardinal rather than an ordinal, even though the number may be pronounced as an ordinal:
the events of September 11
the September 11 tragedy
September 11, 2001
When a day alone is mentioned, it is usually in the form of an ordinal but spelled out:
September 10, 2001, was the last day of its kind in the United States. The tenth will therefore always be important, even as it stands in the shadow cast by the eleventh.
As for an abbreviated form for September 11, “9/11” works fine (but see CMOS 9.35).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In the admittedly rare circumstances when you want to write out the name of a large number, are there any agreed-upon guidelines for the usage of the word “and”? Is it “six hundred seventy-two” or “six hundred and seventy-two”? I was taught the former in grade school; a colleague was taught the latter, equally adamantly. I should note that said colleague is Canadian; is this perhaps a question of American versus British usage? All consulted manuals are, inexplicably, silent on the matter.
Q. In prose, when writing percentages, which is correct: 10 percent; ten percent, or 10%?
A. Chicago prefers the use of numerals for all numbers used as part of percentages, but use the word “percent”
for humanistic copy and the “%” symbol for scientific and statistical copy:
humanistic:
10 percent (but spell out “10” if it begins the sentence)
scientific, statistical:
10%
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]