Q. CMOS rules (at 8.22) point to “secretary of state” but “Secretary of State Kerry” or “Secretary Kerry,” so I am using “president” but “President Kirchner.” But shouldn’t I capitalize “the Pinochet Dictatorship”? and what about “the Kirchner Administration” and “the Kirchner Government”? Rather than “generic terms associated with governmental bodies” (8.65), they all form an important part of recent Latin American history, like the Mexican Revolution. In addition, they “follow a name and are used as an accepted part of the name” (8.51).
A. While administration and government are commonly capped in sources that don’t follow CMOS, to my eye “the Pinochet Dictatorship” (capped) looks bizarre. Can you imagine it stamped at the top of letterhead stationery or etched in gold leaf on a door? If so, then go ahead and cap it (even though Chicago wouldn’t).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I teach an English-writing class, where I tell my Japanese students never to mix singular and plural pronouns and verbs (“the
government has released its”; “the couple have had their”).
I am also a Japanese-to-English translator and have turned in quite a few passages like this, albeit with a sense of guilt:
“Company A offers our heartfelt sympathy to the tsunami victims.” What do you
suggest in situations where “the company offer” and “its
heartfelt sympathy” both sound odd?
A. The remedy (aside from the guilt thing) is to rewrite the sentence until it doesn’t sound odd. For
instance, you could write, “We at Company A offer our heartfelt sympathy.” There
is almost always a way to rethink (even the guilt thing).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have a photograph that I want to describe. It is a picture of two couples who are business friends. Would I write, “This
is a photograph of the Gould’s and the Johnson’s” or “This
is a photograph of the Goulds and the Johnsons”?
A. Our readers never tire of asking this question. What you need is a simple plural: one cat, two cats; one Gould, two Goulds.
This is a photograph of the cats. This is a photograph of the Goulds.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Chicago recommends using the present tense when discussing the actions of characters in literature. But I often face questions about verb tense when discussing the actions of authors themselves, particularly in academic writing. Is it correct to say, “Blomley (2004) argues that property claims can be used toward ends that are both oppressive and emancipatory,” or should I instead render the verb in the past tense? Would the answer change if Blomley had written his book in, say, 1867?
A. Regardless of how long ago the author wrote, the “historic present” is commonly used in just this type of context. If you want to emphasize the past, however—perhaps to contrast it with the present—the past tense works well. Absolute consistency needn’t be a goal in a long manuscript, but don’t mix tenses near each other. Please see CMOS 5.129.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. If a sentence contains a compound subject in which one of the subjects is dead while the other is alive, is the verb written
in the present or past tense?
A. It depends. If the action clearly takes place in the present, use the present (Aristotle and Susie Jones are examples in
this answer); if it clearly took place in the past, use the past (Abe Lincoln and Susie Jones were both born in Kentucky).
If the “historic present” is more appropriate, that’s another
choice (Aristotle and Susie Jones both write about logic). If you meet with difficulties (Both Lincoln and Jones are/were
tall?), recast the sentence to minimize the problem (Like Lincoln, Jones is tall).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I was told this was passive voice and therefore “avoidant”: “If
your suspension from this section was not lifted on time, then that was a mistake and I’m sorry that
happened.” Is this so?
A. “Was not lifted” is indeed passive, and it is “avoidant”
in this sentence because it allows the writer to avoid identifying who failed to lift the suspension on time. This use of the passive deserves its bad reputation, but in good writing a mix of
active and passive is essential for variation and eloquence, as you will find in any classic of English literature. (Strunk
and White use the passive throughout The Elements of Style after famously recommending against it.) The idea that the passive must be avoided is a superstition that language professionals
long ago abandoned, although the prohibition remains popular.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m a grammar teacher currently teaching paired/correlative conjunctions. According to AzarGrammar, with “neither . . . nor,” “either
. . . or,” and “not only . . .
but also,” the subject closest to the verb decides the singularity or plurality of the verb. So, following
that rule, it would be “neither my brother nor my sister is happy.” However, with
“I” being the first person singular, I’m confused. Is it,
“neither my brother nor I am happy” or “neither my brother
nor I is happy”?
A. Authorities seem to agree that the only way to handle such quandaries is to avoid them, because you can’t
win. Either way, you look silly. You must rewrite as “My brother and I are both unhappy”
or in some other way.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Convoluted structure aside, is there anything grammatically wrong with the following sentence from a state unemployment application?
My boss thinks “which” is incorrect and should be replaced with “that”;
I think both are incorrect. Please help! “Did you work full-time or part-time for an employer or in
self-employment or return to full-time work during the week ending last Saturday, which you have not already reported?”
A. The sentence is ungrammatical, because “which” has no antecedent. Changing it
to “that” does not help. Adding a noun somewhere (such as “hours”)
and moving things around will fix the grammar. “During the week ending last Saturday, did you work any
hours (full-time or part-time, for an employer or in self-employment) that you have not already reported, or did you return
to full-time work?” Either way, “that” is preferred, but
“which” is not incorrect.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. An article I wrote recently was copyedited, and wherever I had begun a sentence with “Due to”
the editor changed it to “Owing to” or “Because of.”
What’s the difference?
A. Your copyeditor was following a rule that is fast losing ground to common usage. Strictly speaking, “due”
is an adjective and is properly used as such: “Her headache was due to a paralyzing fear of hearing
the same song twice.” If you wrote “Due to her fear, she threw the radio out the
window,” the adjective phrase would be left dangling, without anything to modify. “Owing
to” and “because of” act as prepositions, so in writing
“Because of her fear” you create a prepositional phrase that can modify the verb
“threw.” By the way, The Chicago Manual of Style includes a chapter on grammar. For a discussion of “due to”—and
many other grammatical issues—see chapter 5.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Dear CMOS, What is your opinion of the contraction “there’s” for “there
has”? A sample sentence is “There’s been an explosion of
scientific knowledge.” One on-line source says “there’s”
has two meanings, “there is” and “there has.”
If contractions were appropriate in a document, would you use “there’s”
in both ways in the same document? Same paragraph? And by the way, when did the second usage creep in? Thanks.
A. (1) Seems fine to me. (2) Sure. (3) Can’t think why not. (4) I don’t know, but
the online concordance to Shakespeare shows 401 occurrences, so it must have crept in some time ago. (5) You’re
most welcome.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]