italicization for latin /et al/ in technical writing

On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:26:10 PM UTC-8, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> On 2023-02-05 14:42, Simon S Aysdie wrote: 
> > I was contemplating using "ad infinitum". I am not sure if I will use it. But I wondered if it should be italicized. I think I would not italicize it. 
> > 
> > 
> > https://www.enago.com/academy/should-you-italicize-latin-terms-in-scientific-writing/ 
> >
> I'd certainly italicize "et al." "Ad infinitum" isn't really standard 
> English over here, so I'd probably italicize it if I ever used it, which 
> I don't recall having done in print. 
> 
> And the full stop after 'et al' is super important. 'T'aint me and my 
> old pal Al. 

Thank you... Just looking for opinions. My typography book frowns on overuse of emphasis. That is, if I did use it I felt as though I had to justify emphasis. I guess this is the first time I've looked it up.

Writing is not my native element--I must check everything I do. It's a struggle. :)

On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:51:33 PM UTC-8, Don Y wrote:
> On 2/5/2023 1:47 PM, Don Y wrote: 
> > On 2/5/2023 12:42 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote: 
> >> I was contemplating using "ad infinitum". I am not sure if I will use it. 
> >> But I wondered if it should be italicized. I think I would not italicize 
> >> it. 
> > 
> > Italicize foreign words and abbreviations.  etc.  et al.  ibid 
> > as well as titles (of documents, etc.).
> s/ibid/ibid./
> > In many contexts, their usage is so universal that one can fudge 
> > a bit. 
> > 
> > But, IME, it's easier to just be consistent there as *most*  (?) 
> > folks mix technical and nontechnical materials and it's easier 
> > for them not to have to adjust to different writing styles. 
> > 
> > Also, reserve italics for this instead of also using it (also) for 
> > emphasis, if possible.
> (I have a tag for "foreign" and another for "emphasis".) 
> 
> This also comes in handy when you want to search for a string 
> and want to be able to specify if your search should be *in* 
> those foreign/abbreviations or not. 
> 
> (And, having tags lets me temporarily set the COLOR of the 
> text thus tagged. So, I can quickly see if I've used 
> "italics" somewhere instead of "foreign".)

Thank you, Don. et al and ibid (depending on bib style) are sort of inevitable because they show up in the bibliography. 

Ultimately it's about making it easy for the reader. Whatever that takes, I'll do it if I know it. I don't want to annoy them, which is hard for me. lol

Occasionally I suppose emphasis is called for. Interesting note about the tagging. Can't say I've done it. I use LaTeX, but am not an expert.

On 2/6/2023 11:56 AM, Simon S Aysdie wrote:
> On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:51:33 PM UTC-8, Don Y wrote:
>> On 2/5/2023 1:47 PM, Don Y wrote:
>>> On 2/5/2023 12:42 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote:
>>>> I was contemplating using "ad infinitum". I am not sure if I will use
>>>> it. But I wondered if it should be italicized. I think I would not
>>>> italicize it.
>>> 
>>> Italicize foreign words and abbreviations.  etc.  et al.  ibid as well
>>> as titles (of documents, etc.).
>> s/ibid/ibid./
>>> In many contexts, their usage is so universal that one can fudge a bit.
>>> 
>>> But, IME, it's easier to just be consistent there as *most*  (?) folks
>>> mix technical and nontechnical materials and it's easier for them not to
>>> have to adjust to different writing styles.
>>> 
>>> Also, reserve italics for this instead of also using it (also) for 
>>> emphasis, if possible.
>> (I have a tag for "foreign" and another for "emphasis".)
>> 
>> This also comes in handy when you want to search for a string and want to
>> be able to specify if your search should be *in* those
>> foreign/abbreviations or not.
>> 
>> (And, having tags lets me temporarily set the COLOR of the text thus
>> tagged. So, I can quickly see if I've used "italics" somewhere instead of
>> "foreign".)
> 
> Thank you, Don. et al and ibid (depending on bib style) are sort of
> inevitable because they show up in the bibliography.

Yes.  And, there are lots of "common use" foreign language abbreviations that
are really hard to avoid (e.g., i.e., etc.).  If those were the only such uses,
one could argue that they are common enough that folks would recognize them
for what they are.  Maybe add "sic".

[IMO, italics tells people that "this is special".]

> Ultimately it's about making it easy for the reader. Whatever that takes,
> I'll do it if I know it. I don't want to annoy them, which is hard for me.
> lol

When I started writing, I read the Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) to
get an idea of the "norms".  I figure smarter people than me have
already visited this subject; silly not to avail myself of their
expertise!  Adopting a different style for different audiences
assumes you can identify an appropriate style *for* that audience!

[I'm lazy; one size fits all!]

> Occasionally I suppose emphasis is called for. Interesting note about the
> tagging. Can't say I've done it. I use LaTeX, but am not an expert.

It depends on what you are writing and your intended audience.  I'm
often trying to "talk" to the reader (but without the "Dear Reader"
colloquialisms).

I've not used LaTeX in ages (I use FrameMaker in a WYSIWYG mode
as it makes it SO much easier to see how the text/tables/illustrations
flow, verify placement of table/page footnotes, cross references, etc.

By tagging words/phrases (FrameMaker has tags for paragraphs and
separate set of tags for words/characters), I can make global changes
to how the document looks without having to chase down every instance
of, for example, a Document Title, Foreign Word, Table Title, Footnote
Indication, Equation, Code Fragment, etc.

And, I can assign colors to the tags so, when proofreading, I can
know that I have applied the correct tag to each word/phrase.  So, I
can make "foreign" be rendered in RED italics and "emphasis" rendered
in GREEN italics and be able to determine if the correct tag has been
applied without relying on the typeface variant for that information.

[This is particularly useful in the equation editor where I want
to distinguish "special variables" from other text.]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:41:15 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie
<gwhite@ti.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:26:10 PM UTC-8, Phil Hobbs wrote:
>> On 2023-02-05 14:42, Simon S Aysdie wrote: 
>> > I was contemplating using "ad infinitum". I am not sure if I will use it. But I wondered if it should be italicized. I think I would not italicize it. 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > https://www.enago.com/academy/should-you-italicize-latin-terms-in-scientific-writing/ 
>> >
>> I'd certainly italicize "et al." "Ad infinitum" isn't really standard 
>> English over here, so I'd probably italicize it if I ever used it, which 
>> I don't recall having done in print. 
>> 
>> And the full stop after 'et al' is super important. 'T'aint me and my 
>> old pal Al. 
>
>Thank you... Just looking for opinions. My typography book frowns on overuse of emphasis. That is, if I did use it I felt as though I had to justify emphasis. I guess this is the first time I've looked it up.

I often use italics for a different purpose:  If I have two sentences
that are very similar, like sentences summarizing very similar (except
for one thing) cases, I will italicize the critical word or phrase
that changes between the cases, so people are drawn directly to the
critical difference. instead of missing it, buried an all those words.


>Writing is not my native element--I must check everything I do. It's a struggle. :)

Even if one is a good writer, it's still a whole lotta work to get it
exactly right, with draft after draft.

Joe Gwinn

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-8, Joe Gwinn wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:41:15 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie 
> <gwh...@ti.com> wrote: 
> 
> >On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:26:10 PM UTC-8, Phil Hobbs wrote: 
> >> On 2023-02-05 14:42, Simon S Aysdie wrote: 
> >> > I was contemplating using "ad infinitum". I am not sure if I will use it. But I wondered if it should be italicized. I think I would not italicize it. 
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > https://www.enago.com/academy/should-you-italicize-latin-terms-in-scientific-writing/ 
> >> > 
> >> I'd certainly italicize "et al." "Ad infinitum" isn't really standard 
> >> English over here, so I'd probably italicize it if I ever used it, which 
> >> I don't recall having done in print. 
> >> 
> >> And the full stop after 'et al' is super important. 'T'aint me and my 
> >> old pal Al. 
> > 
> >Thank you... Just looking for opinions. My typography book frowns on overuse of emphasis. That is, if I did use it I felt as though I had to justify emphasis. I guess this is the first time I've looked it up.
> I often use italics for a different purpose: If I have two sentences 
> that are very similar, like sentences summarizing very similar (except 
> for one thing) cases, I will italicize the critical word or phrase 
> that changes between the cases, so people are drawn directly to the 
> critical difference. instead of missing it, buried an all those words.

Interesting. I don't come across that issue too much. I am not sure why. But your usage seems justified.

I suppose I am conflating emphasis with font style for foreign language. The font style is the same for each.

> >Writing is not my native element--I must check everything I do. It's a struggle. :)
> 
> Even if one is a good writer, it's still a whole lotta work to get it 
> exactly right, with draft after draft. 

"Good" to hear others share my pain. lol.

If there is one thing I very much regret sandbagging in grade school, and on through high school, it is not having taken advantage of the opportunity to learn English. I have been paying for that mistake for decades. I thought it was "illogical" and "not worth my time." Wrong.

On 2/8/2023 6:42 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote:
> I suppose I am conflating emphasis with font style for foreign language. The
> font style is the same for each.

This is why the use of tags is so important.  It explains (to the writer)
WHY he is opting to present the text in a different form (underlined book
titles, italicized article titles, <whatever> for emphasis, "special
terms", etc.)

> If there is one thing I very much regret sandbagging in grade school, and on
> through high school, it is not having taken advantage of the opportunity to
> learn English. I have been paying for that mistake for decades. I thought it
> was "illogical" and "not worth my time." Wrong.

Spelling and grammar aren't the entirety of the problem.
It takes work to figure out how best to convey to the reader
your content and intent.

Larger documents are particularly hard to "design"; you don't
want to intimidate the reader (who may just be using the document
as a REFERENCE) with page after page of text (illustrations, etc.).

And, even within a page, you want to be able to make it easy for a
reader to find the topic of interest -- without having to create
"subheadings" for everything imaginable.  (margin notes that "outdent"
the body text are great for this).

I built a manual for a piece of test equipment, many years ago,
and was faced with that issue -- no one is going to READ the
document.  But, many will want to REFER to it!  So, crating a
design that lets people guess where to find the information
they want without wading through a ToC or index is critical
to usability.

[I developed a "pictorial" ToC with screen shots of the
major operating modes of the instrument so a user could
find a screen that was of interest and, from there, no
where to turn in the document to find a description of
that screen.  And, ordered them in the order that they
would typically be encountered during use (e.g., "setup"
comes first)]

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 12:05:45 PM UTC-8, Don Y wrote:
> On 2/6/2023 11:56 AM, Simon S Aysdie wrote: 
> > On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 12:51:33 PM UTC-8, Don Y wrote: 
> >> On 2/5/2023 1:47 PM, Don Y wrote: 
> >>> On 2/5/2023 12:42 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote: 
> >>>> I was contemplating using "ad infinitum". I am not sure if I will use 
> >>>> it. But I wondered if it should be italicized. I think I would not 
> >>>> italicize it. 
> >>> 
> >>> Italicize foreign words and abbreviations. etc. et al. ibid as well 
> >>> as titles (of documents, etc.). 
> >> s/ibid/ibid./ 
> >>> In many contexts, their usage is so universal that one can fudge a bit. 
> >>> 
> >>> But, IME, it's easier to just be consistent there as *most* (?) folks 
> >>> mix technical and nontechnical materials and it's easier for them not to 
> >>> have to adjust to different writing styles. 
> >>> 
> >>> Also, reserve italics for this instead of also using it (also) for 
> >>> emphasis, if possible. 
> >> (I have a tag for "foreign" and another for "emphasis".) 
> >> 
> >> This also comes in handy when you want to search for a string and want to 
> >> be able to specify if your search should be *in* those 
> >> foreign/abbreviations or not. 
> >> 
> >> (And, having tags lets me temporarily set the COLOR of the text thus 
> >> tagged. So, I can quickly see if I've used "italics" somewhere instead of 
> >> "foreign".) 
> > 
> > Thank you, Don. et al and ibid (depending on bib style) are sort of 
> > inevitable because they show up in the bibliography.
> Yes. And, there are lots of "common use" foreign language abbreviations that 
> are really hard to avoid (e.g., i.e., etc.). If those were the only such uses, 
> one could argue that they are common enough that folks would recognize them 
> for what they are. Maybe add "sic". 
> 
> [IMO, italics tells people that "this is special".]

👍

> > Ultimately it's about making it easy for the reader. Whatever that takes, 
> > I'll do it if I know it. I don't want to annoy them, which is hard for me. 
> > lol
> When I started writing, I read the Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) to 
> get an idea of the "norms". I figure smarter people than me have 
> already visited this subject; silly not to avail myself of their 
> expertise! Adopting a different style for different audiences 
> assumes you can identify an appropriate style *for* that audience! 

I have a couple copies of CMOS. Another one I like is /Words into Type/. It is dated and won't always be timely, but there is still a lot of good stuff in it.

> [I'm lazy; one size fits all!]
> > Occasionally I suppose emphasis is called for. Interesting note about the 
> > tagging. Can't say I've done it. I use LaTeX, but am not an expert.
> It depends on what you are writing and your intended audience. I'm 
> often trying to "talk" to the reader (but without the "Dear Reader" 
> colloquialisms). 

I do conversational stuff like  "we have ... 
<equation>"
... because I find it pointlessly strenuous to do otherwise. 

> I've not used LaTeX in ages (I use FrameMaker in a WYSIWYG mode 
> as it makes it SO much easier to see how the text/tables/illustrations 
> flow, verify placement of table/page footnotes, cross references, etc. 

Yeah.... I like the free tool and I just could not take Word anymore. I actually like LaTeX quite a bit. Word is really just a scratchpad tool. It isn't pro. 

> By tagging words/phrases (FrameMaker has tags for paragraphs and 
> separate set of tags for words/characters), I can make global changes 
> to how the document looks without having to chase down every instance 
> of, for example, a Document Title, Foreign Word, Table Title, Footnote 
> Indication, Equation, Code Fragment, etc. 

This may be possible in LaTeX. I don't know.

> And, I can assign colors to the tags so, when proofreading, I can 
> know that I have applied the correct tag to each word/phrase. So, I 
> can make "foreign" be rendered in RED italics and "emphasis" rendered 
> in GREEN italics and be able to determine if the correct tag has been 
> applied without relying on the typeface variant for that information. 
> 
> [This is particularly useful in the equation editor where I want 
> to distinguish "special variables" from other text.]

On 2/8/2023 7:21 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote:
>>> Ultimately it's about making it easy for the reader. Whatever that
>>> takes, I'll do it if I know it. I don't want to annoy them, which is
>>> hard for me. lol
>> When I started writing, I read the Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) to get
>> an idea of the "norms". I figure smarter people than me have already
>> visited this subject; silly not to avail myself of their expertise!
>> Adopting a different style for different audiences assumes you can
>> identify an appropriate style *for* that audience!
> 
> I have a couple copies of CMOS. Another one I like is /Words into Type/. It
> is dated and won't always be timely, but there is still a lot of good stuff
> in it.

It is also worth "looking through" (not necessarily *reading*) other
texts/manuals/publications that are similar to what you're trying to
write and/or that target the same (type of) audience or manner of use.
See what you like (and dislike) about their styles and cherry pick to
taste.

>> [I'm lazy; one size fits all!]
>>> Occasionally I suppose emphasis is called for. Interesting note about
>>> the tagging. Can't say I've done it. I use LaTeX, but am not an expert.
>> It depends on what you are writing and your intended audience. I'm often
>> trying to "talk" to the reader (but without the "Dear Reader" 
>> colloquialisms).
> 
> I do conversational stuff like  "we have ... <equation>" ... because I find
> it pointlessly strenuous to do otherwise.

Yup.  Usually no need to "stand on formality" -- unless you are writing
for a journal that expects such.

OTOH, I've had a *really* hard time moving from the "he" to "she" pronoun.
Old habits...

>> I've not used LaTeX in ages (I use FrameMaker in a WYSIWYG mode as it
>> makes it SO much easier to see how the text/tables/illustrations flow,
>> verify placement of table/page footnotes, cross references, etc.
> 
> Yeah.... I like the free tool and I just could not take Word anymore. I
> actually like LaTeX quite a bit. Word is really just a scratchpad tool. It
> isn't pro.

My first DTP tool was Ventura.  It was relatively inexpensive (for the value
provided) and was easy to see how the program "interpreted" your "document".
Prior to Corel acquiring the product, everything was plain ASCII text.
This was a huge win because you could use a "text editor" and build macros
to make global adjustments/substitutions on things that weren't possible
within the program.

But, Corel buggered it into a "proprietary format" which made doing anything
outside of the application, impossible.

FrameMaker straddles those two worlds; you can export a document into a
"portable" FrameMaker format, make changes to the *text* file, and then
drag it back into FM with the changes interpreted as expected.

What I didn't like about TeX (et al.) was the fact that I had to
"render" my text in order to see what I'd done.  And, if something
unexpected happened, I had to search for *my* error.  Try putting
callouts on an illustration without seeing the rendering!  <frown>

[Additionally, you couldn't see *all* consequences of your document
as inserting a word *here* might move a page break in a manner that
you'd not foreseen.  Or, leave orphans/widows that prove tedious to
eliminate.  Or, discover that a table is 6 points to large to fit
on a page -- but, changing the "space above paragraph" by -1 point
would give you the results you desire!]

[FM has an equation editor that is a step between something simplistic
(like eqn) and advanced (like Mathematica, Octave, etc.).  It will do
some rudimentary reductions/transformations for you without truly
being a "solver"]

MSWord is just a toy -- suitable for secretaries hammering out memos
but not for structured documents that "live".

>> By tagging words/phrases (FrameMaker has tags for paragraphs and separate
>> set of tags for words/characters), I can make global changes to how the
>> document looks without having to chase down every instance of, for
>> example, a Document Title, Foreign Word, Table Title, Footnote Indication,
>> Equation, Code Fragment, etc.
> 
> This may be possible in LaTeX. I don't know.

I would suspect it is -- it's just too valuable of a feature NOT to support!
How friendly the implementation is a different matter.

[In FM, you just highlight text and pick a tag from a set of tags that
you've defined *or* manually set the rendering aspects -- typeface, color,
variation, size, kerning, etc. -- as you desire.  The same applies to
"paragraphs" -- but, with a different set of tags and controls.  Other
tools exploit these tags to help build ToC, ToI, ToT, Index, etc.]

The biggest hassle I find is support for other symbols; you either
memorize the magic keystrokes (e.g., CTL+SPACE creates a non-breaking space,
ESC hyphen h creates a non-breaking hyphen, CTL+q SPACE creates a dagger,
CTL+q Shift+q creates an em dash, etc.).  The *trick* is to find one that
you already entered and just copy-paste!  <grin>

>> And, I can assign colors to the tags so, when proofreading, I can know
>> that I have applied the correct tag to each word/phrase. So, I can make
>> "foreign" be rendered in RED italics and "emphasis" rendered in GREEN
>> italics and be able to determine if the correct tag has been applied
>> without relying on the typeface variant for that information.
>> 
>> [This is particularly useful in the equation editor where I want to
>> distinguish "special variables" from other text.]

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

> On 2/5/2023 12:42 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote:
> > I was contemplating using "ad infinitum". I am not sure if I will use it.
> > But I wondered if it should be italicized. I think I would not italicize
> > it.
> 
> Italicize foreign words and abbreviations.  etc.  et al.  ibid
> as well as titles (of documents, etc.).
> 
> In many contexts, their usage is so universal that one can fudge
> a bit.
> 
> But, IME, it's easier to just be consistent there as *most*  (?)
> folks mix technical and nontechnical materials and it's easier
> for them not to have to adjust to different writing styles.
> 
> Also, reserve italics for this instead of also using it (also) for
> emphasis, if possible.

I edit a magazine which has a convention that the first paragraph of an
article is in the form of an introduction or an explanation of what is
to follow.  To make that stand out as 'different' it has always been set
in italics.  A problem arises when that paragraph contins Latin - which
then has to be typest in 'normal' text to emphasise that it is different
from different.

A furhther complication arises because book titles and some proper nouns
are also set in Italics to make them stand out as 'not just part of the
sentence'.


-- 
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 2:43:02 PM UTC-5, Simon S Aysdie wrote:
> I was contemplating using "ad infinitum". I am not sure if I will use it. But I wondered if it should be italicized. I think I would not italicize it. 
> 
> 
> https://www.enago.com/academy/should-you-italicize-latin-terms-in-scientific-writing/

Nobody uses that kind of haughty language anymore. Modern English would use yada yada yada.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/yada_yada_yada