Re: Quoting styles (was Re: Antipassive?)

Alex Fink wrote:
>
> Tristan McLeay wrote:
>> [on punctuation-inside-quotes]
>> I gather it has its origins in old fashioned movable
>> type. The quote characters were apparently fragile,
>> or something, and inclined to break if put on the
>> wrong side of the quotation mark. I don't quite
>> understand how this could be the case, so I assume
>> my explanation is wrong.
>
> I've heard this explanation except that it was the
> period or comma (the marks to which the rule
> traditionally applies, AIUI) which were supposed to
> be fragile, understandably so since they're the smallest
> characters, and thus putting them between the quotes
> and whatever preceded these would protect them.
>
> I've also heard the convention defended on the grounds
> that it looks better: placing a period or comma after
> quotation marks would leave an unsightly blank region,
> so it goes.

Finally a topic about which I know something. I've been
collecting and printing with hand-set metal type for thirty-
six years now (as a hobby), and I spend quite a bit of
time studying typography.

I've never heard the "fragile" explanation. First, in metal
type the double quotes are two separate pieces, and
traditionally in English, opening quotes were set as two
inverted commas. Real opening quotes (as two pieces)
are a middle of the twentieth century development.

In italic types, the quotes may kern on the right side (as
printed). That is, they may hang over the body of the
type. If so, they would be fragile, and putting the period
or comma *after* the quotes would provide a backing
for them. (Blank spaces are much lower than the
shoulders of the printing characters.) But in roman
types, the quotes would be no more fragile than the
comma or period.

Whether to put the period or comma inside is really
just an aesthetic issue. As with many things, it really
comes down to what one is used to. I find it looks
much better to have them on the inside, even if it's
not logical, and that's the way I set them when I print
a small book. Those outside of North America
will probably think they look best outside because
that's what they're used to. (This reminds me of the
thread about currency sizes. Those who live in
countries where each denomination is a different
size think it quite odd that North American currency
has the same size for all, and those in North America
find it quite odd to different different sizes.)

(N.B.: I am speaking very generally here. I know there
will always be a few people whose views don't follow
the trend.)

--Ph. D.

Replies