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.
Q. In a school application would it be correct to say “At UPenn, I will participate in XYZ club” or “At UPenn, I would participate in XYZ club”? For an applicant who doesn’t yet know whether he will
be admitted, the latter seems correct. Please advise. Thanks.
A. Yes, you’ve put your finger on this subtle difference. UPenn might be impressed by your self-confidence
if you use the “will” construction—or they might just think
you’re arrogant. Good luck!
Q. Hello! When indexing a book that names the same person literally hundreds of times (it’s about this
person’s philosophy), is passim correct in the index? Same Q about his works; some of the famous works are named or referenced dozens, if not hundreds of
times.
A. Imagine yourself using this index to find something. What good is passim? A reader already knows that X is mentioned throughout the book. Professional indexers disagree whether it even makes sense
to have an entry for the main subject of a book, but if you do, it must be broken up into many subentries and possibly sub-subentries,
so readers can find what they’re after. (In fact, any index entry that consists of more than five or
six page numbers should be further broken down into subentries.) Some indexers of biographies create an entry for the person’s
name, but within it they list only passages that relate to the person’s life events (birth, marriage,
death), which could not easily be listed elsewhere in the index. Some indexers also put under the person’s
name “Works. See titles of individual works.” Your questions show that you would profit from learning more about indexing before you go further.
I suggest you read the indexing chapter of CMOS.