Q. In paragraph 13.7, in the section on permissible changes to quotations, CMOS says, “Obvious typographic errors may be corrected silently (without comment or sic; see 13.61) unless the passage quoted is from an older work or a manuscript or other unpublished source where idiosyncrasies of spelling are generally preserved.” Earlier in the passage, CMOS states that direct quotes must reproduce exactly not only the wording but the spelling, capitalization, and internal punctuation of the original. It does not mention italicizing. When I’ve edited quotes or extracts from older texts, I’ve, as a rule, reproduced pretty much “everything” as it is in the older text. I am editing a book now with numerous quotes from seventeenth-century books or letters, referencing ships. Before launching forth, thought I would double check. Seems ship names were not italicized back then. My thought is to leave as they are in the original—as roman. That is, do not italicize ship names in the quotes or extracts. Would this be correct?
A. In addition to spelling, capitalization, and punctuation, I’d also preserve the distinction in the original between italic and roman type. It is certainly necessary to retain any italics in quoted text that are there for reasons of emphasis, but it’s also probably best to retain italics used for other reasons and, by the same token, refrain from adding italics (you can of course add italics within a quotation for the purposes of your own emphasis, as long as you clearly indicate where you’ve done this with a bracketed phrase such as “emphasis added”). But the line is not always a clearly etched one. You need not necessarily italicize a quoted passage that’s been presented entirely in italic type, for example. And if you quote a subhead that’s been italicized in the original source for reasons of design, you can certainly present it in roman. Just make sure that whatever you do, do not obscure the meaning of the original passage.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. The following is a two-part quotation mark question: Is a quotation nested within a separate quotation of double quotes recognized by an additional set of double quotes? Or is the quotation in question enclosed by single quotes? If my question hasn’t confused you, perhaps my example will. The court transcript detailed Jack’s recollection of that fateful day. Jack took the stand and began his testimony. “Your honor, I distinctly remember Jill saying to me, “Jack, I will never climb that hill. Furthermore, what good is a pail of water?”” Please advise.
A. Quotation marks alternate, as follows: quotations within quotations are single, quotations within quotations within quotations are double, quotations within quotations within quotations within quotations are single, etc.
He said, “I have one request: never say ‘never say “never” ’ again.”
I hope this is clear enough. For more information, start with CMOS 13.30.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When quoting statutory material, is it appropriate to substitute ellipses points in for semicolons that end the “line”
of a statutory clause? For instance, suppose a statutory clause reads “(i) Procedures involving animals
will avoid or minimize discomfort, distress, and pain to the animals;”, and this is the end of the line
(that is, the next line starts with “(ii)”). In this situation, if one quotes
the line itself, should one end it with a period, ellipses points, or maybe even a bracketed period?
A. CMOS would recommend that you quote your example as follows: “Procedures involving animals will avoid or
minimize discomfort, distress, and pain to the animals.” The function of the semicolon, out of context,
becomes irrelevant, and there is no need to use ellipses or to bracket the period. Within a sentence, the quotation would
look like this:
The relevant clause states that “[p]rocedures involving animals will avoid or minimize discomfort, distress,
and pain to the animals,” and this organization has done everything in its power to follow suit.
Note that the “p” has been lowercased because grammar requires it but placed in
brackets in deference to the original text. CMOS recommends doing this for all legal works and textual criticism. But the end punctuation is a different matter here, and
in the example above a comma is required.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Can you distinguish when a single quotation mark is used versus a double quotation mark? I’m not referring
to quotes within quotes, but about the use of single quotation marks closer to linguistic uses. I see both single and double
quotation marks in instances seemingly for special meaning but not limited to linguistics. (That also seemingly will drive
whether a comma is placed inside or outside the closing single quotation mark.)
A. For nonspecialist texts, Chicago recommends double quotation marks for everything except quotations within quotations. The
comma or period goes inside.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]