italicization for latin /et al/ in technical writing

I'd certainly italicize "et al." "Ad infinitum" isn't really standard English over here, so I'd probably italicize it if I ever used it, which I don't recall having done in print.

And the full stop after 'et al' is super important. 'T'aint me and my old pal Al.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Just use plain English, e.g. "forever" or "with no limit".

Latin is for try-hards who want to look smarter. I.e. most academics.

Clifford Heath.

Undefined acronyms are another academic favorite.

"Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent."

By that rationale, you should avoid words with four or more syllables, like the former President Trmp.

Well, Latin comes from Italy...

lol. Towers lean there too.

Haha — I totally agree. That's why I don't know if it will ever make further although "ad infinitum" was my first thought when sketching a first draft. But it did make me ask the question.

It came up with a description explaining how HPF prototypes naturally morph into BPF—for distributed filters such as edge-coupled—when using the Richards transformation. "Spectrum" for dc-2*f_R repeats ad infinitum every 2*f_R... or something like that of me talking to me. I doubt it would make the cut, for exactly the reason you state.

Thank you... Just looking for opinions. My typography book frowns on overuse of emphasis. That is, if I did use it I felt as though I had to justify emphasis. I guess this is the first time I've looked it up.

Writing is not my native element--I must check everything I do. It's a struggle. :)

Thank you, Don. et al and ibid (depending on bib style) are sort of inevitable because they show up in the bibliography.

Ultimately it's about making it easy for the reader. Whatever that takes, I'll do it if I know it. I don't want to annoy them, which is hard for me. lol

Occasionally I suppose emphasis is called for. Interesting note about the tagging. Can't say I've done it. I use LaTeX, but am not an expert.

I often use italics for a different purpose: If I have two sentences that are very similar, like sentences summarizing very similar (except for one thing) cases, I will italicize the critical word or phrase that changes between the cases, so people are drawn directly to the critical difference. instead of missing it, buried an all those words.

Even if one is a good writer, it's still a whole lotta work to get it exactly right, with draft after draft.

Joe Gwinn

Interesting. I don't come across that issue too much. I am not sure why. But your usage seems justified.

I suppose I am conflating emphasis with font style for foreign language. The font style is the same for each.

"Good" to hear others share my pain. lol.

If there is one thing I very much regret sandbagging in grade school, and on through high school, it is not having taken advantage of the opportunity to learn English. I have been paying for that mistake for decades. I thought it was "illogical" and "not worth my time." Wrong.

I have a couple copies of CMOS. Another one I like is /Words into Type/. It is dated and won't always be timely, but there is still a lot of good stuff in it.

I do conversational stuff like "we have ... <equation>" ... because I find it pointlessly strenuous to do otherwise.

Yeah.... I like the free tool and I just could not take Word anymore. I actually like LaTeX quite a bit. Word is really just a scratchpad tool. It isn't pro.

This may be possible in LaTeX. I don't know.

I edit a magazine which has a convention that the first paragraph of an article is in the form of an introduction or an explanation of what is to follow. To make that stand out as 'different' it has always been set in italics. A problem arises when that paragraph contins Latin - which then has to be typest in 'normal' text to emphasise that it is different from different.

A furhther complication arises because book titles and some proper nouns are also set in Italics to make them stand out as 'not just part of the sentence'.

When I took over editorship of the magazine, it was using a Roman font for headings and San-serif for body text. I reversed this for the reasons you have given above. Also, 'Times' is more legible at smaller point sizes than any other font I have found, so that is the preferred Roman body font for long articles on small page sizes.

For body text that is a long quote (such as from a document or book) I use 'New York', another Roman font, but at 95% character width and with slightly inset margins. It fits in with the general appearance but is quite clearly a different block of text from the ordinary body of the article.

I very very rarely use text boxes to expand on a particular concept. Often a diagram is needed for the explanation, so I put the necessary text into a caption with the drawing. Just occasionally I use 'bastard setting' around a picture (I'm sorry, I don't know what the American equivalent is for this terminology). Used sparingly it gives the layout a professional feel and I have always had favourable comments about it from readers.

My deputy editor and proof-reader has a very strong aversion to underlining; it probably works well in technical articles, but isn't really suitable for more general-interest magazine text.

Sod's Law: "is to coney meaning" has a typo. :-)