Q. Hello from Poland! While I have never actually seen CMOS (there is no copy in the US Consulate Library in Poznan where I live), I have seen it mentioned as an authority everywhere. I am now working on a project that requires automated identification of persons and would be grateful to know if CMOS addresses the question of translating given names. When and where are they translated and when do they remain in the original language? Are there any rules in English for this? Of course, one knows the most obvious cases such as Karl Marx and Charles the Bald, but many other cases are not so obvious. For instance, Russian princes are usually named Yuri rather than George. I shall be most grateful for any tips/suggestions.
A. Hello from Chicago! In the books that we publish, we depend on our authors to understand their audience and to style names accordingly. If the book is for a general audience, then names will probably appear in a form familiar to English-speaking readers. If the subject of the book is more narrowly defined and will be read by specialist scholars, the author might prefer to use the original-language names. Sometimes an author writing for a general audience will wish to educate readers by using the original names, but will introduce them by popular name. Merriam-Webster is a good resource for variations on names.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. My question is about the proper font of a boat name as a possessive as in “the Ibis’s lower decks.” CMOS 8.116 says italics for the boat’s name; 6.2 specifies the use of italics when the punctuation is part of the word. This seems a Talmudic moment. Thanks.
A. Ah—although the boat name is properly in italics, the apostrophe and s are not, because they are not actually part of the name. Please see CMOS 7.29. Shalom.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. The author enclosed the translation of a name in both quotation marks and parentheses. I removed the quotation marks and left just the parentheses. Are both types of punctuation needed? What is the best way to handle this? Example: The Foreign Name (“translated name”) blah blah . . .
A. If the name is a proper name (an organization, a building, a place), you don’t need quotation marks: Il Popolo della Libertà (The People of Freedom); la mer Rouge (the Red Sea). If the word is a term or concept, you can quote or not, as you please: lavoro (“work”), or lavoro (work); CMOS 11.12 favors parentheses without quotation marks.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When using proper names in a book, what is the rule for subsequent use of that name? For example, in a book that mentions
Herbert Hoover, if I use his full name the first time it is mentioned, and then do so again 20 pages later, can I just say
“Hoover” or must I say “Herbert Hoover”?
What is the longest you can go without repeating the full name? Does the beginning of a new chapter affect this?
A. An editor must develop a feel for the pacing of a document, the familiarity of a particular name, and the likelihood of any
confusion on the part of the reader. For example, it shouldn’t be necessary to repeat Herbert Hoover’s
first name as often as that of a more obscure person, although if the text discusses other members of the Hoover family as
well, you may need to use “Herbert” frequently.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
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.]