Q. Is it JD Vance or J.D.? I’m having a dispute with an editor who claims to follow Chicago style and she insists on J.D.
A. In Chicago style, initials in a person’s name normally get periods; a nonbreaking space separates consecutive initials. Accordingly, our style would be “J. D. Vance”—as in a bibliography entry for the book Hillbilly Elegy, where the author’s name would be inverted: “Vance, J. D.” We’d add that space even though “J.D. Vance,” with periods but no space, is how the name is credited in that book (as in the 2016 Harper edition). (Unspaced initials with periods is a common style, though published books seem more likely to follow Chicago style, as this n-gram from Google comparing “T. S. Eliot” with “T.S. Eliot” suggests.)
But when initials are used alone, Chicago style says to use no spaces or periods, as in FDR (for Franklin Delano Roosevelt). And we make other exceptions—for example, for pen names (as in H.D., with periods but no spaces, for the poet Hilda Doolittle) or stage names (as in LL Cool J, no periods or spaces). So if Vance himself prefers “JD Vance” (i.e., without periods or spaces), as this Wall Street Journal article from July 17, 2024, suggests, then it’s OK to use that form, at least for mentions in the text. In a bibliography or reference list, on the other hand, you could follow Chicago style, assuming the cited sources themselves include periods (see also CMOS 13.75).
For more details, see CMOS 10.4 and 10.14.
[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In CMOS 16.71, why is Leonardo da Vinci indexed under “L”? And in an article that refers to people by surnames on subsequent mention, should he be referred to as “Leonardo” or “da Vinci”?
A. You can ignore Dan Brown and others who’ve rebranded the archetypal Renaissance man as “Da Vinci.” The name is Leonardo, and he came from Vinci (da Vinci), an Italian town in the region of Tuscany.
Leonardo can be referred to in full as Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci (as noted on page 69 of Walter Isaacson’s 2017 biography, Leonardo da Vinci [Simon & Schuster])—in which “di ser Piero” means he’s the son of a man named Piero (ser is an old social title that was similar to “sir”). Leonardo’s father was also da Vinci, which isn’t a surname but rather an epithet (see CMOS 8.34). Leonardo and Piero are given names (i.e., first names).
Because he lacks a surname, Leonardo da Vinci is properly indexed under “L” and would be referred to in the text as Leonardo—that is, after having been introduced as Leonardo da Vinci.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hello! I know that spellings are always preserved in proper names. For example, in a book written in American English, “Globe Theatre” would not become “Globe Theater.” Does this extend to punctuation? In “St Thomas’s Hospital Medical School” (in London) does it stay “St” or become “St.” when mentioned in a book in American style?
A. British-style punctuation, unlike spelling, can usually be adjusted to conform to the style used in the surrounding text. This includes moving periods and commas inside closing quotation marks (and changing single quotation marks to double), replacing spaced en dashes with unspaced em dashes, and adding periods to abbreviations like “St.”—which, as a form of contraction (the first and last letters of the term are retained), isn’t normally punctuated in British style (see also CMOS 10.4).
Note, however, that the advice relative to periods does not apply to direct quotations from written sources (or, by extension, to titles of works), which should record “St Thomas’s” or “St. Thomas’s” as it appears in the source. See CMOS 13.7 for permissible changes to quotations and 8.165 for permissible changes to titles of works.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hello! I am wondering about the capitalization of trademarks such as “Dad’s root beer” and “Mack trucks,” where the name includes what I consider to be a generic description. My instinct is to make terms such as “root beer” and “trucks” lowercase, but I’m wondering if that’s correct. The companies’ full names in this case are Mack Trucks Inc. and the Dad’s Root Beer Company LLC. Thanks!
A. We agree with your instinct, though it’s never wrong to capitalize the generic term if the company or brand does so in its own materials (as on a company website). With Dad’s Root Beer, the advantages of the extra capital letters are obvious; without sufficient context, “Dad’s root beer” could easily be mistaken for root beer belonging to somebody’s father. Ambiguity is less likely with Mack trucks, and the lowercase t will allow you to compare Mack trucks to, for example, Ford trucks without appearing to be inconsistent.
Another example like Dad’s Root Beer would be Scotch Tape. A capital T could help readers understand that you’re not merely referring to tape from Scotland. 3M’s trademark, however, extends only to the name “Scotch”—as seen in the placement of the registered trademark symbol in “Scotch® Brand Tapes” at the company’s website. Unambiguous examples would include Kleenex tissues and Nike shoes. Whatever you choose, be consistent, and prefer lowercase for a generic term like “root beer” used alone.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hi, when a person has a hyphenated first name, such as Zheng-Jun Gao, how would you style their first initials? Would it be “Z.-J. Gao” or “Z. J. Gao”? Thank you.
A. If you’re following Chicago style, keep the hyphen: “Z.-J. Gao” or, inverted (as in a reference list or index), “Gao, Z.-J.” If you’re writing for the sciences, where initials for given names are more common, and where periods and spaces are often omitted from initials, you could follow the lead of the National Library of Medicine, as detailed in Citing Medicine: The NLM Style Guide for Authors, Editors, and Publishers, 2nd ed. According to that guide, hyphens in given names are disregarded when forming initials: “ZJ Gao” or, inverted, “Gao ZJ” (without a comma).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What is the correct capitalization of “Zoom” and its derivatives when it refers to the essential meeting software that we are all using during the coronavirus pandemic? I’m certain that it is capitalized as a noun—e.g., “I have a Zoom conference at 3:00 p.m.” What about when it’s used as a verb—e.g., “People are zooming/Zooming into online classes all day long.” Thank you!
A. Zoom is a brand name, so you’re right, it gets a capital Z in both noun and attributive forms. (An attributive noun functions like an adjective, as in your “Zoom conference” example.) Capitalization is also appropriate for brand names that have become synonymous with a category, like Band-Aid, Coke, Hula-Hoop, Jet Ski, Xerox, and Zamboni. Those terms are all listed in Merriam-Webster as capitalized trademarks. And though it may seem normal to refer to a hula-hoop or a jet ski in casual prose or creative writing, it’s never wrong to capitalize a brand name.
Verbs are a different story. Some brands immediately enter the lexicon as verbs, and verbs like to be lowercase. Merriam-Webster’s entry for Google, which is limited to the verb form, lists lowercase and capitalized versions as equal variants: “google or Google,” “googled or Googled,” “googling or Googling,” and “googles or Googles.” Ditto Auto-Tune (“auto-tune or Auto-Tune,” etc.). The somewhat older verb “xerox” doesn’t even get a capitalized variant.
But unlike “xerox” or “google” or “auto-tune,” “zoom” has a day job as an ordinary verb. Even if it does enter the dictionary in its trademarked sense, it may be a good idea to retain the capital letter for the sake of clarity. For now at least, prefer “Zooming” over “zooming.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Hello, this question is in regard to paragraph 8.54 of the Manual. One of the examples of a generic term for a geographic entity is “the Hudson River valley.” I was wondering why “valley” is not capitalized, despite being part of the proper name. I am most likely just missing a really big point here, but it feels like the equivalent of saying “the Grand canyon.” Thank you so much for your help and your time!
A. The unstated point of CMOS 8.54 is that words like “valley” aren’t automatically considered part of a proper name. Life would be easier if usage never varied, but it does. To take another example from 8.54, the Thames is often referred to as such or, more specifically, as the river Thames (not the Thames River). So in Peter Ackroyd’s Thames: Sacred River (London: Vintage Books, 2008), it’s “the river Thames” (or just “the Thames”). But a search at the UK government’s website shows a preference for “the River Thames.” Who is right? Paragraph 8.54 supports Ackroyd’s usage, but the main thing is to be consistent. As for the Hudson River, the valley is often referred to as the Hudson Valley (or, yes, the Hudson River Valley), but in its article on the Hudson River, Encyclopaedia Britannica refers to “the Hudson valley.” Britannica’s article is using the word “valley” descriptively, and you can think of paragraph 8.54 as giving you permission to do the same—especially where preferred usage may be in doubt.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What is the best way to use a possessive with royalty that commonly has extra descriptors after their name? E.g., Philip II of Macedon; Alexander the Great; Elizabeth I; or Gregory I, “the Great.” Sometimes the number or descriptor has become part of the individual’s name. I couldn’t find this easily on the website so I am asking. Any help is much appreciated.
A. If the numeric suffix or description follows the name with no intervening punctuation, simply add an apostrophe and an s: Philip II of Macedon’s son; Alexander the Great’s mother; Elizabeth I’s reign. But if a comma (or parentheses) or quotation marks intervene—as in the case of a description that follows a numeric suffix—you will want to rephrase: not Pope Gregory I, “the Great’s” predecessors, but the predecessors of Pope Gregory I, “the Great.” For more on such names, see CMOS 8.34.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I know that we should follow the spelling of names of organizations, even when the spelling isn’t Chicago style (e.g., United Nations Development Programme). But what about when translating non-English-named institutions? For example, the French institution CNRS translates itself as “National Centre for Scientific Research.” Would you use “Centre” or “Center”?
A. You can write “Center.” The translated name isn’t the official corporate name, so you are free to apply your own regional spelling preferences.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Dear Editor, I was wondering if you could help me with a style query. I am copyediting a 10-chapter document on fish. The author has asked me to include the scientific name in parentheses after the common name of fish species. It seems to me that repeating this each time the fish is mentioned would make the text bulky (the names are repeated often in each section). Can we mention the scientific name of the fish in parentheses just once in each chapter, or should we keep repeating this style after each species is noted? I hope I’m being clear. . . . Many thanks for your advice on this!
A. Just once is enough. According to Scientific Style and Format (published by the University of Chicago Press and, like CMOS, available online), “If the organism is widely known by a vernacular name, this may be used if, at the first reference to the organism, the vernacular name is presented in clear association with the Latin name.” See SSF, section 22.2.3.2.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]