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 17th edition of CMOS (2017) 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 17th edition of CMOS (2017) 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 17th edition of CMOS (2017) 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 17th edition of CMOS (2017) 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 17th edition of CMOS (2017) 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 are merely perhaps a little behind the times. Woman has long been an accepted adjective. Please see CMOS 5.259:
When gender is relevant, it’s acceptable to use the noun woman as a modifier {woman judge}. In recent decades, woman has been rapidly replacing lady in such constructions. The adjective female is also often used unobjectionably.
—Editor’s update:
A. This is absolutely the right question to ask, but there are actually plenty of occasions when it makes sense to specify the gender of a pilot. {How many women pilots asked to join the association this year?} {Are male pilots paid more than women pilots?} {When did the first female pilot make that trip?}. CMOS 5.260 addresses this issue explicitly:
When it is important to mention a characteristic because it will help the reader develop a picture of the person you are writing about, use care. For instance, in the sentence Shirley Chisholm was probably the finest African American woman member of the House of Representatives that New York has ever had, the phrase African American woman may imply to some readers that Chisholm was a great representative “for a woman” but may be surpassed by many or all men, that she stands out only among African American members of Congress, or that it is unusual for a woman or an African American to hold high office. But in Shirley Chisholm was the first African American woman to be elected to Congress and one of New York’s all-time best representatives, the purpose of the phrase African American woman is not likely to be misunderstood.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) 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 17th edition of CMOS (2017) 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 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. The following parenthetical sentence was in the introduction relating to your 20th anniversary in the February Style Q&A: “Note that some styles have shifted slightly since then.” What is your view of not using the word that in cases similar to your sentence? The word that can be deleted without changing the meaning, or in my view, without making the meaning harder to understand. It can be deleted from almost every use when it follows a verb. Would you agree adding a comma after Note and then deleting that would be clear to the reader?
A. When there really is no chance of confusion, by all means leave out that. Otherwise, let it do its honest work. That is often needed to prevent reading the next noun as a direct object. For instance, “Note those styles” is a complete imperative sentence. A reader would reasonably believe styles to be the object of Note and not expect it to have a verb of its own—only to find that styles is the subject of the verb have shifted in the dependent clause. The reader stumbles. Newspapers notoriously leave out that, causing goofy misdirection:
“But the obtained records reveal the scope of visitor misbehavior is huge” (Matthew Brown, “Visitor Misbehavior Abounds at U.S. Parks,” Chicago Tribune, August 31, 2016, Kindle edition).
As for using a comma after Note, a colon would be better, and in fact is quite common in place of that (Note: Some styles have shifted). Note, of course, that the need for a comma or colon suggests that the omission of that would be problematic otherwise.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. It’s long-standing software jargon to “save to disk” or “save to file.” Recently I’m seeing “save to list,” “save to album,” and other “save to” constructions in user interfaces and other places where I would use “save in” or other prepositions. Where can I get advice on whether the “save to” construction is idiomatic outside my industry?
A. Jargon in one area often spreads to other areas. It would be difficult—if not impossible—to determine exactly when an expression becomes “appropriate.” You can compare the frequency of specific phrases in professionally published books (which for the most part tend to stick to “appropriate” language) at Google Ngram Viewer. There’s also a searchable database of TV and movie scripts.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]