|
|
Post by siloam on Jul 12, 2008 17:24:38 GMT -5
I noticed, well actually someone else pointed out to me that Rapunzel and the Bible passages are lacking correct quotations marks. 1. Why? 2. How do we handle it when our kids notice it?  Thanks! Heather |
|
|
|
Post by Carolyn on Jul 12, 2008 21:14:01 GMT -5
The quotation marks are not correct according to modern style manuals because there were different conventions back then. There are even various competing conventions now. If your child should notice, you can discuss how punctuation usage has changed over time, and explain which modern convention you use and will be teaching your child. You can even mention that SPACES are a 'modern' convention and once upon a time, all writing WASDONEINCAPITALSWITHNOSPACES. But only mention that if you don't mind receiving a writing project or two in the ancient fashion.  Carolyn |
|
|
|
Post by siloam on Jul 12, 2008 21:57:42 GMT -5
Carolyn,
No way!! My dd would then use it as an excuse to write like that forever! LOL!
That does makes sense to me. For example I am at a total loss as to how to punctuate quotes in this situation:
My ds doesn't think my best friend is "real" because I have never met her IRL.
It isn't the typical he said statement. I rarely see commas used in this situation and thus I don't use them, but from what I know of quotation rules it should be:
friend is, "real," because
Is that the sort of stuff we are talking about?
Heather
|
|
|
|
Post by Carolyn on Jul 13, 2008 7:37:31 GMT -5
I was thinking more about introducing quotes with colons rather than commas, and the placement of quotation marks relative to other punctuation. In the sentence you give, no quotes are necessary according to the Chicago Manual of Style, which says that quotation marks are only necessary for 'slang' when it is foreign or unfamiliar to the reader. That doesn't answer your comma question, however. When using words as words (Young children often say "ain't"), commas are not necessary. |
|
|
|
Post by siloam on Jul 13, 2008 18:20:17 GMT -5
Carolyn, Thank you again, LOL! Now I am off to add the Chicago Manual of Style to my Amazon wishlist. The handbook I have now isn't as exhaustive and only covered traditional quotes. Heather |
|
|
|
Post by Carolyn on Jul 13, 2008 21:27:23 GMT -5
The Chicago Manual of Style is a pretty hefty book ... 800 pages or so? It's for the die-hard, gotta-be-right editor/publishing house. I refer to it because I just happen to have one on my desk. There may be something a bit less weighty that would have the answers you need.... but I'm not familiar with what it would be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lene Mahler Jaqua on Jul 22, 2008 13:09:09 GMT -5
An alternate to the Chicago Manual of Style is Strunk and White's Elements of Style. It is a small paperback, which 'almost' fits in your pocket. It has a section on quotations and commas and all that good stuff. But another idea is buying a used older Chicago Manual, which is what I did. I have the 14th edition and got it for a few bucks at www.addall.comMost things for our daily writing needs does not require the newest edition and the 14th is only one or two off anyways. Lene |
|
Carolyn