Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
correct reference
14 Answers
when writing an essay and you refer to a book or poem for example
In La Belle Dame sans Merci by John Keats there is...
Should the name of the poem be in quotation marks and if so should they be double or single or should the title be in italics or is there some entirely different method and i'm completely wrong. help!
In La Belle Dame sans Merci by John Keats there is...
Should the name of the poem be in quotation marks and if so should they be double or single or should the title be in italics or is there some entirely different method and i'm completely wrong. help!
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ketchupkid. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
While picking no particular bones with Quizmonkey, I would, after consulting my copy of Grammar Tips state there's a difference between the way British and American's use these conventions. "The American rule is that double quotation marks are the standard form, and single quotation marks (what the British call "inverted commas") are normally used only to enclose a quotation within a quotation.
The British usually, but not always, reverse this order, using single quotation marks first, and then double quotation marks to enclose quotations within quotations."
Additionally, and in line with Quiz's example, "...And that brings us to the point about using double quotation marks for enclosing words or phrases that are not actual quotations but that are being set off for some other reason--i.e., words referred to as words."
"When a word is being defined or otherwise set apart as a word, it needs to be rendered in some way that will distinguish it from the rest of the text. For words presented as vocabulary terms, either italics or boldface can be used."
The British usually, but not always, reverse this order, using single quotation marks first, and then double quotation marks to enclose quotations within quotations."
Additionally, and in line with Quiz's example, "...And that brings us to the point about using double quotation marks for enclosing words or phrases that are not actual quotations but that are being set off for some other reason--i.e., words referred to as words."
"When a word is being defined or otherwise set apart as a word, it needs to be rendered in some way that will distinguish it from the rest of the text. For words presented as vocabulary terms, either italics or boldface can be used."
there's no right or wrong on this one, it's more a matter of 'house style'. Publishing houses make rules regarding their own books or newspapers. If you're writing a university essay, your department will probably have its own requirement too. One common British convention is to have names of books, poems etc in italics and quotations with double quote marks, saving single quote marks for quotes within quotes. But this is by no means universal; there's no law.
A quotation isn't the same as a title. I have always been taught (at grammar school and at university) to put the title either in single quotes or italics if typing (you may underline if writing by hand), and actual quotations from the title in double quotes, eg. "Piping down the valleys wild," wrote William Blake in his poem Songs of Innocence.
or:
"Piping down the valleys wild," wrote William Blake in his poem 'Songs of Innocence'.
In speech, I was taught to use double quotes for direct speech and single quotes for quotations within speech. This seems to be a little old-fashioned now, though, as I see many British book publishers are going with it the other way round. My gut feeling is that if one way or the other is specified by, say, an academic or editorial team, then use it. Otherwise it doesn't really matter as long as you are consistent.
or:
"Piping down the valleys wild," wrote William Blake in his poem 'Songs of Innocence'.
In speech, I was taught to use double quotes for direct speech and single quotes for quotations within speech. This seems to be a little old-fashioned now, though, as I see many British book publishers are going with it the other way round. My gut feeling is that if one way or the other is specified by, say, an academic or editorial team, then use it. Otherwise it doesn't really matter as long as you are consistent.
thanks for all your help, you've been really useful. you've actually made me think of one more thing, in my introduction i've written
...something something something. This poses the question; what does...
so i should put "what does..." into double quotation marks because it's something i've said?
this makes me realise how shockingly bad my grammer is.
...something something something. This poses the question; what does...
so i should put "what does..." into double quotation marks because it's something i've said?
this makes me realise how shockingly bad my grammer is.
I've been paid a few pounds, now and again, for published writing. (I don't mind when sub-editors change what I've written to conform to a house style but I do object when they replace correct usage with something totally wrong!).
If I was to write the sentence you refer to, I would use this:
This poses the question, 'What does . . .?'
(I was taught to use double quotation marks but most editors expect to see single marks; I now find that this style feels more 'natural' to me).
In case Westminster's comment has left you mystified, I think that he/she is referring to your mis-spelling of 'grammar'.
If I was to join in with the criticism, I would have to point out that you shouldn't use semi-colons unless you know why you're doing it. (e.g. to separate two clauses, where the content of the second clause is dependent upon the content of the first one). There's certainly no case for using a semi-colon where you have. (A comma is best, although a colon might be acceptable).
And please tell me that you really do know about capital letters! ;-)
(Yes, I know that I started that sentence with a conjunction. Nobody's perfect!).
Chris
If I was to write the sentence you refer to, I would use this:
This poses the question, 'What does . . .?'
(I was taught to use double quotation marks but most editors expect to see single marks; I now find that this style feels more 'natural' to me).
In case Westminster's comment has left you mystified, I think that he/she is referring to your mis-spelling of 'grammar'.
If I was to join in with the criticism, I would have to point out that you shouldn't use semi-colons unless you know why you're doing it. (e.g. to separate two clauses, where the content of the second clause is dependent upon the content of the first one). There's certainly no case for using a semi-colon where you have. (A comma is best, although a colon might be acceptable).
And please tell me that you really do know about capital letters! ;-)
(Yes, I know that I started that sentence with a conjunction. Nobody's perfect!).
Chris
thanks for you're help Buenchico. i've never really been taught any of this and there are so many different variations and opinions that it can be quite confusing and yes i do know about capital letters, i'm just lazy when it comes to answer bank! also i don't mind being corrected or criticised at all, so long as that criticism is helpful, which yours was so thank you!
While we're on the subject of grammar and style, I don't like to appear pedantic (he lied!), but I'm afraid I find Buenchico's use of "if I was" rather than "if I were" rather uncomfortable. I know it isn't considered "wrong" these days, and I'm not suggesting it should be - it just grates a little on my ear, that's all. Sorry, Buenchico - no offence intended!
Ketchupkid: Thanks for not taking offence at my comments. I usually refrain from criticising spelling and grammar on AB but I couldn't give a meaningful answer to your question without doing so ;-)
Narolines: You'll see that I posted my comments at 2150 but I was unaware that Ketchupkid had already acknowledged the incorrect spelling of 'grammar' at 2124. This was because I started writing my post at least half an hour before I posted it. I spent most of that half hour checking and re-checking my post because I knew that any errors would be bound to attract criticism. So I'm now kicking myself for failing to spot (as you have done) that I'd used the past tense instead of the conditional one ;-)
To make matters worse, I've just looked at the previous sentence and I can't decide whether it's correct or whether it should have started with 'So now I'm . . .' (Also, should
there have been a comma after 'So'?).
Thanks anyway for the criticism!
Chris
Narolines: You'll see that I posted my comments at 2150 but I was unaware that Ketchupkid had already acknowledged the incorrect spelling of 'grammar' at 2124. This was because I started writing my post at least half an hour before I posted it. I spent most of that half hour checking and re-checking my post because I knew that any errors would be bound to attract criticism. So I'm now kicking myself for failing to spot (as you have done) that I'd used the past tense instead of the conditional one ;-)
To make matters worse, I've just looked at the previous sentence and I can't decide whether it's correct or whether it should have started with 'So now I'm . . .' (Also, should
there have been a comma after 'So'?).
Thanks anyway for the criticism!
Chris
I don't think you need quote marks at all when you're quoting yourself (after all, the entire sentence is written by yourself). I would put it:
This poses the question: What does...?
You might not need the capital W; either way is common. And I've used a colon rather than the comma which Buenchico suggested (though these are pretty much interchangeable and neither is 'wrong') or the semi-colon you used yourself, which I do think is wrong.
I know what you mean about writing for AB, though. I often use lower-case letters rather than capitals (too lazy to shift for myself, as someone once said about the shift key); and it's generally easier with computers to use single quotes because they require only one finger; double quotes need two as you have to hold down the shift key. This purely technological reason may be why many publishers use single quotes as their default punctuation.
This poses the question: What does...?
You might not need the capital W; either way is common. And I've used a colon rather than the comma which Buenchico suggested (though these are pretty much interchangeable and neither is 'wrong') or the semi-colon you used yourself, which I do think is wrong.
I know what you mean about writing for AB, though. I often use lower-case letters rather than capitals (too lazy to shift for myself, as someone once said about the shift key); and it's generally easier with computers to use single quotes because they require only one finger; double quotes need two as you have to hold down the shift key. This purely technological reason may be why many publishers use single quotes as their default punctuation.
1 to 14 of 14
Latest Posts
ChatterBank1 min ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Will Stonehenge Become Reform's...
News5 mins ago
