Workaround for classic sources

bromatthew
In CMOS for classical authors, the proper format for footnotes is as follows:

First footnote: Augustine, De civitate Dei, trans. Jane Doe (Tan, 2005), 3.4.5.
Subsequent footnotes: Augustine, De civitate Dei 3.4.5.

Zotero gets the first footnote correct if the locator (3.4.5) is entered as the page number. But the subsequent footnotes are incorrect, because CMOS doesn't want a comma between the work title and the locator. Adding the locator as a suffix (" 3.4.5") doesn't help, because then the first footnote is missing a comma.

But I suspect this wouldn't be too hard to implement in a new release: simply adding a new locator option (e.g, "classical") which handles this. (And perhaps it could also convert hypens to en-dashes, such as "3.4-6" to "3.4–6".) Does that sound right?

I think this would go along way toward making Zotero effective for classics scholars; and seems much simpler than proceeding as here: https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/79604/classical-sources
  • dunning
    You're looking for the 'classic' item type in CSL. Zotero does not yet support it, but you can still create an item (a book will give you the most helpful fields) and override the type by adding to the Extra field:
    type: classic
    The Chicago style files do not yet include the specifications for classical sources in CMOS 14.142–152, but this is something that I need myself, and I hope to find the time to implement it within the next month or so.
  • dunning
    @dstillman Is there any chance of adding the classic item type to Zotero in the near future? It essentially needs the same fields as a book section, ideally with the additions of genre, volume-title, archive-place, archive_collection, original-title, original-publication-place, original-publisher, and DOI.
  • dstillman
    We could, if there's consensus that it's necessary. I think "Classic" could be somewhat confusing as the UI term. "Classical Work"?
  • dunning
    This type allows us to meet the guidance in Chicago 14.142–152 (and pretty much covers 14.153–154), producing citations that don't always need to appear in the bibliography; have both an italicized title and a container-title; and use different punctuation for locators.

    I might call it a 'classic work' or 'canonical work'. It covers classical Latin and Greek references particularly well, but the style is also common for citing literature in medieval and modern languages (including English literature).
  • adamsmith
    I think there's a strong case for it in the humanities (broadly understood), yes. I like "Classical work" best (Neuromancer is undoubtedly a classic work but not what we are talking about)
Sign In or Register to comment.