Q. Many of our news blurbs contain conference and presentation titles. Folks here, including the head of the organization, insist on constructing sentences with titles thus: “He gave a presentation on ‘Planetary Boundaries and Peacebuilding’ in a parallel session of the conference.” I have explained that this must be recast, either omitting the preposition and adding commas (gave a presentation, “Planetary Boundaries”) or retaining the preposition and translating the title into lowercase (gave a presentation on planetary boundaries and peacebuilding). But everyone here ignores my suggestion. My understanding is that it is a non-negotiable grammatical error, but the error is so widespread, at least in science circles, that I’m beginning to wonder now if it is permissible in other style guides. Is there anything you can tell me to bolster my case?
A. There are some nonnegotiable grammar errors, but this is probably not one of them. The rule (CMOS 8.174) was made to prevent misunderstanding. For instance, in your original sentence, it’s not clear whether the presenter was speaking about a published article titled “Planetary Boundaries and Peacebuilding” or whether that was the title of his own talk. Much of the time, readers will know what you mean whichever way you style it. When there’s a risk of ambiguity, however, it’s worth enforcing the rule.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In a Q&A some time ago, you said, “In other words, use the unless the abbreviation is used as an adjective or unless the abbreviation spelled out wouldn’t take a definite article.” My question is: since there is only one definite article in English (the), is a in the expression “a definite article” correct?
A. It’s conventional to refer to “the definite article,” but that doesn’t mean that “a definite article” is nonsense. If there were only one definite article in the whole world available for use, after which no one could use another one, then maybe you would have a point. But we can use the as many times in a sentence as we like—there is an unlimited supply. “The cat climbed the tree in the forest” has three. We can put a [sic] definite article in front of all kinds of words: nouns, adjectives, adverbs, and so on.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m working on a write-up about women’s soccer, and I’m unclear about how to describe the athletes. Woman athlete? Female athlete?
Q. During the past few years, many people have developed the habit of beginning a sentence with the word so, typically when they are responding to a question. This includes politicians, talking heads on television, and others who one might think are “learned” individuals. My view is that the use of the initial so in a sentence is both unnecessary and annoying. Any thoughts? Thank you.
A. There have always been “throat-clearing” words. Even highly intelligent professional speakers need a little thinking room to organize thoughts before speaking. So is no worse than well or um. The trick is not to be annoyed.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I would like to know more about the use of the modals can and may. Here in Brazil it is being taught that both can be used, as in “Can/May I erase the board?” Could you please distinguish both for me?
A. Traditionally, “Can I?” means “Am I able to?” whereas “May I?” means “Do I have permission to”?
Can I lift six times my weight? Can I get to the parking lot through this alley?
May I take your plate? May I go ahead of you in line?
This use of may is dying, however. We tend to hear it from grandparents when a child asks “Can I have some candy?” and the grandparent replies “May I!” Although it’s not rude to use can when you are asking permission, it is incorrect to use may when asking whether something is possible.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Dear CMOS Editors, Although strict grammar would suggest that “if I had been you, I wouldn’t have done that” is correct, I feel that using “if I had been you” in this case instead of “if I were you” implies that the condition of my being you is impossible only in the past and may somehow have become more possible as time went on. Because it is not a changeable condition—I cannot be you, whether in the past or the present—I feel that “if I were you” is the right conditional to use in this example. I have not been able to find an authoritative explanation either way. What do you reckon?
A. This isn’t philosophy—it’s just grammar. “If I were you” puts the reader in the present. If you want to stage “if I were you” in the past, it becomes “if I had been you.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. “The larger the parameter, the smaller the region.” This construction is just fine, but what’s the justification for implied rather than fully present verbs? Why don’t we get to imply parts of speech whenever we want to? And as an editor, am I wrong to delete the verbs when they are used? “The larger the parameter is, the smaller is the region”?
A. You are right to delete the verbs. Your first version is idiomatic English; the second is pedantic overkill. As for your whys and wherefores, I’m afraid you will need a linguist rather than a style guide to get the technical backstory. Let us know what you find out!
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Is it correct to say, “The cost of the widget is 300 percent of its counterpart”? I’m wondering if this should be “The cost of the widget is 300 percent more than its counterpart.”
A. “Percent of” means something different from “percent more than.” It might be easier to understand if you use a different number: 50 percent of 100 people equals 50 people, whereas 50 percent more than 100 people equals 150 people. So although I can’t tell you the answer without knowing the cost of the widget and the cost of its counterpart, “300 percent of the cost” means three times the cost; “300 percent more than the cost” means the cost plus 300 percent of the cost (cost times 4). Since many people don’t know the difference, avoid those expressions and say exactly what you mean (e.g., “costs three times as much” or “costs $850 more than”).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Do you use a or an before a word that begins with the letter S?
A. If the S is pronounced with a hissing sound (“sss”), use a: a snack. If the S is pronounced as the letter S (“ess”), use an: an SVGA cable.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Some guidance, please, on the use of (s) to indicate that a noun may be singular or plural, as in “The manager will interview the candidate(s).” I use the plural candidates to indicate there is at least one candidate but have been getting pushback from authors who ask for the source of my decision.
A. Although we aren’t crazy about the (s) solution, we do use it at times in CMOS. Another solution is to write “candidate or candidates,” but that’s a little clunky. Simply using the plural is often a good solution, but if it gives the wrong impression (e.g., that if there’s only one candidate, someone other than the manager will interview), then avoid it in favor of clarity.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]