"favorite."
Period Space or Period Space Space
- Thread starter dangerousdon
- Start date
<In US convention, they may be added to the end of a quotation (i.e., inside the marks) unless doing so alters the substance of the quoted material.>
Last time I tried to look up current "rules," the US "rule" appeared to be that commas and periods are to appear before the close quote. There was no allowance for periods and commas to ever appear after the close quote--regardless of whether that changes the meaning or whether or not the comma or period appeared at the end of the text being quoted.
I also tend to agree that consistency of usage is important. However, at this point, I would not file a legal brief with a court that consistently placed commas and periods outside of a close quote mark. I would be concerned that the judge(s) would think that I did not know the current American "rule." I am not sure what I would do about a quote that did not include a comma or period that I wanted to follow with a comma or period but which I thought was less precise if I put the comma or period before the close quote. Putting it after the close quote mark would arguably violate consistency.
On the other hand, so long as I was being consistent, I do not think I would hesitate to file a court brief that had either one or two spaces after periods that indicate full stops, or, for that matter, colons. (Are we in agreement on one space after periods used for other purposes, such as abbreviations or acronyms?)
Last time I tried to look up current "rules," the US "rule" appeared to be that commas and periods are to appear before the close quote. There was no allowance for periods and commas to ever appear after the close quote--regardless of whether that changes the meaning or whether or not the comma or period appeared at the end of the text being quoted.
I also tend to agree that consistency of usage is important. However, at this point, I would not file a legal brief with a court that consistently placed commas and periods outside of a close quote mark. I would be concerned that the judge(s) would think that I did not know the current American "rule." I am not sure what I would do about a quote that did not include a comma or period that I wanted to follow with a comma or period but which I thought was less precise if I put the comma or period before the close quote. Putting it after the close quote mark would arguably violate consistency.
On the other hand, so long as I was being consistent, I do not think I would hesitate to file a court brief that had either one or two spaces after periods that indicate full stops, or, for that matter, colons. (Are we in agreement on one space after periods used for other purposes, such as abbreviations or acronyms?)
You won't catch me doing it, either. However, the funny thing is that I see it quite often in legal documents. These days, I look at many, many more contracts than pleadings or briefs, but I still see it in both.
Agreed on all counts. One space before and after each dot in an ellipsis, as well.
<Agreed on all counts. One space before and after each dot in an ellipsis, as well.>
I agree with you, but Microsoft Word "characters" seems to think no spaces between the dots in an ellipsis or after an ellipsis and before a period.
<You won't catch me doing it, either. However, the funny thing is that I see it quite often in legal documents.>
That is interesting. I am not sure I care about contracts. It seems to me a used to see commas and periods outside of close quote marks more often than I do now. I had a mentor who was a stickler for grammar and proper usage and an extraordinarily good and pristinely clear writer--Arnold I would say I think about you every day, but I more think about you every hour!--who insisted on putting commas and periods after close quote marks, and I think he came up with some reliable authority that such usage was allowable in precise or technical writing such as law. However a decade or more later I had a fairly new associate who challenged that that usage was proper and indicated that it looked odd and wrong to her. (She was a pretty good writer and grammarian, too, and I encourage such persnicketiness (sp?) in folks helping me write court filings.) I was unable to find anything anywhere for authority that talked about an allowance for technical and legal writing. I decided that no matter what my own preference, I was trying to communicate to a judge that I knew what I was doing, and I did not want anything about my writing to stand out and be potentially perceived as incorrect, whether or not it really was incorrect.
To me that is the bottom line about all of this stuff. I try to write so that my audience will most likely think I am careful--therefore, in part, the consistency--l and know what I am doing. I do not want anything about my writing to make someone stop and ask themselves whether I erred. That would be a distraction at the least! On the other hand, as David Foster Wallace famously apparently put on his drafts for review by his editors "NB: All deviations from standard syntax are intentional." DFW was pretty darn persnickety himself about these matters and as a writer, he is my hero in many ways.
I agree with you, but Microsoft Word "characters" seems to think no spaces between the dots in an ellipsis or after an ellipsis and before a period.
<You won't catch me doing it, either. However, the funny thing is that I see it quite often in legal documents.>
That is interesting. I am not sure I care about contracts. It seems to me a used to see commas and periods outside of close quote marks more often than I do now. I had a mentor who was a stickler for grammar and proper usage and an extraordinarily good and pristinely clear writer--Arnold I would say I think about you every day, but I more think about you every hour!--who insisted on putting commas and periods after close quote marks, and I think he came up with some reliable authority that such usage was allowable in precise or technical writing such as law. However a decade or more later I had a fairly new associate who challenged that that usage was proper and indicated that it looked odd and wrong to her. (She was a pretty good writer and grammarian, too, and I encourage such persnicketiness (sp?) in folks helping me write court filings.) I was unable to find anything anywhere for authority that talked about an allowance for technical and legal writing. I decided that no matter what my own preference, I was trying to communicate to a judge that I knew what I was doing, and I did not want anything about my writing to stand out and be potentially perceived as incorrect, whether or not it really was incorrect.
To me that is the bottom line about all of this stuff. I try to write so that my audience will most likely think I am careful--therefore, in part, the consistency--l and know what I am doing. I do not want anything about my writing to make someone stop and ask themselves whether I erred. That would be a distraction at the least! On the other hand, as David Foster Wallace famously apparently put on his drafts for review by his editors "NB: All deviations from standard syntax are intentional." DFW was pretty darn persnickety himself about these matters and as a writer, he is my hero in many ways.
For as final an answer as on can get, I turned to A Dictionary of Modern English Usage by H.W. Fowler. For inverted commas (to which we have usually applied the term 'quotation marks'), he advises to use ' a " b " a '; he acknowledges that there is 'no universal distinction', but suggests this as 'the more sensible practice', since the heavy double mark then draws attention to the uncommon quotation within a quotation.
On the placing of stops inside or outside inverted commas, they are always outside save and except where they are part of the actual quoted text ... and if needed, an additional punctuation is placed outside the inverted comma as well. An example he gave was: With him it was always 'Damn the consequences!'.
For the want of an Oxford comma, five million dollars was lost.
On the placing of stops inside or outside inverted commas, they are always outside save and except where they are part of the actual quoted text ... and if needed, an additional punctuation is placed outside the inverted comma as well. An example he gave was: With him it was always 'Damn the consequences!'.
For the want of an Oxford comma, five million dollars was lost.
I'll go along with H.W. Fowler the next time I correspond with Her Majesty. 
The British rule on inverted commas, also a strictly British term as I understand it. I guess that is the Canadian rule, too.
<and if needed, an additional punctuation is placed outside the inverted comma as well. >
Cool, a precise statement of that. I cannot find a similarly unambiguous statement as to what the US rule is re that!
I did not mean to indicate I thought the Oxford comma was not important for contracts! I was only talking about commas and stops in relation to inverted commas! Although I am not sure I follow why the court ruled as it did in that news story. Sure looks like a series to me! And I agree, an excess of semi colons is not a good solution!
They went so far as to give an example where there's a question mark within the quotation, and another immediately following the quotation. Something like ...
Did you just say 'who's there?'?
That would be the correct punctuation, rather than leaving out either of the quotation marks.
The latter. Space-Space. There is no other way to do it
I've found Matthew Butterick's advice invaluable, in book form (written more for those in the legal field) and through his website (more generally applicable). I especially appreciate the thoughtful reasoning behind his positions. Although he has strong views about several of the topics that appear in this thread, he also takes a "YMMV" approach.
As to how attorneys should write for the court, he suggests strictly abiding by local rules and yielding to any known preferences of the judge. Relatedly, I think that the ABA Journal (or similar publication) had an article discussing a recent survey that asked judges about their preferences concerning various writing styles. As I recall, the majority didn't express a strong opinion on most issues. They seemed more bothered by egregious misspellings, clear punctuation errors, and a lack of civility than the number of spaces following each sentence.
As to how attorneys should write for the court, he suggests strictly abiding by local rules and yielding to any known preferences of the judge. Relatedly, I think that the ABA Journal (or similar publication) had an article discussing a recent survey that asked judges about their preferences concerning various writing styles. As I recall, the majority didn't express a strong opinion on most issues. They seemed more bothered by egregious misspellings, clear punctuation errors, and a lack of civility than the number of spaces following each sentence.
I haven't read through all 11 pages of this thread, but I was taught that space-space was a typewriter thing, and that it was wholly unnecessary on computers.
I don't know about being considered intelligent, but I majored in English Lit and everything today irritates the crap out of me. I'm accepting it better now as language does evolve but it shouldn't evolve beyond understandable written or oral communication. I must admit that I often omit the proper second space required at the end of a sentence in e-mails and things such as this but I do punctuate and capitalize my texts. Anyway, don't take it too badly but don't change what you are doing.
shavefan
I’m not a fan
Two spaces after a period. Always. I had no idea there was another acceptable option . . .
- Thread starter
- #214
Thanks Steve!
Similar threads
