The Chicago Manual of Style might just be the mother of all manuals. Not only is it one of the oldest style guides around, but it is possibly the most comprehensive. And why not? It was after all designed by publishers for publishers. Given the scale of technological changes in the publishing industry over the last 75 years, the manual has evolved to keep pace with these developments. New types of media are often catalogued first by Chicago before trickling out to other guides. Even disciplines like Sociology or Economics that frequently use APA in journals will defer to Chicago rules when publishing monographs.
Given its sheer size, how to make sense of this beast of a manual? The comprehensiveness of the manual makes it a research librarian’s dream and a researcher’s nightmare. In this post I want to explore how authors can harness this extremely powerful manual beyond mere citations. Whether you are a writer who normally uses APA and is looking to publish a monograph, or whether you have used Chicago for years to create footnotes and reference lists, this blog post is for you.
Organization
For writers looking to publish, organization is of critical importance. Particularly for projects that come together after years of work and research, marshaling all of the relevant information into a coherent narrative poses a significant challenge. Even for extremely careful writers, one of the biggest pitfalls lies in the question of how to transfer the research outline to the written page. At this most basic level, the Chicago Manual offers writers a great deal of freedom to experiment.
Headings
Headings differ from manual to manual, vexing authors and editors alike. To indent or not to indent, that is usually the question. In the case of the Chicago Manual, the answer to that question is usually no: align left all headings. In terms of how much of the outline to use, when in doubt, the key to Chicago style is “consistency and simplicity.” That short phrase appears over and over again throughout the manual, and this matter is no exception. Generally speaking, the fewer headings and subheadings, the better. Include only the most important pieces of your outline–if you include any at all in the main body of the text.
Because the people who wrote this manual are in the business of producing and selling books, Chicago encourages authors to focus on the writing of their work rather than simply transferring their outline to the page. This does not mean that headings entirely disappear, but in many cases, you may not have to think about them until you are ready to submit your manuscript for publication. A savvy editor can help you decide how much to include, at that point.
Citations or Footnotes or Both?
I know this guide promised more than just footnotes and reference pages, but bear with me for a moment. One key point of organizational confusion I often see lies in the mixing between footnotes and in-text citation. Lots of authors find it tempting to combine short, abbreviated citations in the text with footnotes at the bottom of the page. This happens most frequently when the work cited in the footnote contains some odd feature (such as a long URL) or comes from social media. Regardless of how legitimate the use of a novel form of media, many writers and researchers seem to find citing these sources an uncomfortable exercise.
Dealing with new forms of media are where the Chicago Manual really shines. Publishing houses have done their best to stay on top of new forms of publishing technology. The Chicago Manual is the product of all of those conversations between publishers about these new forms of media. The main rule of thumb remains: cite those new sources in the same manner as you would any academic study in the main body of the text. Footnotes should be used sparingly and be purely discursive–either explanatory or exploratory. The Chicago Manual allows authors to treat valuable (if alternative) sources with the same respect as academic papers. Cite Twitter, Weibo, YouTube, or defunct MySpace blogs without fear! It will declutter your writing immensely.
Consistency
Consistency is one of those watchwords in academic and professional publishing. Some journals, for instance, are fairly relaxed about whether or not an author uses either British or American English conventions, but insist that the work remain internally consistent with one system or the other. A good editor will be alert to any flip-flopping between the two systems! Consistency is one of those details that, if you get it wrong, yanks the reader right out of the flow of your argument. This is yet another place where turning to the manual can help you make sure that you nail this aspect of technical writing.
Non-English Words
The transliteration of names and vocabulary is one of the easiest places for inconsistency to creep into your writing. Perhaps the name is not spelled phonetically. Perhaps you are transliterating from a non-Latinate alphabet (or a non-alphabetic!) language into Latin letters. Or, perhaps there are a variety of accepted transliterations into English. Regardless of the particular problem you face, the Chicago Manual has general guidelines to help you. The section on non-English languages is found in Chapter 11 of the Manual. It roughly divides into three sections: the General Overview, Languages Using the Latin Alphabet, and Languages Usually Transliterated. The final sections deal with special languages (like Classical Greek or ASL).
For most authors, the brief General Overview will probably suffice. I will say that, as an editor, the rule that trips authors up the most frequently (at least in my experience) is the following: Non-proper nouns in a language other than English should be italicized when first introduced. If the word becomes familiar to the reader through repeated use, then you can drop the italics. If, however, you only use the word once or twice, then it should be italicized throughout the text. This comes straight out of the General Overview, yet it frequently gets missed.
Numerals
Numbers are another entry point for inconsistency in writing. The fact that the guidelines for numbers in technical writing are themselves somewhat fluid only compounds the issue. For authors crossing over from their usual style guide (often APA) the rules may differ just slightly enough to cause major headaches. The major takeaway for authors, especially those crossing over, is that you do not have to redo all your numbers. In this area, Chicago breaks its own rules about simplicity. The first part of Section 9 offers the general rule that authors should write out all numbers from 0-100. The very next sentence contains the alternate suggestion for scientific and technical writers: write out only numbers from 0-9. This tracks much more closely to APA guidelines, and reduces headaches for more technical authors!
Getting Published
For authors, this is what really matters at the end of the day. How does the Chicago Manual help you to publish your work? The Chicago Manual includes a dedicated section addressed to authors that outlines the publication process. This section covers the basics, from text to tables to digital formatting. For the most part, I recommend dipping in and out of manuals as needed. This section (2.1-2.3), however, I do recommend that writers and researchers read. This section gives you (more or less) a step-by-step checklist to follow when prepping your manuscript.
This basic checklist also provides the foundation for the submission guidelines for many publishing houses. If you have a firm grasp of the basic process laid out in the manual itself, it demystifies the specific guides for those publishing houses. Many of them simply replicate the manual! Some do, however, include other quirks. If you understand the process laid out in the manual, spotting those quirks and organizing your material accordingly becomes much easier. If you get stuck, your editor can walk you through the process.
Final Thoughts
This post really only touches the surface of the resources available in the Chicago Manual. Chicago contains a significant number of sections dedicated to the details of grammar and spelling. The exhaustive recommendations in the last part of the manual answer almost any question about citations. For most authors, all you need is to familiarize yourself with a very few sections of the manual to massively improve its usefulness to your writing. It’s just too good a tool to pass up.