🔧 Auto-commit from sysupdate on 2026-05-19 21:49
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: User's English usage register — European/Fowler, not Chicago
|
||||
description: Steward grew up with Chicago Manual of Style but is much more European in English usage (Fowler etc). For ARC editorial decisions, default to European register over American/Chicago conventions.
|
||||
type: user
|
||||
originSessionId: 3bf7ae75-1138-4745-9024-0c40b3755ad3
|
||||
---
|
||||
Stated 2026-05-06 in context of Sources/bibliography spec decision: *"I have the Chicago manual because I grew up with it, But I am much more a european in terms of English usage (fowler, etc)"*
|
||||
|
||||
**For ARC editorial work**, this means:
|
||||
- When typographic/editorial conventions diverge between Chicago/MLA (American) and Fowler/Bringhurst/European/British traditions, default to the European pole
|
||||
- Bringhurst's *Elements of Typographic Style* sits closer to Harrison and the European register than Chicago does
|
||||
- Em-dash spacing, punctuation, capitalisation defaults, bibliographic conventions — favour European usage
|
||||
- This is not a polemic against Chicago; the Chicago Manual is a reference the steward owns, not a posture
|
||||
- When citing typographic authority on questions of usage, prefer Fowler / Hart's Rules / Bringhurst over Chicago/MLA where there is a divergence
|
||||
|
||||
**Concrete first instance**: Sources/bibliography repetition convention (2026-05-06) — chose Bringhurst's three-em rule (`———`) following Harrison's *Dominion of the Dead*, against Chicago/MLA name-repeat practice. This was the substantive ground for the decision after typographer chavruta surfaced the divergence.
|
||||
|
||||
**Cross-reference**: ARC's voice gathering already weights European voices heavily (the §0 colophon-of-ARC frame, Vico/Leopardi/Harrison/Bachelard substrate). The European-English usage preference is consistent with this.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user