standard format in use by American university presses in the humanities

I've spent several hours sorting through the documentation and forums, going through your list of citation styles, using the preview pane, and experimenting with various packaged styles.I haave found nothing at all that conforms to the standard format in use, say, by Yale University Press, or U Penn Press, or Penn State Press, etc. for scholarly books in any humanities field, i.e. books where both short-form endnotes and full citation bibliography are required. Not MLA, and none of the listed 'Chicago' styles.

In a book with endnotes and a bibliography, the proper format is:
For an endnote:

last name of author date, page no. (sometimes name, date, page no.)

AND the bibliography must look like:

Last name,first name. date. Italicized Title for a book. Place. [sometimes (Place: Publisher)}.
Last n, first n. date. "article title." Journal name no:xxx-xxx
with variations for different sorts of publications

Your styles coming closest to this format either have parentheses in the endnote (I've never seen this used in decades of scholarly practice and academic publishing!). If no parentheses, then the bibliography style doesn't have the date in the right place.

If I have manually to remove parentheses in each endnote with my wordprocessor, or manually put the date in the correct place in the bibliography, I might as well do each endnote manually, and find a way to generate a bibliography (maybe compiling it the old-fashioned way).

Is there an EASY way to format to the style I need? (I'm not going to bother with codes etc. -- it's easier just to put in all references manually the old-fashioned way.)

I recommend actually looking at a book in literature, history, art history, cultural studies, etc that has been published by an American university press in the last decade. Look at the Endnote/ bibliography styles. Forget the silly style manuals, MLA, Chicago.

It's very frustrating to have collected an enormous zotero library (which I love) only to find that the your citation styles make the word-integration aspect impossible to use.
  • Every history book I own uses one of the versions of Chicago Manual of Style, so I'd suggest you tone down your sweeping rhetoric a little. Many of your colleagues seem happy to publish using the "silly" CMoS.

    What you describe, best as I can tell without actual examples, is close to the "dated note" version of the Chicago style - have a look and see if that works for you, but it doesn't put the date where you want it.

    There is no easy way to format citation styles, no.
    If you have an actual documented style guide, there's also the option of requesting styles.
    No one has ever requested the style you're describing.
  • Yes, the dated note version of Chicago is closest for the note but not the bibliography. I made pdfs of bibliography/ endnote examples from a Yale U Press 2011 book and a Penn State Press book 2003. Happy to send them as supporting documentation for putting in a style request, if this can be emailed.
  • Here are manuscript submission guidelines from Yale University Press:

    "For matters of style, including capitalization, abbreviation, notes, and bibliography, consult The Chicago Manual of Style, 15th ed. Spelling, hyphenation, and punctuation should follow American rather than British rules. The Press follows Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th ed."

    So it appears Chicago is still the standard.
  • That said, as noted above, we're happy to add new styles - but I'm less inclined to put work into that unless it's a requirement set out somewhere by a publisher. I.e. is Penn or Yale Press actually is telling you (or any submitting author) to follow the example of the books you're looking at?
    And if the styles are that common, surely there must be journals using them that have author guidelines?
  • Penn State in general follows Chicago as well, and even allows authors to choose their own:

    "In general, the Press follows the Chicago Manual of Style (15th edition) and the first spellings and hyphenation in Webster's Third New International Dictionary or Webster's Tenth New Collegiate Dictionary. Please tell us about any stylistic preferences you have: for example, spelling idiosyncratic to the work; field-specific abbreviations, conventions, and terminology used; the style guide followed for the notes and bibliography (MLA, Chicago Manual of Style, the Harvard Bluebook, APA, "Art Bulletin Style Guide")."

    I'd be happy to look at the pdfs you made from the books and compare them to Chicago guidelines. (elena.razlogova [at] gmail [dot] com)
  • But it appears, then, that the Zotero style set does not include the particular version of Chicago used by Yale (and many other)Presses. The styles in the list under the Chicago rubric pair note and bibliography formats in strict couplets. I think house styles are far more flexible. A short form end- or footnote has no (parentheses),unlike in-text citations, which I would not call "notes." At the same time, a bibliography can certainly have the date of publication follow the author's name; that's what appears in a 2011 YUP book I randomly pulled from my shelf, and there are good reasons for this format. Nothing I've seen in the Zotero style set allows for such a combination, which is, in fact, quite common.

    So it comes down to making a choice between manually removing all the parentheses in hundreds of endnotes; or manually reformatting a huge bibliography after it is generated. This is something I would like to avoid.

    Chicago is given as a standard so that a Press doesn't have to list how to cite each and every specific type of source, from the Bible to a Ph.D. thesis, website, or film. It is not, apparently, a straitjacket.

    As long as I'm posting here: I would be grateful if there is information in Zotero documentation about how to create complex discursive end (or foot)notes. In other words: a reference followed by a comment or discussion, and then another reference, and so forth. In searching through the documentation, I came across an instruction not to use the word-processor to edit the note. But in the "edit citation" function, I could not find a way to introduce text into the note. I just want to make sure that if I were to use the word-processor or "show editor" window, the discursive text would not be lost in a reformat/ refresh operation.

    The same question applies long- or full-form notes (where there is no bibliography provided) in which adjustments have to be made in the formatting of source (e.g., multi-volume series, conference volumes etc., don't always come out right automatically). It's not reasonable to expect that the Zotero program will format every source in every language in exactly the way one wants. So do you edit with the word-processor, the "show editor window", or, if in "edit citation," then how?
  • Following on from my last post:

    The author - date form of the short note in Chicago is, to make something up: Kupfer 2011:xxx-xxx. But what if one wanted Kupfer 2011, xxx-xxx or Kupfer, 2011, pp. xx-xx, then what to do?

    Going back to Adam's latest post: It may not be an instruction to authors making submissions or preparing accepted mss. It's happened in the past that a copy-editor has come back to me with a request to use a particular bibliography format (author. date. Title etc), and of course, endnotes have no (parentheses). I thought this time around I'd set it up that way. Now, it's true, a copy editor or designer might request a format other than what one has submitted -- hopefully, if the bibliography is in a separate file, Zotero can simply regenerate it according to spec without having the notes in the same file, or without having to reformat all the notes.

    Citation practices/ styles are probably the "last frontier" for computer reference managers. So many of them, so many fields, house styles, journal styles...
  • sorry, just to be clear.

    The style I've tried to find in the last couple of days is not a journal style. I've seen it, used it only in books.
  • You should create complex foot/endnotes using the prefix/suffix fields. See "using affixes..." here:
    the examples are from parenthetical citations, but apply to footnotes as well.

    You can use "show editor" in the word plugin to fix citations as well as complex footnotes, but the problem is that those citations won't update anymore: they won't reflect changes in the citation style or in the item data (the footnote/endnote count is done by Word, so that will still update).
  • As for the citation style - I'm sorry, but I don't really know what to say any more. I have said that I'm willing to help code a style if it's an actual requirement for anything.

    Since I'm doing this in my free time and free of charge, I put a priority on stuff that's widely useful. My rule of thumb is that I will try to help code any style that a publisher (journal or book) or a University requires. I don't have the time to code for departmental requirements or personal taste. Since, afaik, there is currently no one but me volunteering style development that means if you can't point to requirements you're on your own. You can either do it manually, try coding the style yourself, or pay someone to do that.
    The author - date form of the short note in Chicago is, to make something up: Kupfer 2011:xxx-xxx. But what if one wanted Kupfer 2011, xxx-xxx or Kupfer, 2011, pp. xx-xx, then what to do?
    For Zotero purposes these are three different citation styles. The modifications are minor and quick to do, but it's still a different citation style (we have separate styles in the repository for much smaller reasons, such as a space after a semicolon or the number of authors before et al).
    The question remains, though - if it's not a requirement, why does it make a difference?
  • I recommend actually looking at a book in literature, history, art history, cultural studies, etc that has been published by an American university press in the last decade.
    Not only do we look at them, we write them.
Sign In or Register to comment.