Q. In certain scenarios (invitations, ads, etc.), our organization sometimes omits the verb: for example, “Complimentary parking available” (with is omitted). If the verb is elided, is it still a sentence requiring a period, or is it a fragment?
A. Although it is a fragment, even fragments require periods when they appear in a paragraph. If a fragment appears apart from other text, however (on a line by itself or in a banner or burst on an invitation or flyer or sign or ad), there is often no need for end punctuation.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m editing a report that frequently uses the phrase “be intentional about,” as in “the program is now intentional about [providing a certain service].” This seems awkward, but I’m not sure why. It also seems vague. I could use a second opinion.
A. Most jargon words and trendy phrases sound awkward and vague to those who aren’t soaked in that culture. It may begin to look better by the time you’re done editing. If the phrase is overused, of course, you could point that out and ask whether the writer was being intentional about it or would mind eliminating a few.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Looking for proper protocol, but will accept opinions. When assigning a century to a notable figure, do you use the year of birth? So if someone is born in 1493, is he a fifteenth-century or sixteenth-century scientist?
A. There is no “protocol”; it’s just common sense. A scientist born in 1493 would be a sixteenth-century scientist—unless this was a prodigy whose main life’s work was accomplished by the age of seven. Fl. (“flourished”) is sometimes used in front of the years of a person’s greatest work, but the best plan is to explain clearly when the person lived and worked.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What is the distinction between yeah, yea, and yay? Is each confined to a specific usage?
A. Dictionaries are terrific for looking up what words mean. I found all these words at Merriam-Webster’s free online dictionary.
Yay means “hooray”; rhymes with day
Yea means “yes” or “indeed”; familiar to many from translations of the Bible; often used in voting (“yea or nay”); rhymes with day
Yeah means “yes”; famously used by the Beatles (“She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah”); rhymes with pretty much not anything (bleah?).
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What is the rule for subject-verb agreement when a sentence has a collective noun + prepositional phrase + relative pronoun? For example, should it be “Scientists follow a set of guidelines that include x” (because the antecedent of that is guidelines), or “Scientists follow a set of guidelines that includes x” (because the subject is set)? Or does the answer differ depending on whether the writer wants to emphasize set or guidelines as the subject? And would the answer change if the sentence had “the set” instead of “a set” (as in the rule about mass noun + prepositional phrase)?
A. The verb goes with whichever noun is the subject. Often that will be clear (the box of rocks that was too wide for the door; the box of rocks that were brought back from space). In your sentence the meaning is nearly the same whichever noun you choose, and that’s often true. The choice of article doesn’t matter (a box of rocks that was too wide; a box of rocks that were brought back from space).
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am an editor having a debate with some authors over their use of this article title: “Intangible Values of Palliative Nursing Care.” I have told them that it doesn’t make sense because there is no such thing as a value that is tangible, despite the existence of accounting terms such as “tangible value.” I prefer a title such as “Intangible Elements of Palliative Nursing Care.” What is your take on this?
A. Our take is that a good dictionary can prevent many an editorial squabble. Both tangible and intangible have a figurative meaning, which is why “tangible value” makes sense to accountants. In the same way, intangible makes sense in the article title. See Merriam-Webster Unabridged, under intangible (“2 : incapable of being defined or determined with certainty or precision”).
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am editing a fiction story that has the word slash used as a separator of terms such as “toys slash books slash paint party” instead of the / mark. Is it acceptable to use the word rather than the mark itself?
A. The word is especially appropriate if a character is speaking or the text is meant to sound like personal narration. In running text, it would be a judgment call, depending on the kind of writing. The usage is strongly suggestive of someone speaking; it’s most appropriate in conversational contexts.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I keep hearing people say things like “She was a woman pilot” and “We have a woman speaker tonight.” In my mind, this is completely incorrect—shouldn’t it be female, not woman? Since when did woman become an adjective? Am I crazy?
A. You’re not crazy. Please see CMOS 5.264:
When gender is relevant, it may be acceptable to use a gendered noun such as female or male as a modifier {the patient requested a female doctor} {the first female president}. . . . By contrast, because man is rarely used as a modifier, adjectival use of woman may unacceptably suggest that it’s peculiar or exceptional for a woman to be something {a woman astronaut will lead the expedition} or may sound dismissive or derogatory {the woman plumber successfully replaced the pipe}.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hi! I see a common mistake from writers I edit, but I’m not sure what to call it. An example sentence: “A key to understanding the movie was its being a musical.” Another: “One of the most interesting things about them is their endorsing a candidate.” A noun phrase made up of an “its + -ing + noun” formula. Certainly, these are easily rephrased, but is there a word for this besides simply poor writing style? Is there a grammatical rule I can refer these writers to? It’s pretty clearly colloquial for the region these writers are from, but I’d love to be able to give them a more accurate, professional response than “it just sounds bad.”
A. Although in some constructions (like yours) it is awkward, using the possessive (including pronouns) with a gerund is accepted grammar. Please see CMOS 7.28 for a discussion and examples (e.g., “I won’t stand for him [or his] being denigrated”).
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. To avoid gender-specific language, is it acceptable to use “upperclass students” as an alternative to “upperclassmen”? I am seeing this more and more in academia, where I work. An alternative would be “upper-class students,” but that seems to refer to those from a higher social and economic class. What do you recommend?
A. Upper-level students, returning students, juniors and seniors (or sophomores, juniors, and seniors—whichever you mean), third- and fourth-years, third- and fourth-year students. There are plenty of ways around this, and all are less ambiguous than “upper-class.”
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]