=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EDline Vol. 8, no. 26 (5 March 2003) Editorial mailing list (digest version) Published by the Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Contents: Q & A [2xq] Footnote usage =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ---[2]-- Q & A -------------------------------------------------- Date: Thurs, 27 Feb 2003 From: Margaret Corbett, mcorbett@ntlworld.com As a reader, with the possible exception of large tomes that cannot be read casually, I prefer footnotes to endnotes - and I rather like them. If the book is physically fairly small, I might read it where it's not convenient to keep turning the pages to the assembled notes. I think that if I don't even glance at the notes I miss a great deal. ------------------------ Date: Thurs, 27 Feb 2003 From: Lane Lester, llester@simpub.com Elizabeth Graham wrote: > Footnotes are an essential part of certain kinds of scholarly > writing. In the humanities, they are essential to: > > 1. Placing the writer in the scholarly context to which they > are contributing; I'm not sure I understand this one. Are you saying that, in a scholarly paper, you want to have plenty of footnotes to make it look scholarly? > 2. Demonstrating the solidity of each step in the writer's > argument; This one is also confusing. I can't imagine anything that is more needful in the body of the text. > 3. Giving proper acknowledgement to the sources the writer has > used (thus avoiding the charge of plagiarism). That one I understand. [smile] ------------------------ Date: Thurs, 27 Feb 2003 From: Miranda Barker, wordwiseed@aol.com Can anyone give me the scholarly justification for quoting first the full (YES that makes sense) bibliographical reference supporting a foot/end note, but thereafter an abbreviated version which includes most but not all of the title and author and date, when all that information is or should be (if the editor's done her job) in the Bibliography anyway. Why is the Harvard system (author and date and if really necessary, page number(s)) not acceptable in many of the humanities/arts? ------------------------ Date: Thurs, 27 Feb 2003 From: Katie Lewis, katie@farnfilm.com Lane Lester wrote: > I can't imagine anything that is more needful in the body of > the text. I think I've just realized how useful footnotes would be to me! Sometimes I find myself writing very long explanations of things, and as side-thoughts occur to me about one thing, and as I feel the need to provide background for another thing, I end up with lots of brackets. The resulting text is very hard to follow and understand. If I used footnotes instead of brackets, there would be a clear basic argument to follow, and readers who wanted to could pick up on the side issues and background separately. Pity there isn't a facility for footnotes in emails :) ------------------------ Date: Thurs, 27 Feb 2003 From: Christine Shuttleworth, cshuttle@dircon.co.uk Katie Lewis wrote: > Pity there isn't a facility for footnotes in emails :) You could always do them like this.* Or like this.** --- * This is a footnote. ** This is another footnote. ------------------------ Date: Thurs, 27 Feb 2003 From: Jane Lyle, jlyle@indiana.edu Miranda Barker wrote: > Why is the Harvard system (author and date and if really > necessary, page number(s)) not acceptable in many of the > humanities/arts? Each field has its own traditions and preferences--but the Harvard system is becoming more widespread, as is the use of short cites throughout the notes instead of full cite at first mention (or at first occurrence in each chapter), partly because it can reduce the number of pages in the book--and thereby the cost. My own preference is for a full citation once per chapter, because I think that's easier for readers. When I'm reading a book with endnotes, it's enough of a pain to have to flip back to the notes section; it's a further pain to have to flip back to the notes and then on to the bibliography if I want to know the title of the work in question. If there is a full cite in each chapter, the reader has to look back only within the notes, and only so far. I have, however, gotten used to the more concise notes styles, and I have yet to receive any complaints from readers about books in which we went with one of those shorter styles. ------------------------ Date: Thurs, 27 Feb 2003 From: Julian Rowe, john.rowe@virgin.net Elizabeth Graham wrote: > The issue is not about including footnotes only to 'be seen as' > highbrow. Footnotes are an essential part of certain kinds of > scholarly writing. In the humanities, they are essential to ... Judicious use of footnotes enables access to additional material without slowing up main narrative, i.e. not simply an academic device! ------------------------ Date: Thurs, 27 Feb 2003 From: Elizabeth Graham, egraham@deakin.edu.au Lane Lester wrote: > I'm not sure I understand this one. Are you saying that, in a > scholarly paper, you want to have plenty of footnotes to make > it look scholarly? Not at all. On the contrary, I am disputing the implication that the only reason writers want footnotes is to make a show of being 'highbrow'. I'm saying that the references a writer makes places them within a discipline (history, cultural studies, sociology) and within a school of thought within that discipline (Postmodernist, Marxist). By looking at the footnotes, the reader can place the writer within a discourse, that is, within a continuing dialogue of scholars. For instance, if I write an article about aboriginality, you will be able to see by what I cite and what weighting I give to different sources, whether I place myself with the 'Henry Reynoldsists' or the 'Keith Windschuttlists'. > This one is also confusing. I can't imagine anything that is > more needful in the body of the text. I may not have made myself clear then. You are quite right, it is most needful in the text to establish that each step of the argument has been tested against and is based on the work of those that have gone before. If I make a grand claim about immunology, for instance, you want to be able to see by my footnotes, that I am familiar with all the recent research on immunology before you believe me. If my footnotes are patchy and incomplete, you are entitled to doubt the solidity of my arguments. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 From: Viviane Lowe, vivilowe@bluewin.ch I agree with Margaret that endnotes are a pain - with footnotes a quite glance tells you whether it is a citation, or an aside that may contain interesting extra information. The parenthetical footnote is a way of filling out context, add further support to argument or evidence provided in the main text. As with anything, isn't it a question of proportion? Nothing is more discouraging than a page half-filled by a footnote that continues onto the next page. It suggests the author couldn't decide what to leave in and what to leave out. It betrays a form of academic insecurity as often as highbrow pretension, saying "I better show that I also researched this angle thoroughly, although I know it is only marginally relevant to my argument". These footnotes are the bane of the PhD thesis! ----------------------- Date: Sat, 1 March 2003 From: Esther Shchory, eshchory@nonstop.net.il Julian Rowe wrote: > Judicious use of footnotes enables access to additional > material without slowing up main narrative, i.e. not simply an > academic device! Who remembers their schooldays, reading Dickens and Shakespeare? I remember intense irritation at having to flip to the end of the book for the explanation of some antiquated term just when I got into the 'flow'. Footnotes would have been much more convenient. ----------------------- Date: Mon, 3 March 2003 From: Mary Ellen Osowski, maryellen.osowski@curriculumassociates.com Esther Shchory wrote: > I remember intense irritation at having to flip to the end of > the book for the explanation of some antiquated term just when > I got into the 'flow'. Footnotes would have been much more > convenient. Footnotes made the Norton Anthologies of Literature readable. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= END OF EDline 8.26 Admin page: < http://www.electriceditors.net/edline/admin.htm > ** The views expressed in this mailing list are strictly those of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the moderators or of the Electric Editors. ** Articles (c) 2002--2003, by individual contributors Design (c) 1996--2003 Iain Brown Compilation (c) 2003 Iain Brown / The Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=