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?)
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.
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.
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.)
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.
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}.”
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.
Q. My projects include a lot of descriptions of real property. The author, the reviewer, and I are butting heads about using
“a rectangularly shaped parcel” instead of “a rectangular
shaped parcel.” I say if they wouldn’t use “squarely shaped
parcel”—which they don’t—they should
stick with “rectangular shaped.” And now that I’m typing
this, I’m thinking “rectangle shaped parcel” may be even
better.
A. The alternatives using “shaped” are all pretty awkward: rectangle-shaped parcel,
rectangular-shaped parcel, rectangularly shaped parcel. And they’re redundant to boot. “Rectangular
parcel” says it best.
Q. I am editing a short story about Rosa Parks. Should “blacks” be used instead
of “African Americans”? My Australian colleague seems to think that “blacks”
is more socially accepted, but I totally disagree.
A. Since these terms go in and out of fashion and may be regional in their popularity, in this case you should let the author
decide.
Q. Can you advise what part of speech is “cowering” in the following sentence: “They
discovered that she was no cowering little simpleton”? Is it possibly an adjective?
A. Bingo! A participial adjective is indeed cowering in that sentence. Or at least loitering.