1 2 3  5 6 7 8 17
Most English speakers would use "respectively" in this context only in the odd case where button 1 took you to floor 2 and vice versa.

Well, this explains it.
the abbreviation "resp." is not used in English.

resp. /abbrev. for:/ 1. respective(ly). 2. respondent.

I'm quite aware of the fact that dictionaries don't reflect the actual language. At least, "resp." doesn't appear to be a Teutonism since there are also English natives who use it the same way as we do.

Of course, "respectively" does not actually translate "beziehungsweise". "Respectively" literally means "je nachdem" while "bzw." most often translates into a simple "or".
Gerd
Perhaps it's not a mistake specific to German speakers, but it does crop up quite often in my proofreading.

OK, since we're on the topic of spaces, punctuation and proof-reading...what's the deal with double-spaces after periods, question marks and exclamation marks?

Don't.
Certainly, don't if you are writing something on a wordprocessor, set to justify, which you will use to print the text.
Similarly, don't put a space before a punctuation mark.

The reason is practical - if you do either of these, the printed text may well look extremely odd.

Andy Taylor (Editor, Austrian Philatelic Society)
For Austrian philately http://www.kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk/austamps
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
I had assumed Germans put space around slashes since so many of my colleagues do this.

Generally, this is regarded poor German spelling.
However, there are exceptions. At sentence level, the slash continues a mediaeval virgula (or virgule, sorry I don't know the English term) which allows a space after the slash and possibly even a space in front of it. This use is not approved by the official orthographists, be they reformed or not. But it's quite common with German newspapers.

To tell the truth, a slash between two parts of speech or two subtitles, set with no spacing, would look very strange to me.
In section 1.5 on the ellipsis I am missing some hint on when to place space around it.

To be honest, I don't know the standard practice myself, or even if there is one. Anyone?

I'd expect to handle spacing as usual. Separate words by spaces, but don't interrupt them. Therefore, a shortened word which is continued by ellipses is to be set with no space. OTOH, separate words, substituted by an ellipsis character, have to be handled as separate words. This includes the most common case where an ellipsis substitutes one or more words.
Of course, this is a German rule. I don't know about English usage.

Gerd
Without doing any research at all on this, I would venture to say from memory that no British newspapers use the em-dash and that the only major publisher using it is Oxford. "Copy-editing: The Cambridge Handbook" and "The Economist Pocket Style Book", which I have to hand, both use the en-dash surrounded by spaces. In other words, plenty of professionally set publications in Britain, probably the vast majority, use the form that you say you have never noticed. You can easily check this next time you are in a newsagent's or a bookshop with English publications.

Alan
OK, since we're on the topic of spaces, punctuation and proof-reading...what's the deal with double-spaces after periods, question marks and exclamation marks?

Don't. Certainly, don't if you are writing something on a wordprocessor, set to justify, which you will use to print ... mark. The reason is practical - if you do either of these, the printed text may well look extremely odd.

Like French, for example ?
Jan
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
To be honest, I don't know the standard practice myself, or even ifthere is one. Anyone?

For a great many of the issues discussed in this thread, much at least in English-speaking instances depends simply on "house rules," the rules of whichever publishing house is publishing the piece.
Such rules can vary *wildly* from house to house, can be blatantly contradictory (sometimes even self-contradictory), and often leave you scratching your head in puzzlement. But as copyeditors say: "House rules are always right." Moreover even house rules can vary wildly from project to project.
Though it may be obvious to many posters here, the Chicago Manual of Style (now in the 15th ed.), while a widespread guide and standard, is by *no* means universally followed and certainly not consistently followed.
Hence when I read something like
"Double quotation marks ... always > come in pairs", but I believe there is an exception from this rule when > a quotation spans several paragraphs"
or even
"But we DON'T abbreviate 'respectively to 'resp.' in English"

my first question is: What do the house style guidelines say? That determines what you do. "Query the project editor . . . "

If you are establishing your own standards, you are clearly functioning as the "house" and have every right to do so.

It's wild and woolly out there.
doug
I wonder why the section on the ampersand is included there.

Probably for the same reason that the misuse of quotation marks for emphasis is castigated. If people can't be bothered to get it right in German, maybe there is hope that they will get it right in English.
In section 1.5 on the ellipsis I am missing some hint on when to place space around it.

That is apparently never done (except that there is a space before the ellipsis dots when they follow after a comma etc). It might be worthwhile mentioning that the dots are not usually enclosed in square brackets as is done in German.
- Sebastian
Referring to section 1.6, I reckon 640x480 is correct, but you have it both correct and incorrect.

If you look carefully, the incorrect one is a letter x; the correct one is a multiplication sign.
m.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Most English speakers would use "respectively" in this context only in the odd case where button 1 took you to floor 2 and vice versa.

Well, this explains it.

the abbreviation "resp." is not used in English.

resp. /abbrev. for:/ 1. respective(ly). 2. respondent.

I'm quite aware of the fact that dictionaries don't reflect the actual language. At least, "resp." doesn't appear to be a Teutonism since there are also English natives who use it the same way as we do.

Are there? I have never seen or heard it used in my life. I do not believe that it is a part of normal spoken or written English in any context.

Don Aitken
Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com".
Show more