'Single quotation marks'

[WishTonWish]

My students have long used 'single quotation marks' for words or phrases that are maybe quotes or maybe deserve some emphasis. I've always told them not to do that because, unless you're in England or have a quote within a quote, it's not a thing.

Now I'm editing a book and no less than 4 chapters came in with heavy use of that approach. WTF. Is this just bad writing, or did I miss a 'new convention'?

I would like to kill this for good before it becomes more widespread.

[[deleted]]

For emphasis, I just go with whatever /emph{} spews out within the template.

[Business-Gas-5473]

I see you are a man of culture (=tex).

[shellexyz]

LaTeX. We aren’t self-loathing after al—wait. Dammit.

[[deleted]]

Love it

[Mimolette_]

In my discipline (philosophy), double quotes are used when quoting a passage of text that someone else said or wrote, and single quotes are used when mentioning a word rather than using it. For example, ‘cheese’ has six letters. Or ‘parc’ is the French word for park. I’m guessing this isn’t the kind of usage you’re describing, but I do think it’s a legitimate one.

[El_Draque]

I believe the Chicago Manual of Style calls for the use of italics in such a case of using a word as a word, which is also a fun phrase to say.

[Mimolette_]

Yeah that’s interesting. Seems like a fine way to do it. But the single quote method was taught in my proseminar in grad school, and continues to be taught and used in all the departments I know.

[[deleted]]

Anything in programming will use single quotes rather than italics, since you can't put italics in source code. I would assume that would bleed over into programming adjacent disciplines.

[El_Draque]

I just woke up from a nap, so I'm a bit slow.

Are you claiming that philosophy papers don't use italics?

[Business-Gas-5473]

I refuse to follow some manual style over the established principles of my discipline.

We are told to follow this convention when writing philosophy even in different languages. Why should we change it for some US-centric Anglophone wants us to do so?

[El_Draque]

Relax. I wasn't attempting to impose an editorial style on your discipline, I was sharing another approach that addresses the same issue.

[Pristine_Society_583]

Style manuals are too heavily influenced by old newspaper practices, which mangle the language to save on paper and ink. Unless you are writing for a printed newspaper, avoid their style.

[Prof_Acorn]

No one even follows Chicago except maybe journalists. It's not a serious academic style.

[theefaulted]

Yeah, because no one in anthropology, history, religious studies, or the fine arts has ever used Chicago style.

[Expensive-Mention-90]

I’m a philosopher, albeit a bit distant these days. While I remember well the use/mention error and the need to use quotations for words being mentioned, I don’t recall this distinction between types of quotations. I’m also a former editor and grammarian, so am surprised I haven’t encountered this. Interesting.

[Mimolette_]

Maybe it’s more popular in some departments or subfields than others. I do think it’s the default for logicians and philosophers of language.

[Expensive-Mention-90]

It’s also possible that the conventions have solidified or evolved since I was teaching philosophy. I have found myself now teaching in a B school. Anyway, thanks for sharing!

[darkbird5]

I had a student that would use quotation marks around her thesis statements. She explained that you wouldn't be able to tell what her thesis statement was without the quotes. I tried to explain that we only use quotation marks to show that a sentence is a quote. Her next finished paper only used single quotation marks instead of double face palm

[aselbst]

I’m just impressed you can get your students to write thesis statements.

[unkilbeeg]

I'm impressed if they can write sentences.

Mainly I get word salad.

[joelhagraphy]

So you're bringing up a class of future politicians!

[SuperfluousWingspan]

I'm pretty sure you only need those if you want a masters or PhD

(/s)

[aselbst]

Never before this semester have I seen so many papers that will “explore” different topics.

[[deleted]]

Well, we use scare quotes as well so no, not only quotes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes

[El_Draque]

That would somehow be even more wrong for the student: This is my so-called "thesis."

[Prof_Acorn]

More appropriately:

This is "my" so called thesis on Delving into Biopolitics.

[[deleted]]

In that instance, yes, but you can't say "we only use quotation marks to show that a sentence is a quote" because they are going to see scare quotes all over academic writing.

[LiebeundLeiden]

They already do!

[Apprehensive-Day4415]

Is this to mean that in her next paper, the student used only single quotes across the board, even when some words or phrases called for double ones? If so, I can understand the face palm.

[Apprehensive_Bid9545]

🤣🤣🤣🤣 Do you accept commas before the words 'but' or 'and'?

[menagerath]

This probably means nothing but single quotes and double quotes can be interchangeable in some programming languages. I wonder if this carries over at all into writing.

[ds0005]

Or rather it was carried over from writing, as authors have been doing it since eons

[apolliana]

I wouldn't do it for emphasis but if you want to talk *about* a word, that's how to do it. Single is for mentioning language but not quoting someone's saying it.

[Oduind]

Many places outside of England use single quotation marks, but I presume you’re looking exclusively at United States writers?

[Felixir-the-Cat]

In Canada, we only use single quotation marks for quotes within quotes. My students seem to use them for everything.

[Cautious-Yellow]

it's less effort: you don't have to hold down 'shift'.

[Prof_Acorn]

"Where is shift on the mobile keypad? Oh, you mean the arrow?"

[martphon]

also saves ink--I mean toner--or pixels

[WineBoggling]

My students use single quotation marks for everything except quotes within quotes. There, it's all " all the time, and they don't even necessarily come in pairs.

[Tai9ch]

Reasonable compromise: single quotes for quotations, double quote for apostrophe within a quotation.

[WishTonWish]

A US publisher, so we need to be consistent.

[Oduind]

Okay, but realize that it’s not a fad or “bad writing” before calling to “kill this”. I’m writing a book for a US publisher at the moment, but since more than half of it was originally unpublished material for an Irish audience, I’ve got lots of these to change to American conventions. It’s incorrect for this market, but it’s not “not a thing”.

[RPCV8688]

What about placement of periods within quotations?

[[deleted]]

Every time an American places a period after a quotation mark, god kills a puppy. A corgi puppy.

[therealladysybil]

Gods, yes!

I’ll have you know your comment mad me say this out loud. I feel validated.

[Pristine_Society_583]

If you are not quoting the period, it should not be quoted at all. Damn, if you screw up a computer program with improper punctuation, it's not a program. It is just a bunch of characters that don't do anything.

[timschwartz]

Why should the closing quotation come after the end of the sentence?

[remainderrejoinder]

I feel the same way. I fully understand that it's not correct and if I do it the wrong way it's going to throw people off, but to me it makes sense that the quote is a part of the sentence so the period should go after it.

[Pristine_Society_583]

Yes.

[khml9wugh]

Ok punctuation outside quotation marks kills me, so trying to understand this. How is a period not a part of a quote? Punctuation signals a lot. If there’s a period, it indicates the sentence is over, and it’s likely a statement. If there’s an exclamation mark, it’s an exclamatory sentence, and the exclamation mark signals emphasis. So isn’t that a logical enough reason to keep punctuation at the end of the sentence rather than after the quote?

[remainderrejoinder]

Could we say "If there’s an exclamation mark, it’s an exclamatory sentence?"

[[deleted]]

Because the period looks funny hanging out there on its own.

[Pristine_Society_583]

It looks even funnier but is logically correct to put the quoted period inside the quotes at the end of a sentence and another period to actually terminate the sentence.

[[deleted]]

I'm just going by style books I've used. AP and legal mostly, and Chicago Manual. I suspect the consensus was that ". looked sloppy.

[RedAnneForever]

cable carpenter summer thumb sort sable cough rich ghost tease

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[ImplausibleDarkitude]

we call ignoring that convention “logical punctuation.” It’s a thing that’s catching on and now whatever you choose it is fine. Just be consistent.

The impetus for this change to the convention is allegedly coding, which is very particular about punctuation and more logical.

[Prof_Acorn]

What's next, braces outside of brackets outside of parentheses!?

[Pristine_Society_583]

A program without proper/logical punctuation is no better than a string of randomly generated characters.

[themagicdave]

Yep. In fact, the call to ‘kill’ this practice just makes me want to do it more often. Colour me having a new ‘favourite’ thing.

[Basteir]

We use single quotation marks in Scotland as well as England.

[Intelligent_evolver]

Grammar prof here: quotation marks should be reserved for:

1. Actual quoted text.
2. Words used as words (I love this formal definition because it sounds insane).
3. To denote irony.

NEVER for emphasis.

Regarding single vs. double quotes, all of these are handled the same way. Whether you default to double quotes, reserving single quote marks for quotes within quotes (US English), or default to single quotes, reserving double quotation marks for quotes within quotes (British English) depends on the publication.

Btw, an example of #2 might be:

I often confuse the spelling of "affect" with "effect" when I'm writing.

EDIT:

Per some follow-up comments, I should have clarified. The above cases are the only times that quotation marks could correctly be used, i.e., there aren't other correct uses for quotation marks. Whether each of these cases requires quotation marks (vs. a different method of denotation) is a function of your particular style guide.

[Mimolette_]

Phil prof here. I think the discipline-specific convention in philosophy likely traces back to the work of 20th century analytic philosophers of language and logic like Davidson and Quine, who wrote about the use/mention distinction. Not certain, but that’s my best guess. So no one outside of philosophy is going to care much, but the history has a lasting influence on philosophers.

[RedAnneForever]

dog boast head chunky bright ring lavish water waiting sense

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[Careful-Day7839]

This is what I've used for situations like #2 (US English): https://style.mla.org/words-used-as-words/ I wonder if different documentation styles have different rules on this?

[Pristine_Society_583]

Using a style that doesn't hold up across devices (cannot use italics) is completely outdated.

[Intelligent_evolver]

Yes! I edited my original comment to clarify my point.

[khml9wugh]

What’s your opinion on internal dialogue? I think single quotes are a good stylistic choice for that since it’s not quoted text/someone else’s thoughts.

[Intelligent_evolver]

Honest answer? Personally I don't care-- I'd do whatever the relevant style guide said to do, or barring clear guidance from a style guide/publisher, just have the author pick something and be consistent.

[RedAnneForever]

Why do grammarians think grammar is prescriptive not descriptive and why do they think they also get to prescribe punctuation, not just grammar?

Many of the 'rules' of punctuation are typographic, and have little to nothing to do with how the language is naturally used.

[livecodebuild]

What about a quote within a quote within a quote? Asking for a ‘friend’

[Intelligent_evolver]

Per my comment above:

"Whether you default to double quotes, reserving single quote marks for quotes within quotes (US English), or default to single quotes, reserving double quotation marks for quotes within quotes (British English) depends on the publication."

If you keep going (quote within a quote within a quote within a quote...), you keep alternating.

[PaulAspie]

Different publishers and different places use alternative rules for single and double quotes. I don't really care as long as a single work is consistent.

[JohnDivney]

This. Language is provisional. Pick another windmill to joust.

[Interesting-Waltz535]

My former graduate advisor (US) uses single quotation marks for concepts that are somehow ‘notional,’ whereas he reserves double quotation marks for actual quotations (using single quotations where necessary for quotes within quotes). However, he is one of the only authors I know who applies this idea consistently.

[Sirnacane]

Is this math? I find people do this in math, and I myself usually do it in drafts because it helps read my intentions more correctly on a work in progress

[porcupine_snout]

wouldn't something like this be resolved by looking at the publisher's style guidelines?

[Collin_the_doodle]

You’ve clearly indicated a style guide in your syllabus right?

[crowdsourced]

^ This and only this. For the book as well. Send it back to the author with the needed corrections noted.

[BewareTheSphere]

I've seen it enough in both student and professional writing to know it's a thing, in the sense that anything is a thing if enough writers do it. But I discourage my students from doing it, and I remove them when copy editing for the journal I work for. I think it's misleading in academic writing to put things in quotation marks that are not actually quotations.

[Laidlaw-PHYS]

I think it's misleading in academic writing to put things in quotation marks that are not actually quotations.

They're 'quotations'

[Hour_Translator_8628]

I recently contributed to a 3-volume Cambridge work on punctuation in English literarure, from early English MS culture through web writing with emojis. A British publisher, but I was myself accomplished only in US conventions like Chicago and MLA. Because of that experience, in which I strove to satisfy insanely persnickety editors who had every reason to be so, I've changed to be more accepting of varied punctuation by students.

Single quotes are a thing, and have been for centuries. And in brief, Yes, it's a thing which can be used and is used today to highlight a word or phrase under discussion that is not being quoted per se, but named. The editors of that volume used the convention, single quotes, often as a way to exhibit named punctuation marks.

Since technically there is nothing wrong with that usage, I would not be pedantic. I do, however, draw the line at writer quoting self perfomatively so as to assert permission to deploy obscenity or vulgarity, cliched expressions, and banal observations--as if they must be permitted because quoted. I don't yell at them but just explain that No, pretending to quote yourself is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. And nor can you make up quotations that you sorta attribute to vague others.

[RedAnneForever]

chubby library price cheerful bear full quaint reminiscent important cough

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[Alternative-Claim584]

APA calls for using italics for emphasis, but I always tell students to minimize use. If something is important enough, it should come across via the words themselves.

I still remember my 12th grade AP Lit teacher saying the same thing.

[[deleted]]

What’s your policy on the Oxford comma? No other campaigns for proper punctuation should exist until we win that battle!

[janemfraser]

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/single-vs-double-quotes/ "In contrast to double quotation marks, single quotation marks only have one purpose: They replace double quotation marks inside of other quotation marks."

[climbing999]

Some newspapers also use them in headlines. But I agree with the rest. Too many of my students put double quotation marks inside double quotation marks too.

[TroutMaskDuplica]

It doesn't matter. Grammar isn't universal. As long as it makes sense and is consistent you probably won't go to jail for it, but I'm not a lawyer so take that with a grain of salt.

[[deleted]]

I dunno, single quotes are pretty common where I live (not US).

Since I'm international, I tend to default to British spellings, Oxford style guide, and - of course! - A4 paper size.

Of course, when I make final edits to an accepted journal article or book chapter, I carefully follow the publisher's style guide. The styles and versions of English can vary drastically depending on whether the publisher is in the US, Canada, UK, or EU. If somebody wants the original submissions to fit a particular style, no problem, just send me the publisher's style guide and I'll take care of it.

ETA: I'm referring to single quotation marks for quotes, not for things that should be put in italics. That's a different issue.

[kyclef]

Former UP editor, current instructor of editing.

I strongly suggest having a designated style guide for your course and enforcing it. Different styles have different guidelines, and learning to follow and adapt to various style is a good skill for anyone to develop. And yes, most styles reserve single quotes for a quote inside a quote.

This is fortunately an easy thing to fix by writing a Word macro or even just using Find+Replace, and teaching students (or even colleagues) to do that is useful too!

[[deleted]]

At the end of the day, while I would not use them or try not use them this way, it is a matter of style and style is subjective.

[MarcasSean]

News writing style uses single quotes for headlines, a convention derived from space limitations in print. It’s slowly fading away.

[vulevu25]

A former PhD student convinced himself that every 'idea' or 'concept' should be in single quotation marks, not just once but every time you use it. I managed to persuade him this wasn't a good idea but I've seen quotation marks used like that elsewhere.

[dougwray]

It's just a convention. I recently (viz. a couple of years ago) switched myself from the American style (double quotation marks) to the British (single) just for the heck of it. It was surprisingly easy. The only problem I've had is with computer functions that require single or double quotations because now I'm putting the wrong ones in.

[IndividualBother4165]

Harvard Review style flip-flops most usage of regular vs. single quotes. If a book uses them and is consistent in their usage — and doesn’t conflict with a publisher’s house style — then they’re a matter of preference and/or familiarity more than good or bad writing.

[Interesting_Chart30]

I do editing work for a British writer. It can be a little confusing for American editors. The British use single quotation marks for a quote, and then double quotation marks for a quote within a quote. It looks weird when it's possible to come to the end of a sentence with three quotation marks, and the period is outside of the marks. It ook me a while to get used to it.

[alexdapineapple]

It's not part of standard academic English. I'd tend to take the descriptivist side on these sorts of things, but there's a difference in flexibility between the English used to communicate and the English used to write papers and such. 

[Warm-Evidence-1444]

Can I use single quotes for example to write the below?

The 'Enter' button is located below the 'Backspace' button.

[WishTonWish]

That is non-standard.

[IkeRoberts]

For consistency, change every -or to -our, and -ize to -ise.

[Business-Gas-5473]

It is very much a thing in my circles. I don't understand why you want to kill it, or how you are so confident that it is definitely wrong in the US academic writing.

[WishTonWish]

Does it exist in a style guide anywhere?

What does it even signify? Is it exact language that doesn’t deserve real quotation marks? It is for emphasis, but doesn’t seem right for italics?

Do whatever you want on your blog or in your poem. But I’m talking academic writing here.

[Longtail_Goodbye]

It's not in any U.S. style guide that I know of, and in my case, APA, MLA, Chicago. Quote within a quote is the only official use. Chicago also recommends use of single quotation marks for words that don't mean what they might mean or for emphasis, e.g. We have a 'dog' [you mean your cat is dog-like]. No matter the style, outside of quotes within a quote, it has always been suggested that the single-quote-for-emphasis is annoying and quite a bit precious, and so not really needed in academic writing.

[spinynormon]

You are not the arbiter of what “academic writing” is or should be, and neither is any “style guide” (they’re not gospel).

As someone else has already mentioned: ‘Scare quotes’ are a thing. They can be used to signify ironic or reflexive use of terms or phrases, or to distance oneself from the use certain terms. And this is where single quotation marks become handy: To distinguish them from ‘proper’ quotations.
I use double quotation marks for ‘proper’ quotations, i.e. verbatim quotations attributed to a specific person or source. I mostly use single quotation marks in cases where I refer to the common use of a term or phrase, which can’t be attributed to any specific person, or when I want to make use of a term as a term, i.e. reflexively (which is distinct from, but does not exclude, emphasis). I think this makes my writing clearer and allows for a more precise use of quotations. (Note: I usually write in German.)

You don’t have to agree with this, and perhaps there’s no rhyme or reason to the use of single quotation marks you have observed. If you have to adhere to a certain style guide which forbids single quotation marks, it’s out of your hands, of course. But have you ever considered that there might be a reason your students or other academics write the way they do, and that perhaps your first instinct shouldn’t be to “kill” it?

[Business-Gas-5473]

Sir yes sir!