Wordsmith.org

Writing Help: Capitalization

Posted By: Nouveau Scribe

Writing Help: Capitalization - 08/18/08 12:37 AM

Is there a reason to capitalize the words "communist" and "socialist" in this sentence:

 Quote:
Anyone who thinks that is nothing but a Socialist or Communist ...


This is quoted from a book about writing: "Reading, Writing, and Rhetoric" by Hogins and Yarber.

I can understand if he meant "Communist Party of China" where capitalization is required but in this context, is capitalization justified?
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 08/18/08 10:31 AM

I would say leave them all lower case unless, as you say, they're part of a proper noun phrase.
Posted By: Zed

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 08/19/08 07:30 AM

I would leave it lower case as well but there could be an argument that it is capitalized to indicate that the writer was referring to members of a group or movement and not just to their ideology.
Nope, capitals still look wrong.
Posted By: LukeJavan8

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 12/29/08 05:14 PM



If I were still teaching high school I would have the students
leave them in lower case, unless, as Zed says, it refers to
a particular group, and not their ideology.

This is a great topic, our country and its use of language
and grammar sadly and badly needs this, to wit, the media.
Posted By: hellerfan

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/04/09 03:58 AM

If you're going to label a person a member of the Socialist or Communist groups (parties), then the words Socialist and Communist are proper nouns and should be capitalized.
Posted By: LukeJavan8

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/04/09 11:06 PM

Originally Posted By: hellerfan
If you're going to label a person a member of the Socialist or Communist groups (parties), then the words Socialist and Communist are proper nouns and should be capitalized.


but would not zed's comment above still be correct?
Posted By: Andrew Robinson

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/16/09 02:12 PM

Different publishers have their own house rules about capitalization; problems can arise when there is a difference between for instance a college fellow (contemporary) and a College Fellow (proprietor).
Posted By: PastorVon

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/19/09 12:18 AM

Originally Posted By: Andrew Robinson
Different publishers have their own house rules about capitalization; problems can arise when there is a difference between for instance a college fellow (contemporary) and a College Fellow (proprietor).


But, aren't there a number of style manuals that serve as standards? I think of the Chicago Style Manual for one. When I was in college (1960s), Harbrace's Manual was the standard at the university I attended.
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/19/09 11:35 AM

Originally Posted By: PastorVon

But, aren't there a number of style manuals that serve as standards?


There are. They don't always agree on specifics. Different publishers choose different manuals.
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/20/09 12:07 AM

Originally Posted By: PastorVon


But, aren't there a number of style manuals that serve as standards?


PastorVon started a sentence with a conjunction! shocked
Posted By: PastorVon

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/21/09 05:50 AM

Originally Posted By: Faldage
Originally Posted By: PastorVon


But, aren't there a number of style manuals that serve as standards?


PastorVon started a sentence with a conjunction! shocked


So?! And Churchhill ended one with a preposition.
Posted By: The Pook

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/21/09 06:25 AM

Originally Posted By: Faldage
Originally Posted By: PastorVon

But, aren't there a number of style manuals that serve as standards?


There are. They don't always agree on specifics. Different publishers choose different manuals.

The Pookwife is a copy editor. She uses style manuals all the time. Government departments (which is whom she usually does work for) have standard style manuals.
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/21/09 12:27 PM

Originally Posted By: PastorVon
Originally Posted By: Faldage
Originally Posted By: PastorVon


But, aren't there a number of style manuals that serve as standards?


PastorVon started a sentence with a conjunction! shocked


So?! And Churchhill ended one with a preposition.


A) It wasn't a preposition; it was the particle of a phrasal verb.

2) He was being facetious

and

) It probably wasn't even Churchill.
Posted By: The Pook

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/22/09 01:17 AM

Originally Posted By: Faldage
Originally Posted By: PastorVon
So?! And Churchhill ended one with a preposition.

A) It wasn't a preposition; it was the particle of a phrasal verb.
2) He was being facetious
and
) It probably wasn't even Churchill.

Are you saying it was a biographer or urban myth that puts the clause "up with which I will not put" in Churchill's mouth? (which is presumably the one in question).

And wasn't the whole point that he was deliberately NOT ending the sentence with the preposition "with" but with the verb 'put' in order to show that not only is it quite appropriate to end a sentence with a proposition, it is sometimes in fact silly not to end the sentence with it?
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/22/09 03:02 AM

Originally Posted By: The Pook
Originally Posted By: Faldage
Originally Posted By: PastorVon
So?! And Churchhill ended one with a preposition.

A) It wasn't a preposition; it was the particle of a phrasal verb.
2) He was being facetious
and
) It probably wasn't even Churchill.

Are you saying it was a biographer or urban myth that puts the clause "up with which I will not put" in Churchill's mouth? (which is presumably the one in question).


I got it in my memory that I read somewhere that it wasn't Churchill that said it, that it was just another misattribution, not unlike all those Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde so-called quotes, but I can't find anything ot back me up.

Originally Posted By: The Pook
And wasn't the whole point that he was deliberately NOT ending the sentence with the preposition "with" but with the verb 'put' in order to show that not only is it quite appropriate to end a sentence with a proposition, it is sometimes in fact silly not to end the sentence with it?


What I said about being facetious.

As far as their not being prepositions, I also seem to remember reading somewhere that there is a substantial body of linguists who believe that the modern prepositions derived from what amounted to particles of phrasal verbs. Of course, if you have enough case markers for your nouns you don't really need prepositions.
Posted By: zmjezhd

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/22/09 04:35 AM

As far as their not being prepositions, I also seem to remember reading somewhere that there is a substantial body of linguists who believe that the modern prepositions derived from what amounted to particles of phrasal verbs.

Many of the prepositions / verbal particles in Modern English derive from propositions in Old English (via Middle English). Some are from adjectives and adverbs: e.g., near and next are the comparative and superlative forms of the archaic adjective nigh. There is an extensive literature on prepositions / verbal particles in Old to Modern English, and if anybody is interested you can contact me at zmjezhd at-sign gmail dot com (who doesn't care who knows), and we can discuss it ...
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/22/09 12:23 PM

I'm counting OE as modern. I'm talking back to PIE or earlier. It's all very theoretical in my Junk Drawer Memory. And five, six cases isn't near enough to obviate prepositions. You'd need probably twenty or more.
Posted By: zmjezhd

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/22/09 02:34 PM

And five, six cases isn't near enough to obviate prepositions. You'd need probably twenty or more.

Yes, I don't think there are any languages which have been studied on this planet which don't have prepositions. The number of cases in PIE has not been determined, IIRC, or their number has not been agreed upon. There are languages which do not have grammatical cases.
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/23/09 12:56 AM

Originally Posted By: zmjezhd
There are languages which do not have grammatical cases.


I think at this point we need to define just what we mean by case. Is it the relationship of a noun to the other elements of as sentence or is it the visible or auditory mark that indicates that difference?
Posted By: PastorVon

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/25/09 02:04 AM

Boy! [That's an expletive, I believe.] It doesn't take much to send this group on a variety of tangents. It's all very interesting whether Churchhill did or did not end a sentence with a presposition. None of the tangents answers my question. The question was "So?" I.E. "So what if I (pastor von) began a sentence with a conjunction?"
Posted By: PastorVon

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/25/09 02:05 AM

"presposition" a pre-position held by a presbyterian.
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/25/09 03:03 AM

Originally Posted By: PastorVon
"So what if I (pastor von) began a sentence with a conjunction?"



I just thought that not starting a sentence with a conjunction would be the sort of prescriptivist poppycock you'd subscribe to.
Posted By: zmjezhd

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/25/09 03:22 PM

The question was "So?" I.E. "So what if I (pastor von) began a sentence with a conjunction?"

Descriptive-grammatically speaking, and ceteris paribus, there is nothing wrong with starting a sentence with a conjunction. Happens all the time. Prescriptive-grammatically speaking it is a solecism (or an enormity).
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/25/09 07:33 PM

Originally Posted By: zmjezhd
The question was "So?" I.E. "So what if I (pastor von) began a sentence with a conjunction?"Prescriptive-grammatically speaking it is a solecism (or an enormity).


Naw. It ain't near big enough to be an enormity.
Posted By: Zed

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/25/09 10:44 PM

a smallity?
Posted By: PastorVon

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/29/09 05:29 PM

would that be miniscule?
Posted By: tsuwm

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/29/09 06:07 PM

miniscule is opposed to majuscule, to be pro forma.

-joe (but I don't think that works in context) friday
Posted By: PastorVon

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/29/09 08:33 PM

no, miniscule is actually opposed to uncial. I just had to throw my bit of wisdom in there. wink
Posted By: tsuwm

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/29/09 09:18 PM

uncial - relating to or written in majuscule letters

-joe (def'ns for all occasions) friday
Posted By: The Pook

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/30/09 12:57 AM

Originally Posted By: Faldage
Originally Posted By: zmjezhd
The question was "So?" I.E. "So what if I (pastor von) began a sentence with a conjunction?"Prescriptive-grammatically speaking it is a solecism (or an enormity).


Naw. It ain't near big enough to be an enormity.

How 'bout just a normity then?
Posted By: The Pook

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/30/09 01:05 AM

Originally Posted By: tsuwm
uncial - relating to or written in majuscule letters

-joe (def'ns for all occasions) friday

I think you are both right. Miniscule as a description of the kind of LETTERS used is the opposite of majuscule. Manuscripts written in miniscules are called miniscules. But manuscripts written in majuscule letters are called Uncial manuscripts, which term has fed back to refer to the letters themselves. So the opposite of an uncial manuscript (such as the biblical Codex Sinaiticus or codex Alexandrinus) is a miniscule manuscript (such as 1739 or p46).
Posted By: Faldage

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/30/09 02:34 AM

Yer all wrong. It's minuscule.
Posted By: The Pook

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/31/09 01:15 AM

Originally Posted By: Faldage
Yer all wrong. It's minuscule.

ha ha! Classic case of not seeing the wood for the trees. Thanks Faldo. We all get a minUs for spelling! laugh
Posted By: Cozymansam

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 02/28/11 09:59 PM

I'd probably leave all but the China part lower-case, but if it is a specific title of a group, such as Americans, for one, it would be capitalized. (I think)
Posted By: LukeJavan8

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 02/28/11 11:55 PM


WELCOME, COZYMANSAM
Posted By: Tromboniator

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 03/02/11 09:00 AM

Originally Posted By: Faldage
Originally Posted By: zmjezhd
The question was "So?" I.E. "So what if I (pastor von) began a sentence with a conjunction?"Prescriptive-grammatically speaking it is a solecism (or an enormity).


Naw. It ain't near big enough to be an enormity.


punity? Small offense, but punitive measures will be taken.

Peter
Posted By: LukeJavan8

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 03/02/11 04:00 PM

Are you speaking with impunity?
Posted By: meliza

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 08/13/14 09:56 AM

If your sentence is like this and you are not specifying any specific country or place leave the words in small letters. I feel it will be better. If the sentence is about the party of any country like in the book its okay, capitalizing is good, otherwise they are normal words let it be as normal.

I'm a writing member of best accounting essay writer team in a reputed service!
Posted By: Bazr

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/26/15 09:35 AM

Both should be in lower case.
Posted By: LukeJavan8

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 01/26/15 05:08 PM

WELCOME meliza
Posted By: Cowboy_Monkey

Re: Writing Help: Capitalization - 04/28/15 03:09 AM

ACHTUNG BABY!

Lower case... because, if you aren't careful... you'll be writing German. Those fanatics capitalize Everything.
© 2017 Wordsmith.org