Q. Dear Sir or Madam, I am taking a course on Hispanic linguistics. As part of a project that has been assigned by my professor, I just learned that there is an institution that regulates the usage of the English language (in the United States? Great Britain?). I would like to read more about it. It is my impression that The Chicago Manual of Style has part of the job of regulator of the English language. Is this true?
A. If only! But no—there is no institution that can regulate language in the United States or Great Britain, although there are organizations that sometimes pretend to. In both countries people are free to speak and write as they wish. The Chicago Manual of Style is a guide for writers who want to write in standard English and use a standard citation format. You can start your research by reading about language regulators at Wikipedia.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What is Chicago’s view on “all of the sudden”?
A. CMOS is silent on the issue, but “all of the sudden” is not idiomatic and normally would be edited to “all of a sudden.” You can compare the frequency and longevity of these two expressions in published books at Ngram Viewer. You aren’t the only one to have noticed the new popularity of “all of the sudden,” by the way. You can read one discussion of the phenomenon here.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hi CMOS—I have a question about sentences using either/neither. For example, “They neither discussed the case nor the suspect.” This sounds fine and a reader will understand what is meant. But almost always, people tend to apply strict grammar and transpose the verb: “They discussed neither the case nor the suspect.” Is this really necessary? I mean, I don’t see any room for confusion in the original sentence. Thanks!
A. I agree that it’s a fine point and that the first sentence can pass the reading test. However, in sentences more complex than yours, the incorrect placement of neither can cause ambiguity:
The police neither caught the suspect after he robbed the bank nor the little old lady bystander packing a stun gun.
Does that mean that neither the police nor the old lady caught the suspect, or that the police caught neither the suspect nor the old lady? For clarity, we recommend using proper parallel structure, especially in formal writing.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Sentence: Only 1 in 66 households [has/have] received this letter. Is it has or have? I presume that because 1 in 66 is the lowest common denominator of a larger group it should be have.
A. If literally only one household received the letter, using the singular has would be the intuitive (and correct) choice. But normally this construction expresses a ratio with a plural numerator, as you suggest, so that “1 in 66” might actually stand for, e.g., “200 out of 13,200.” Perversely, the singular verb is still recommended by many, perhaps because the word one is the subject regardless of its implied meaning in such expressions.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I recommended to an author that he should use the word similar (no ly) when it comes before the word to (similar to, rather than similarly to), and should use the word similarly (with an ly) when followed by a comma. I cannot find a rule to cite. Am I correct? Thanks for your help.
Example 1: Similar to the credit crisis in the 1980s . . .
Example 2: Similarly, the recent financial crisis . . .
A. While your examples are correct, oversimplifications like this can go terribly wrong when applied universally or mechanically. Actual usage depends on syntax and context. Similar may be followed by a comma, and similarly to may be perfectly grammatical. For example:
The train runs clockwise, similarly to a clock.
Similar, but not the same, are trains that run counterclockwise.
In fact, no rule is needed, because the uses of the adjective similar and the adverb similarly are dictated by their definitions and parts of speech. When editing, if you need to change one and you feel that an explanation is needed, you can simply say “Adverb needed here” or “Syntax requires adjective.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Each of Texas’s 254 counties has a county judge, and the Honorable Sam Biscoe is the county judge of Travis County. The question we need your help with is whether Chicago approves of referring to him in formal writing as “Travis County Judge Sam Biscoe.” One editor objects to “county” being forced to serve double duty, but “Travis County County Judge Sam Biscoe” doesn’t seem like a good solution. Thank you for your sage guidance!
A. One county is probably enough to be understood in most contexts: Travis county judge Sam Biscoe. Add the second county when it’s important to be precise about the title: Travis County county judge Sam Biscoe. (See CMOS 8.21 on the lowercasing of job titles in apposition.) Of course, this could get out of hand if you aren’t careful: if there were a person in charge of appointing the county judges, that person could be called the Travis County county judge judge. And if that person happened to be named Travis Judge, he might be referred to as Travis County county judge judge Travis Judge.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Is the word but necessary in a not only/but also construction? A colleague says it’s become acceptable to leave off the conjunction, but to do so creates a comma splice. For example: The dictionary not only provides detailed definitions of words, it also has some great pictures.
A. Although comma splices are increasingly accepted in all kinds of writing, in formal English, when you are joining two clauses, you need either an expressed conjunction or a semicolon. You can read about comma splices in the Economist and the Sentence First blog—as well as at our own CMOS Shop Talk.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Does Chicago Manual of Style approve of different than? Ugh, frankly.
Q. Which is correct: level or levels? “At the local, national, and international level” or “at the local, national, and international levels”?
A. You must have the plural levels, unless somehow a single level is able to be local, national, and international all at once.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Which is the correct version: “a framework with which” or “a framework from which”? I’ve always heard the latter, but when I Googled this question, I found examples of both.
A. This is like asking which is correct, “I walked with” or “I walked from.” The idea is to use with or from to say what you want to say. A framework with which I struggled, a framework from which I took my ideas, a framework within which they manipulated the data, a framework at which I laughed. If it’s hard to decide which one you need, phrase it less formally: a framework I struggled with, a framework I took my ideas from, a framework they manipulated the data with, a framework I laughed at. (And don’t worry: it’s perfectly grammatical to end with a preposition!)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]