Q. I wonder what your ruling is on using Latin-based (but non-Latin) characters as part of a person’s name. At my job, I am often required to write about Turkish Prime Minister Erdoğan. English publications usually write it as “Erdogan,” but this has the side effect of people pronouncing it “Er-do-gan” and looking foolish. I would argue we should write it “Erdoğan,” as this more closely reflects the name’s pronunciation (as well as its actual spelling), and the alphabet is still comprehensible to an English speaker. However, what is your take?
A. If your typesetters can set the correct letter, by all means use it. Although writers who quote you may type a plain g, not knowing how to reproduce the special character, there’s nothing you can do about that. Whenever it’s appropriate, help your readers out by providing the pronunciation in parentheses or in a note.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When one makes an adjective out of a proper name, does one retain the capital letter? For example, should “gram-negative,” the adjective describing a bacterium showing a certain result on Gram’s test, actually be written “Gram-negative” (as my spellchecker seems to “think”)?
A. Many such terms do take initial upper case. CMOS notes, however, that “personal, national, or geographical names, and words derived from such names, are often lowercased when used with a nonliteral meaning,” as in “dutch oven” or “french fries.” In the case of “gram-negative,” Merriam-Webster supports you by lowercasing, although a brief online survey suggests that uppercasing is also accepted by authorities.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When spelling last names, are there rules? We have family names like LaFleur—should there be a space
between the a and the f? Should the L be in caps or lowercase? When spelling place-names, there is a space—Los Angeles would never be spelled
without the space—right? I am confused—can you help?
A. Unfortunately, I cannot help, because there are no rules. Each family gets to decide. If you check a phone book, you'll see
many variations of such names.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. We are working on a biography of Pope John Paul II in which the author refers to the subject alternately as Wojtyla and Karol.
The question is, should it be made consistent throughout?
A. Yes, but consistent with what? The name should conform to the context. For instance, if the passage is about the pope’s
childhood and refers to a brother or sister by first name, the author may have written “Karol”
for consistency. In any passage where others are called by first names or surnames for reasons of clarity or convention, the
author may have chosen accordingly.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am proofreading a nonfiction book which introduces new people in an inconsistent manner: sometimes they are introduced
by first name, sometimes last, sometimes by a shortened form of their name. Sometimes the book goes several pages before completely
identifying the person. Is there a rule which governs how names should be handled?
A. At proofs stage, you can query any omissions that cause problems, but it may be too late to insert complete identifications.
Unless the point is to keep the reader guessing, it’s best to provide the full name at the first mention,
along with other introductory details. After that, surnames ought to be enough, although sometimes it’s
good to remind the reader. And of course some familiar names need no introduction.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. My job entails editing and Americanizing books from the UK. We normally change British spellings to American for our audience,
like defence to defense or centre to center. But what do I do in cases where one of these words is part of an official name, as in Ministry of Defence? or such-and-such
Centre? If I leave the British spelling, it looks wrong compared to the text, but if I change it to the American spelling,
it is wrong according to the organization.
A. Don’t worry—neither will look wrong. The text will look American and the name
will look British. You can’t change the names of organizations, and most readers will know that.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am a translator and in my work I always have to deal with proper names of works of art, locations, streets, cities, etc.
What is the rule of thumb for that? Leave in the original language or translate into English? I have seen both. Would you
kindly help me?
A. I’m afraid there’s no easy answer, because the decision depends on what you believe
will be most useful to the readers you expect to read that work. If you’re translating a scholarly text
for specialists, readers will want the original. If you’re translating a spy novel, they won’t
necessarily. Sometimes you’ll want both to appear right there in the text (one in parentheses); other
times you’ll want to hide one or the other in a note. It’s a decision that should
be made with the author’s input, if possible.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Many of the products that my company offers employ midcaps (internal capital letters) as well as partial italics—for example, CustomerCares. In chapter 8, I see that Chicago style is to preserve midcaps in company or product names—do you recommend the same for italics?
A. No, we don’t. Once you start trying to accommodate typographic styles, it’s hard to stop. There are companies that use bold font or small caps or a backward R—and how about those logos where the first letter is small and then the letters get progressively larger, or where the letters have little wings on them? Better to look the other way.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Does the CMOS have a preferred spelling list of prominent Iraqi proper names, cities, and towns? Different publications use different spellings,
but I would like to adhere to the CMOS preferences.
A. No, sorry. CMOS is not the right place to list current spellings of the world’s cities—such a
list would be out of date before the book hit the shelves. Style sheets from newspapers or news services like the Associated
Press are better sources for this type of information.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. How should I list an author’s name when it is given in different forms in different works I am citing (e.g., John Smith, John R. Smith, J. R. Smith)? In the case of an author’s name in a non-Roman script, if the name has been transliterated differently in different publications, shall I list the name as given in each publication, or choose one form? If a name in a non-Roman script is transliterated differently from the system of transliteration I am using, what shall I do? Thank you!
A. Please see CMOS 14.82: “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.” If a transliterated version is very different from the one used most often in the book, list it as a blind entry with a cross-reference to the more common one.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]