Forums
Hi EE,
This question probably would have worked best in a writing forum, but what is the most straightforward and clear way to discuss a person in a proof when sources spell the person's name (given or surname) differently, as they often do?
I find that some authors:
use quotation marks within the sentence when referring to the differently spelled name to the source, others add [sic] after the varied spelling, and others use neither of these, perhaps supposing the reader will pick up on this by simply reading the citation.
Some make a catch-all citation or statement in the proof saying that discussions in the text will use "x" spelling for the purposes of the article.
We always record accurately the name as spelled in the citation; but what is the most elegant way to handle this in the writing when referring to said differently spelled sources?
That was a mess to explain, but I'd appreciate your feedback on untangling!;)
Robyn
www.reclaimingkin.com
Hello, Reclaiming Kin. …
Hello, Reclaiming Kin. Issues such as this often depend upon context. As a general rule: EE's 2.16, 6.20, and 13.35 strongly encourage users to put the name exactly as written, in quotes, when creating the citation. The correct name might then be placed in square editorial brackets. For our narrative itself, standard canons of writing tell us that our narrative should adopt one name for a person and use it consistently.