Q. The February 2012 issue of National Geographic has a headline and subtitle that read, “What Dogs Tell Us: The ABC’s of DNA.” While I realize that National Geographic may have their own style guide, would Chicago style eliminate that apostrophe from ABC’s?
A. We would. But that apostrophe is conventional in newspaper and magazine publishing. You’ll probably see it everywhere, now that you’ve noticed it. In newspapers and magazines, where headlines often appear in all caps, the plurals of acronyms and initialisms without apostrophes (PCS, IVS, RBIS) would be difficult to interpret, since the final S would appear to be part of the acronym.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Is it the three R’s or Rs? The NYT seems to use R’s—I thought I’d double check with you folks before I publish something.
A. Either way is fine, but Chicago style is Rs. (The New York Times evidently prefers to follow NYT style.) Please see CMOS 7.15.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. How would you pluralize “ram’s horn” when there are seven
of them (i.e., more horns than one ram would naturally have)? Logically, it should be “rams’
horns,” but there is an argument that this should be treated in the same way as cowhides or sheepskins.
In that case, wouldn’t it be “ram horns”? There are also
votes in the office for “ram’s horns.”
A. Since cowhides and sheepskins are closed compounds, they aren’t relevant (and in any case you can’t
combine rams and horns without getting “shorn”). Since “seven
rams’ horns” suggests fourteen horns, “seven ram’s
horns” seems clearest.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Our organization has a position called “director’s advisor.”
There are about sixteen such advisors. I am editing a human resources paper on this position, and I have to figure out what
the plural should be. There is an argument for making it “director’s advisors,”
on the grounds that the job title itself is immutable, so if the text refers to several of them, an s should simply be placed at the end of the title. However, if there is one farmer and he has a field, it is a “farmer’s
field.” The fields of several farmers would be referred to as “farmers’
fields.” Any assistance you can give in resolving this issue would be much appreciated!
A. If there is more than one director, then your analogy to farmers’ fields is apt, and “directors’
advisors” will work. (There’s nothing “immutable”
about a title that prevents pluralizing it in this way.) If there is only one director, you don’t multiply
her by having more than one advisor; in that case, the plural is “director’s advisors.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am editing a textbook for English students in Brazil. One of the exercises presents a recipe for pumpkin pie. Students
are told the pie filling contains 1 1/2 cup pumpkin, 1 1/2 cup sugar, and so on. I seem to remember that anything greater
than 1 should be plural. Am I correct? In other words, should the recipe read 1 1/2 cups?
A. Yes, make those measures plural—but that’s way too much sugar.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What is the proper treatment for “disease” in “Center for
Pancreatic and Hepatobiliary Disease”?
A. It’s not entirely clear; the manuscript editors I consulted prescribed treatments ranging from dietary
to surgical. But since the word “Disease” seems to refer to two diseases, three
out of four editors recommended the plural.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Is it correct to use parenthesis to indicate the possibility of a noun as singular or plural? Example: Child(ren).
A. I wouldn’t. It’s not so much an issue of correctness as of ickiness.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Is this a plural or a singular: John Smith et al. (1990) argues (or argue)? And should a comma be placed after the year?
A. The subject is plural (John Smith and others). A comma would be overkill—the parentheses do the work
of setting off the date.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. The editors at our institution disagree about whether the singular point or plural points should be used in the following phrase: “0.4 percentage point(s).” Can you be
the decider, as our commander-in-chief would say, on this one?
A. Recently Chicago Tribune language writer Nathan Bierma made sense of this conundrum in a reply to a similar question. He quoted Bill Walsh of the
Washington Post, who suggests that the trouble resides in thinking of the singular as one or less, whereas it’s more
helpful to think of the singular as exactly one, neither more nor less. Walsh points out that we say “zero
dollars,” not “zero dollar.” By this logic, you should write
“0.4 percentage points.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Should the word head in this sentence have an s on it to agree with the multiple kids, or does this create a situation where each kid ends up with multiple heads? “The
children put their hats on their heads.”
A. Add the s. Please note, however, that people don’t always talk that way; the construction that omits the s is common and accepted in many contexts. (Of course, if the children have a single head, they should have a single hat, pace Dr. Seuss.)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]