Question On Quotations
BMCT2010
not constitute the beginning of the sentence?
Eric Walker
> Is it proper to capitalize the first letter in a quotation if it does
> not constitute the beginning of the sentence?
The Chicago 14th states (5.71):
Note that if the quotation is a sentence, it ordinarily begins with a
capital letter; if it is a fragment, it does not.
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker, Owlcroft House
http://owlcroft.com/english/
mm
wrote:
>Is it proper to capitalize the first letter in a quotation if it does
>not constitute the beginning of the sentence?
Write it so the first word comes in the middle of your sentence, like:
He said that "the tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree".
Not: "the tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree", he said.
--
Posters should say where they live, and for which area
they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in
Western Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis 7 years
Chicago 6 years
Brooklyn, NY 12 years
Baltimore 26 years
HVS
> Is it proper to capitalize the first letter in a quotation if it
> does not constitute the beginning of the sentence?
>
No, it's not. As mm says, it's best to rewrite a sentence to place
the quoted fragment somewhere other than the start.
I think I've also encountered work-arounds like "[T]his form" for a
sentence-starting quotation, but that looks sufficiently odd to me
that, personally, I'd do pretty well anything to avoid it.
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
Athel Cornish-Bowden
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:49:41 -0800 (PST), BMCT2010 <BMCT...@AOL.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Is it proper to capitalize the first letter in a quotation if it does
>> not constitute the beginning of the sentence?
>
> Write it so the first word comes in the middle of your sentence, like:
>
> He said that "the tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree".
>
> Not: "the tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree", he said.
I disagree, punctuation and capitalization should be our servants, not
our masters. When possible (as it isn't always) I prefer to decide what
sounds best and then write it down.
--
athel
Ian Jackson
<NOPSAM...@bigfoot.com> writes
>On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:49:41 -0800 (PST), BMCT2010 <BMCT...@AOL.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Is it proper to capitalize the first letter in a quotation if it does
>>not constitute the beginning of the sentence?
>
>Write it so the first word comes in the middle of your sentence, like:
>
>He said that "the tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree".
>
>Not: "the tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree", he said.
In normal reported speech, you don't use 'that' AND quotation marks.
It's
He said that the tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree.
and not
He said that "the tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree".
Otherwise it's
He said, "The tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree."
or
"The tree was an apple tree and not an oak tree," he said.
--
Ian
Cece
I was about to mention the work-around myself. I agree with you!
mm
How do you handle the fact that you're putting quotes a capital T in
The when the source quoted from had a lowercase t?
Aren't you putting some rule ahead of accurate quoting?
Chris Tsao
> Is it proper to capitalize the first letter in a quotation if it does
> not constitute the beginning of the sentence?
For quoting a whole entire sentence that starts with a capital letter
and ends with a period, if it's in the middle of Your sentence, you
can put the first letter of the person's sentence you're quoting in a
bracket which is not capitalized and you omit (sp.?) the period. In
other words, if their sentence is the last sentence in your sentence,
then a capital letter is usually used and there's a period.
Chris Tsao
By brackets, I meant these square brackets: [ [ [ [ [ [ ] ] ] ] ] ]
Mudge
> On Dec 23, 10:20�pm, Chris Tsao wrote:
>> On Dec 22, 8:49�pm, BMCT2010 wrote:
>>
>>> Is it proper to capitalize the first letter in a quotation if it does
>>> not constitute the beginning of the sentence?
>>
>> For quoting a whole entire sentence that starts with a capital letter
>> and ends with a period, if it's in the middle of Your sentence, you
>> can put the first letter of the person's sentence you're quoting in a
>> bracket which is not capitalized and you omit (sp.?) the period. In
>> other words, if their sentence is the last sentence in your sentence,
>> then a capital letter is usually used and there's a period.
>
> By brackets, I meant these square brackets: [ [ [ [ [ [ ] ] ] ] ] ]
Them is "braces" innit ?
--
The Canadian Curmudgeon (in Calgary)
Fix the biosphere - eliminate people
John Varela
Nope, them's brackets. Braces is what holds up your overhauls. Or
straighten your teeth. Or what you put bits in to drill holes with.
--
John Varela
Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email
musika
John Varela <OLDl...@verizon.net> typed:
Overhauls? Is that a mistake, an Americanism, other?
These can also be braces { }.
--
Ray
UK
tony cooper
wrote:
Mistake. "Overalls" is the word. However, to me, "overalls" are "bib
overalls" and no braces are needed. They's built-in.
http://www.leecuestalive.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/2007_1126firstpix0001b.jpg
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
>In news:dxizd0mOwXzR-pn2-hdljO1Rv4JOF@localhost,
Was that a whoosh I heard?
"them's brackets" is a colloqialism; "overhauls" might also be.
>These can also be braces { }.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.english.usage)
musika
Peter Duncanson (BrE) <ma...@peterduncanson.net> typed:
That's what the "other" was for.
>
> "them's brackets" is a colloqialism; "overhauls" might also be.
>
>> These can also be braces { }.
--
Ray
UK
John Varela
<mUs...@SPAMNOTexcite.com> wrote:
Indeed.
> >> These can also be braces { }.
The hierarchy is {[( )]}: parentheses, brackets, braces.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paren gives "paren" as a
synonym for parenthesis; I've seen "parend" as well.
mm
wrote:
I was once quoted a price to have my engine overalled. This must be
why it was so much cheaper than the places that wanted to overhaul it.
>
>Indeed.
>
>> >> These can also be braces { }.
>
>The hierarchy is {[( )]}: parentheses, brackets, braces.
What does that mean.
I thought brackets indicated words added by the person quoting
someone. Or is that a separate thing?
Don't braces have some special meaning too?
>
>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paren gives "paren" as a
>synonym for parenthesis; I've seen "parend" as well.
Parend seems strange.
John Varela
wrote:
> On 25 Dec 2009 02:34:28 GMT, "John Varela" <OLDl...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >The hierarchy is {[( )]}: parentheses, brackets, braces.
>
> What does that mean.
If there are parentheticals within parentheticals (not likely to
happen except in equations), parentheses () go inside brackets [] go
inside braces {}.
>
> I thought brackets indicated words added by the person quoting
> someone. Or is that a separate thing?
Words, capitalization, or punctuation added or changed.
> Don't braces have some special meaning too?
Already noted: tooth straightening, things to hold up pants, etc.
> >http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paren gives "paren" as a
> >synonym for parenthesis; I've seen "parend" as well.
>
> Parend seems strange.
--
Chris Tsao
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 02:46:46 UTC, mm <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 25 Dec 2009 02:34:28 GMT, "John Varela" <OLDla...@verizon.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > >The hierarchy is {[( )]}: parentheses, brackets, braces.
>
> > What does that mean.
>
> If there are parentheticals within parentheticals (not likely to
> happen except in equations), parentheses () go inside brackets [] go
> inside braces {}.
>
>
>
> > I thought brackets indicated words added by the person quoting
> > someone. Or is that a separate thing?
>
> Words, capitalization, or punctuation added or changed.
>
> > Don't braces have some special meaning too?
>
> Already noted: tooth straightening, things to hold up pants, etc.
>
> > >synonym for parenthesis; I've seen "parend" as well.
>
> > Parend seems strange.
>
> --
> John Varela
> Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email
I've seen these things < > used in a few ways that no copy editing or
punctuation book has ever explained. Like I've seen it repeatedly used
by many different people for describing an action. For example
<scratching an itch> <sigh> <shutter>
I forgot the other ways I've seen it used in obscure ways.
Chris Tsao
+aeu200...@nospam.firedrake.org> wrote:
> Chris Tsao wrote:
> >I've seen these things < > used in a few ways that no copy editing or
> >punctuation book has ever explained. Like I've seen it repeatedly used
> >by many different people for describing an action. For example
> ><scratching an itch> <sigh> <shutter>
>
> refer to the signs in this context as "angle brackets", but I don't know
> what antecedents this may have.
>
> R
Yup, I've only seen that from posters in newsgroups. One was a
professional writer though. He writes boxing articles.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
It is not wrong to use angle brackets "< >" in newsgroup post. It is a
useful convention.
>One was a
>professional writer though. He writes boxing articles.
There is nothing wrong or unprofessional about using angle brackets in a
newsgroup post if users of that newsgroup accept the use of angle
brackets.
The reason you haven't found any mention of angle brackets in books on
copy editing and punctuation is that those books are not written to
advise or instruct people writing newsgroup messages. Those books are
about the conventions to be used in printed work.
In printed work it is possible to use different typefaces to distinguish
between normal text and descriptions of actions by the writer or "stage
directions". We cannot do that in newsgroup postings because the creator
of a message cannot indicate differences in typeface for different parts
of a message.