Grrr. Mine is stuck with some vapid shipping "partner" in Savage, Maryland. Perfect name, as I'm feeling savaged by the delay. Too on the nose? Prolly. I'm looking forward to seeing the infamy of 6.83 and 6.85.
I can’t make this translate into the written word, so I must simply invite you to google “Kenneth Williams infamy.” (And it'll be much more enjoyable that way, anyway.)
Do you prefer the print edition over digital, or do you have both? If print only, is it because of functionality, familiarity, or a love of physical books (or all three)?
I’ve been a diehard user of the online edition for many years, because of the elegant yet robust user interface and functionality—especially the ability to search the manual (whether the current or previous edition), Shop Talk, the reader forum, Style Q&As, and Style Workouts.
I’m always going to love a print book: I find comfort in print books, and there’s also that thing about serendipitous revelation when your eye is caught by something as you’re flipping pages that ebooks can’t ever have.
That said, I also think that a subscription to Chicago Manual is essential.
Lots of buzz in Editors’ Association of Earth on Facebook, about the acid green and how the banner down the left side eats up a third of one’s screen space; and the need for a PDF of the hyphenation guide, which has moved from 7.89 to 7.96 (aargh—new citation numbers??). Fun fact: If you search “departures” in the online edition, you’ll find most if not all of the significant changes.
Interesting punctuation in the Photo of "The Chicago Manual of Style" where on the cover is the statement: The essential guide for writers, editors, and publishers (sic) If one uses punctuation-there are two commas- why omit a period at the end. It seems inconsistent punctuation. And why use an "Oxford comma" after "editors"-is that consistent with the contents of the book?? Peter
Well, I am out of my depth, so just two comments and await being corrected:
1. If it is not a sentence then it must be a non-sentence in which case perhaps an ellipsis should have been used.
2. While adding a period at the end of a non-sentence doesn't make it a sentence, well, it doesn't make it any less a sentence, either. A period, to me, signals that the writer was in fact finished with whatever message he or she meant to convey, whereas no period gives me the unjustified but nonetheless bothersome feeling that the writer was murdered, abducted, or lost interest.
A polite put-down from the guru! Agreed. Soul, don't complain, but suffer in silence. Here endeth the comments from me. Best wishes for always edifying posts.
The only challenge is to come up with some reason for which I deserve this book as a reward. (It won't be that hard to do: if I have any gift at all, it is the gift of being able to justify rewarding myself for even the smallest achievements.)
OMG, I just had to run around the apartment in a rage, screaming, "Noooooooooooooo!," and making one stop to hug our beloved jacketless copy of the thirty-eighth printing of the third edition of "Words into Type." These two sections, 6.83 and 6.85, are going to be hard to swallow. I'm about to send a note to my team demanding that we pretend they don't exist.
If I am ever called upon to testify in court (the closest I've come is jury summonses, which—alas—have never seen me so seated), I will eschew the proffered book in favor of the latest edition of CMoS. (The CMoS? I dithered.)
I'm putting off editing the final draft of a client's twelve-book fantasy series. He's a wonderful storyteller but doesn't seem inclined to self-edit (much nodding of heads, shrugging of shoulders, etc.). Fortunately for me, he leaves that to me. But my head gets so filled with his complex and amazingly detailed alternate reality that I sometimes need a bit of grounding...preferably not politically themed (since Nov. 5, anyway). Your 'stack is currently doing that life-saving work.
Grrr. Mine is stuck with some vapid shipping "partner" in Savage, Maryland. Perfect name, as I'm feeling savaged by the delay. Too on the nose? Prolly. I'm looking forward to seeing the infamy of 6.83 and 6.85.
I can’t make this translate into the written word, so I must simply invite you to google “Kenneth Williams infamy.” (And it'll be much more enjoyable that way, anyway.)
Wonderful! Something Ricardian in Williams' take.
OK, so now I'm two editions behind but I still have cash left over to buy food, drink, and oxford commas.
As long as you prioritize those commas...!
Do you prefer the print edition over digital, or do you have both? If print only, is it because of functionality, familiarity, or a love of physical books (or all three)?
I’ve been a diehard user of the online edition for many years, because of the elegant yet robust user interface and functionality—especially the ability to search the manual (whether the current or previous edition), Shop Talk, the reader forum, Style Q&As, and Style Workouts.
I’m always going to love a print book: I find comfort in print books, and there’s also that thing about serendipitous revelation when your eye is caught by something as you’re flipping pages that ebooks can’t ever have.
That said, I also think that a subscription to Chicago Manual is essential.
And of course it’s all tax-deductible, ain’t it.
Oh dear, I can tell something awful has happened in 6.85...
Lots of buzz in Editors’ Association of Earth on Facebook, about the acid green and how the banner down the left side eats up a third of one’s screen space; and the need for a PDF of the hyphenation guide, which has moved from 7.89 to 7.96 (aargh—new citation numbers??). Fun fact: If you search “departures” in the online edition, you’ll find most if not all of the significant changes.
But is it as much fun to dip into as Dreyer's English?
Is *anything* as much to dip into as Dreyer’s English, except maybe a vat of butter pecan ice cream?
Interesting punctuation in the Photo of "The Chicago Manual of Style" where on the cover is the statement: The essential guide for writers, editors, and publishers (sic) If one uses punctuation-there are two commas- why omit a period at the end. It seems inconsistent punctuation. And why use an "Oxford comma" after "editors"-is that consistent with the contents of the book?? Peter
There’s no period at the conclusion of the jacket line because it’s not a sentence.
The Oxford/serial/series comma has been Chicago style for well over a century.
Well, I am out of my depth, so just two comments and await being corrected:
1. If it is not a sentence then it must be a non-sentence in which case perhaps an ellipsis should have been used.
2. While adding a period at the end of a non-sentence doesn't make it a sentence, well, it doesn't make it any less a sentence, either. A period, to me, signals that the writer was in fact finished with whatever message he or she meant to convey, whereas no period gives me the unjustified but nonetheless bothersome feeling that the writer was murdered, abducted, or lost interest.
You are correct, I'm afraid: You're out of your depth.
A polite put-down from the guru! Agreed. Soul, don't complain, but suffer in silence. Here endeth the comments from me. Best wishes for always edifying posts.
Oh frabjous day! Calloo! Callay!
The only challenge is to come up with some reason for which I deserve this book as a reward. (It won't be that hard to do: if I have any gift at all, it is the gift of being able to justify rewarding myself for even the smallest achievements.)
It may finally be time to replace my old, secondhand copy. (But you'll still have to pry my beloved Words into Type from my cold, dead fingers.)
OMG, I just had to run around the apartment in a rage, screaming, "Noooooooooooooo!," and making one stop to hug our beloved jacketless copy of the thirty-eighth printing of the third edition of "Words into Type." These two sections, 6.83 and 6.85, are going to be hard to swallow. I'm about to send a note to my team demanding that we pretend they don't exist.
Presumably my former colleagues will also ignore those two bits.
Cool cover: both colour and font.
Don’t make me buy yet anther edition of that fantastic manual, Mr Dreyer!
🫢
If I am ever called upon to testify in court (the closest I've come is jury summonses, which—alas—have never seen me so seated), I will eschew the proffered book in favor of the latest edition of CMoS. (The CMoS? I dithered.)
Max, you're gonna hurt yourself reading all this stuff all at once!
I'm putting off editing the final draft of a client's twelve-book fantasy series. He's a wonderful storyteller but doesn't seem inclined to self-edit (much nodding of heads, shrugging of shoulders, etc.). Fortunately for me, he leaves that to me. But my head gets so filled with his complex and amazingly detailed alternate reality that I sometimes need a bit of grounding...preferably not politically themed (since Nov. 5, anyway). Your 'stack is currently doing that life-saving work.