& punctuation
abc...@gmail.com
How should the symbol "&" be punctuated? With space before and after or
only after or only before?
Thanks in advance
Abcclt
Raymond S. Wise
The following is according to standard punctuation practices in the US:
Most of the time you will simply be using "&" as a substitute for the
word "and" in certain contexts, as in the name of some companies. In
such a case, simply write the symbol with a space before and after it:
"Barnes & Noble."
If making reference to the symbol itself, treat it as you might other
symbols or words represented by themselves, as far as spaces and
associated punctuation are concerned. Some example sentences:
In transcribing Old English text, instead of "&" a "7" is
typically used, in order to represent the Tironean ampersand.
Instead of the word "and" he wrote "&."
Instead of "and" he wrote "&," while for "etc." he wrote "&c."
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Tony Cooper
Usually, a space before and a space after. Always a space before and
a space after when it is between two words (Smith & Jones, Inc), but
never a space when it's between two letters (AT&T). The exceptions
are company logos where the company specifies a the design.
Spaces are not punctuation.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
Raymond S. Wise
Tony Cooper wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2006 21:32:42 -0700, abc...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >Hello,
> >How should the symbol "&" be punctuated? With space before and after or
> >only after or only before?
> >Thanks in advance
> >Abcclt
>
> Usually, a space before and a space after. Always a space before and
> a space after when it is between two words (Smith & Jones, Inc), but
> never a space when it's between two letters (AT&T). The exceptions
> are company logos where the company specifies a the design.
I forgot all about examples such as "AT&T." And how about "&c." for
"etc.," which I mentioned in one of my example sentences? That is a
sort of exception to most uses of "&," because "&" there represents
"et" rather than "and."
>
> Spaces are not punctuation.
Good point.
Odysseus
"Raymond S. Wise" <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
<snip>
> I forgot all about examples such as "AT&T." And how about "&c." for
> "etc.," which I mentioned in one of my example sentences? That is a
> sort of exception to most uses of "&," because "&" there represents
> "et" rather than "and."
I'd say rather that it always represents "et", but when it stands alone
we silently translate it to "and".
Interestingly perhaps but OT, clients for whom I do French-language
typesetting are usually quite averse to using it, despite the similarity
of the Latin and French words. Am I right to conclude that it's not
considered good style, or is my small sample of editors/translators
unrepresentative?
--
Odysseus
Raymond S. Wise
The French generally run across it only in the name of English or
American stores and companies. I should ask some French friends of mine
if they have a quick way of writing a replacement for "et," similar to
what we have over here to replace "and": While nowadays I usually print
"&," in the past I wrote something which was close to a plus sign with
the two strokes formed without picking the penpoint off of the paper. I
considered it an ampersand, but it was quite different in form.
The last time I was in France in 2000, I did see an ampersand in the
lettering in a store window, and it wasn't part of a name. I took a
picture of it because part of it was clearly a smallcap "T," so that
the relationship of the ampersand to "et" was obvious.
mm
<odysseu...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:
>In article <1153203706.3...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Raymond S. Wise" <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> I forgot all about examples such as "AT&T." And how about "&c." for
>> "etc.," which I mentioned in one of my example sentences? That is a
>> sort of exception to most uses of "&," because "&" there represents
>> "et" rather than "and."
>
>I'd say rather that it always represents "et", but when it stands alone
>we silently translate it to "and".
Since its name is ampersand, which iirc comes from "and per se and", I
think it represents "and".
I think people who say "and cetera" translate the "et".
>Interestingly perhaps but OT, clients for whom I do French-language
>typesetting are usually quite averse to using it, despite the similarity
>of the Latin and French words. Am I right to conclude that it's not
>considered good style, or is my small sample of editors/translators
>unrepresentative?
Remove NOPSAM to email me. Please let
me know if you have posted also.
Raymond S. Wise
Raymond S. Wise wrote:
> Odysseus wrote:
> > In article <1153203706.3...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Raymond S. Wise" <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > I forgot all about examples such as "AT&T." And how about "&c." for
> > > "etc.," which I mentioned in one of my example sentences? That is a
> > > sort of exception to most uses of "&," because "&" there represents
> > > "et" rather than "and."
> >
> > I'd say rather that it always represents "et", but when it stands alone
> > we silently translate it to "and".
> >
> > Interestingly perhaps but OT, clients for whom I do French-language
> > typesetting are usually quite averse to using it, despite the similarity
> > of the Latin and French words. Am I right to conclude that it's not
> > considered good style, or is my small sample of editors/translators
> > unrepresentative?
>
>
> The French generally run across it only in the name of English or
> American stores and companies. I should ask some French friends of mine
> if they have a quick way of writing a replacement for "et," similar to
> what we have over here to replace "and": While nowadays I usually print
> "&," in the past I wrote something which was close to a plus sign with
> the two strokes formed without picking the penpoint off of the paper. I
> considered it an ampersand, but it was quite different in form.
Today I asked a French friend of mine if she had used some sort of
symbol to replace "et" when she was in school writing notes. She showed
me a symbol which was largely the same as that which I used for "and"
when I was younger: She had a loop at one point where I had a sharp
angle, but the basic shape was the same. She told me that she had used
it since she was a young girl.
Odysseus
"Raymond S. Wise" <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
<snip>
>
>
> [...] While nowadays I usually print "&," in the past I wrote
> something which was close to a plus sign with the two strokes formed
> without picking the penpoint off of the paper. I considered it an
> ampersand, but it was quite different in form.
I also use the 'joined cross' (like a closed numeral 4 rotated +90°),
but mainly when printing in capitals; in handwriting I usually use a
cursive E (like a backwards 3) with short vertical strokes at the top &
bottom--or sometimes struck through with a long one. Both styles may be
seen in script typefaces--the latter less often, and usually in fonts
that emulate casual handwriting or rapid brush-strokes.
Another peculiar form is used in Anglo-Saxon; it's usually represented
by a numeral 7 in print, but I don't know what it looked like 'in the
wild'.
> The last time I was in France in 2000, I did see an ampersand in the
> lettering in a store window, and it wasn't part of a name. I took a
> picture of it because part of it was clearly a smallcap "T," so that
> the relationship of the ampersand to "et" was obvious.
It's much more so in some fonts than others. Some italic ampersands show
their heritage more clearly than those from the corresponding roman. The
original ampersand from Adrian Frutiger's _Univers_, as in Bitstream's
cut (called "Zurich"), is a distinct example, especially unusual in a
rather self-effacing sans-serif typeface:
<http://tinyurl.com/hgfh4> (You'll probably have to enter an "&" in the
"Change sample text" field to see one displayed there.)
The Linotype cut of _Univers_ has a much more conventional ampersand, in
which the "Et" forms are distorted almost beyond recognition.
--
Odysseus
Raymond S. Wise
Odysseus wrote:
> In article <1153212328.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Raymond S. Wise" <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >
> >
> > [...] While nowadays I usually print "&," in the past I wrote
> > something which was close to a plus sign with the two strokes formed
> > without picking the penpoint off of the paper. I considered it an
> > ampersand, but it was quite different in form.
>
> I also use the 'joined cross' (like a closed numeral 4 rotated +90°),
> but mainly when printing in capitals; in handwriting I usually use a
> cursive E (like a backwards 3) with short vertical strokes at the top &
> bottom--or sometimes struck through with a long one. Both styles may be
> seen in script typefaces--the latter less often, and usually in fonts
> that emulate casual handwriting or rapid brush-strokes.
>
> Another peculiar form is used in Anglo-Saxon; it's usually represented
> by a numeral 7 in print, but I don't know what it looked like 'in the
> wild'.
That's the "Tironian ampersand," which I mentioned in my first message
in this post--in which I used the misspelling "Tironean." It was
derived from a system of shorthand developed by a scholar in ancient
Rome.
It can be seen in an image in a Wikipedia article at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tironian_note
described as "Tironian _et_ in context...from a bible written by a
Belgian scribe."
But that shows a fairly unusual form of it. Most Tironian ampersands
which I have seen looked to me pretty much like a mirror reflection of
a capital Greek gamma. And I've seen a *lot* of them--and a lot of the
"e"-"t" ligature ampersand as well--because I had the good fortune that
the University of Minnesota has in its collection a history of the
ampersand, a small volume containing pages and pages of examples of
both ampersands--In fact, they have both the original version of the
booklet, written by a German scholar, and a translation into English. I
mentioned that booklet in a Usenet post I wrote in which I criticized a
couple of authors for conflating the history of the Tironian ampersand
with that of the "e"-"t" ligature ampersand. That post can be read in
the Google Groups archive at
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.folklore.urban/msg/340f280eee3c7186
I also ran across the Tironian ampersand in an image of a page of Old
English text shown in one of David Crystal's books published by the
Cambridge University Press, probably the *Cambridge Encyclopedia of the
English Language.*
>
> > The last time I was in France in 2000, I did see an ampersand in the
> > lettering in a store window, and it wasn't part of a name. I took a
> > picture of it because part of it was clearly a smallcap "T," so that
> > the relationship of the ampersand to "et" was obvious.
>
> It's much more so in some fonts than others. Some italic ampersands show
> their heritage more clearly than those from the corresponding roman. The
> original ampersand from Adrian Frutiger's _Univers_, as in Bitstream's
> cut (called "Zurich"), is a distinct example, especially unusual in a
> rather self-effacing sans-serif typeface:
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/hgfh4> (You'll probably have to enter an "&" in the
> "Change sample text" field to see one displayed there.)
>
> The Linotype cut of _Univers_ has a much more conventional ampersand, in
> which the "Et" forms are distorted almost beyond recognition.
--
Raymond S. Wise
mm wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 07:22:29 GMT, Odysseus
> <odysseu...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:
>
> >In article <1153203706.3...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Raymond S. Wise" <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> I forgot all about examples such as "AT&T." And how about "&c." for
> >> "etc.," which I mentioned in one of my example sentences? That is a
> >> sort of exception to most uses of "&," because "&" there represents
> >> "et" rather than "and."
> >
> >I'd say rather that it always represents "et", but when it stands alone
> >we silently translate it to "and".
>
> Since its name is ampersand, which iirc comes from "and per se and", I
> think it represents "and".
>
> I think people who say "and cetera" translate the "et".
Your post was the very first time that I have encountered the usage
"and cetera," to my knowledge. In addition, your post was the first
time it was used in alt.english.usage .In alt.usage.english , it was
used only two times, by John Varela, and discussed by the same poster
one other time, when he identified it as a "waggish affectation."
Google turns up examples on the Web, although it confuses matter that
there is some sort of organization (a band?) called "Chicago and
Cetera." Take those examples away, and "and cetera" is nowhere near as
popular as "and et cetera," "and etcetera," or "and etc."
Alan Jones
> In article <1153212328.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Raymond S. Wise" <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>>
>>
>> [...] While nowadays I usually print "&," in the past I wrote
>> something which was close to a plus sign with the two strokes formed
>> without picking the penpoint off of the paper. I considered it an
>> ampersand, but it was quite different in form.
>
> I also use the 'joined cross' (like a closed numeral 4 rotated +90°),
> but mainly when printing in capitals; in handwriting I usually use a
> cursive E (like a backwards 3) with short vertical strokes at the top
> & bottom--or sometimes struck through with a long one. Both styles
> may be seen in script typefaces--the latter less often, and usually
> in fonts that emulate casual handwriting or rapid brush-strokes.
Ever since I saw one of my teachers write a type-style ampersand on the
blackboard with one looping stroke of the chalk, I've done the same when
writing by hand: it took a little practice to master, but once learnt is
hardly slower than the "joined cross" form. For a few years I affected a
semi-italic handwriting but with Greek-style lower-case e epsilon and d
delta, and still occasionally write that d at the end of a word.
Alan Jones