Q. “Between” vs. “among.” I’m
going insane. I think the editor who changed my wording is just clueless or hasn’t given the issue enough
thought. Please help. I’ve read the advice in CMOS, Garner’s Modern American Usage, Bernstein’s The Careful Writer, The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, and a few other sources, but I can’t decide. Should I say “competition between
companies” or “competition among companies”? They’re
competing with each other, severally and individually. At least, that’s what I think. Or is “among”
justified on the grounds that competition implies vague, intricate relationships? Do I need an economist to clear this usage
question up? Are there right and wrong answers in this case? The phrase is “competition between/among
companies is intensifying.”
A. It really doesn’t matter. The editor might well be clueless—it happens—but
you are overthinking this.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Which of the following is correct? “Canadian customers, call 1-800-etc.,” or
“Canada customers, call 1-800-etc.”? I’m inclined toward
the former, but keep thinking about that darn Canada goose.
A. For your purposes, Canadian citizenship mustn’t be confused with one’s location
in Canada. Given that a Canadian might want to call from New Jersey, for instance, it would be clearer to write, “From
Canada, call 1-800-etc.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m editing a report for an author who wrote, “a comparison between the Soviet
and the U.S.-led intervention.” I changed the singular to “interventions.”
He questioned whether the plural was correct, as “there was only one Soviet and one U.S.-led intervention.”
Will you intervene in our tiff and set us straight?
A. There were actually two interventions (one Soviet-led and one U.S.-led), so you must have a plural. Otherwise you’re
suggesting a single intervention led by both countries jointly (like a junior and senior prom versus separate junior and senior
proms), and “between” won’t make sense. It might be best
to rewrite: “a comparison between the Soviet intervention and that led by the United States.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Can “fewest” mean zero? Example: Which desk has the fewest number of books? If
one desk has no books, does that desk contain the fewest? Or must “fewest” refer
to a number (however small) that is greater than zero?
A. Think about the desk. If it doesn’t have more books than the other desks, and it doesn’t
have the same number of books, what’s left? It must have the fewest. But if several desks have no books,
then our desk does not have the fewest, and it’s clearer to say that it has no books. (Was that a trick
question?)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. One of my authors uses “as noted by” and “as is noted by”
frequently. I assume they are the same. However, my copyeditor changes some of the “as is noted by”
to “as noted by” but not all of them. Are there differences between the two phrases?
I read the sentences over and over again, and I can’t see the difference in meaning before and after
the change. If there is no difference in meaning, why change it?
A. The phrases mean the same thing, and there is no need to change them unless either or both are being overused. But sometimes
copyeditors get twitchy if they can’t change something for a while. Maybe if the author’s
work had contained more typos and other problems, the editor would have left these alone.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have a friend who insists the use of the word “littler” is acceptable because it’s in the dictionary. I searched through CMOS but found no mention. What is your position on the use of this word?
A. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you see it), CMOS does not have enough space to state a position on every word, even if we had one. We rely on dictionaries and our ears to decide what works well in scholarly prose. We would not, however, agree that a word’s presence in a dictionary makes it suitable for use on all occasions—many words in Merriam-Webster are best used only by poets or toddlers. “Littler” might not be quite that, but it does beg for editorial discretion.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Editor’s update: Last month two questions arrived a few hours apart, from two different people, each asking whether the day of the month is
capped when spelled out, and both used the second of January as the example. We hoped to learn whether the writers were acquainted
and had written independently to settle a dispute, or whether the nearly identical queries were simply a romantic coincidence
on the part of writers unknown to each other.
A. The latter seems to have been the case. We heard from one of the writers, who, after checking to make sure her sister hadn’t
written the other query, said she hadn’t discussed the issue with anyone else. She was intrigued—but
evidently the other writer wasn’t. (So much for the Q&A as matchmaker.)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Grammarians Strunk and White say in their book, The Elements of Style, that you shouldn’t start a sentence with “however” when
you mean “nevertheless.” I think this classic advice is unreasonable in modern
times. What’s your take?
A. Yes, like so much else in that beloved little book, this rule is now cheerfully disregarded by the best of us.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I edit documents in a corporate environment, and I have ongoing arguments with authors over the extensive use of and/or. I’m not convinced it should be used anywhere. What does CMOS think about it?
A. We use it occasionally but avoid it when possible. In the CMOS chapter on grammar and usage, Bryan Garner suggests that and/or “can often be replaced by and or or with no loss in meaning. Where it seems needed {take a sleeping pill and/or a warm drink}, try or . . . or both {take a sleeping pill or a warm drink or both}.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. If an author uses a rare word like “prevaricators” when “liars”
would be more clear, should an editor change it? The author’s audience is college graduates, not necessarily
English or journalism majors.
A. Dumbing down someone’s prose should be done for a reason, never simply as a policy. A writer might
use a five-dollar word for the sake of rhythm, humor, allusion, or precision. “Prevaricator”
is a good word (and it isn’t the same as “liar,” although
they overlap in meaning). It would be a shame to banish it from the language. So query it if you think “liars”
is a better choice, but be prepared to say why.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]