Language Use Policy

UK English

punctum's loose rule is that UK English is acceptable if that spelling is also used in US English; for example, towards, amidst, whilst, so forth. This is if they are spelling in the UK spelling consistently. If not, then the editor should edit for US spelling. UK spellings that are not acceptable are colour, behaviour, theatre, centre, analyse, aeroplane, programme, draught, jewellery, and so forth.

Identities

When describing Black, Brown, and Indigenous people and a specific experience, Black, Brown, and Indigenous are capitalized because it indicates the collective, diasporic sense of history, identity, and community specific to Black, Brown, and Indigenous people. When describing white people, white is not capitalized. For more on this, consult Guardian article here. Neither adjective should be used as singular nor plural noun.

“African American" is less specific to American-born Black people. In this case, “Black Americans” is more appropriate. This also lends itself to expressions of other nationalities (e.g., Black Britons, Black French, Black Brazilians, etc.). Furthermore, when referring to specifically Black experiences, Black + noun is fine, but when referring to people who are not white, BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) + noun is more appropriate.

In US English, “Black” and “Blacks,” when used as nouns, is never appropriate except in the original quotations. Black is an adjective that should modify a noun as specified as much as possible; e.g., Black communities, Black property, so forth. While Black people might work in general cases, it would be best to be as specific as possible because though the capitalization of Black suggests similarly shared experiences, these experiences are not monolithic and still vary intersectionally. 

Following AP style and common cultural use, punctum does not hyphenate identities, even if they modifying nouns. This goes for ethnicities and other identities, e.g., disability, 2SLQBTQ+. For that matter, we also do not use commas to separate them either, e.g., fat queer scholars of color, Black queer author. Identities are not hyphenated, even if the term is used as an adjective or otherwise modifies a noun; e.g., "Mexican American," "Mexican American cultures," and so on. 

Use as specific terminology as possible; e.g., "unhoused" over "homeless."

If possible, discourage them from aggregating economic, political or cultural identities at all. Advise the clearestauthor languagenot to use terms such as "third-world countries" but rather advise the author to be as specific as possible when providingdescribing commentsstates. "Developing countries" or "Global South" might be attractive and sometimes accurate, but the first suggests a hierarchy between "developed" and "developed countries," and the second suggests a geographical orientation that is not always accurate. For more on this topic, reference this page.

e.g., when referring to a community of Native peoples, first of all, use "community" not "Tribes" unless it is used by a Native author and research that community's specific autonym. Furthermore, advise the author to include IPA or phonetic pronunciation in parentheses. For an excellent resource for Native style in publications, reference this page. e.g., the Spokane people are spoqín people, and there are three clans: the sntʔtʔúlixʷ (Upper Spokan), the snxʷme̓nʔey (Middle Spokan), and the scqesciłni (Lower Spokan). For more on this, reference this page. These responsibilities should be shared between the editor and the author in equal measure.

Geography

Capitalize “Southern” in "Southern America" because it suggests a shared lived experience between specific types of planters, in this case, those who share the economic trappings of slave-ownership. “Southern” here refers to the southern states or the southern United States, which is an appropriate designation to describe the “southern United States.” When capitalized, it takes on a specific set of economic, cultural, and political experiences and development, informed by slavery, in the marginssouthern states in relation to northern experiences. The same rule would not apply to what could almost be called “Northern America” because, first, it sounds too close to North America the continent. Second, one would lowercase the “n” when "northern" modifies a noun, for example, “northern industrialization” because industrialization as an indefinite set of thechanges manuscript.and These“progress” in industry does not suggest a set of experiences that can explicitly be defined as a singular, “northern” experience. Though, of course, not one of these terms are addressedcomprised directlyof tohomogenous experiences – and describing that set of experiences as homogenous would crumble at the authorfirst forblow theirof consideration.scrutiny Do– and neither describe monolithic conceptions of shared experience, the capitalization of “Southern America,” or preferred "American South," can suggest the broad ways in which the southern states historically developed economically, culturally, and politically. “American” here stays because “American colonies” is common use in historical sources and because the United States, as a country, was, like many new countries, a bit fuzzy around the edges early on. Lastly, cardinal directions should not be accusatory,capitalized and(e.g., dosoutheast notAsia, assumenorthwestern theyUnited willStates). makeA theregion, changes. Use sensitive but sterile/technical language and include a brief reason so as avoid bruising egos. Youhowever, can includebe referencescapitalized towhen specificdefined ruleson outlinedcertain inparameters the CMoS. The editor may correct any and all punctuation, spelling, and grammatical errors. Cite the CMoS rule if you feel it is necessary, especially if it conflicts with the author's consistent style.

If an editor has questions or doubts about authorial style and what’s permissible, consult the CMoS or other credible sources that suggest proper use. The typical rule is as long as the author is wholly and completely consistent throughout with a stylistic use of somethingabove (e.g., the GermanAmerican styleSouth ofduring citingthe longAntebellum passagesera; the United States Southwest).

“American” can be used when referring to anyone from North, Central, or switchingSouth betweenAmerica. FrenchWhen spelling, grammar, and punctuation and German spelling, grammar, and punctuation between chapters), then do not suggest revising. If they are not wholly and completely consistent, defer firstreferring to punctumpeople thenin CMoSthe style.United IfStates, these sources are notbe as granular as the occasion requires, then implement the most consistent formulation the author used.

To help ease egos while being as clearspecific as possible when(e.g., makingThe marginUnited comments,States itPostal mightService, “people in the United States”). Though, in many cases, "American" will have to do. Indeed, people of the United States need a different demonym because “Americans” may be helpfulassociated to set up a typology that distinguisheswith the tasks35 anor editorso iscountries assigningon the author.two continents. This might lookseem likecontradictory "question,"to "suggestion,"the "recommendation,"note andI "bib/footnote."just Notemade thatabout Black Americans, but punctum does the best we can with the languages we have.

Non-English Terms

Philosophical terms (e.g., unheimlich, Dasein, epokhē) are placed first in the writing with the English translation following in parentheses if it is not explained more thoroughly in the following examples,sentences. However, if the editorword refersis in another language and does not refer to thea authorkey asphilosophical "Author."term, Thisit depersonalizesis not italicized and the commentEnglish translation follows in parentheses. For example, "La Ley de Memoria Histórica (The Law of Historical Memory)." In an example from one text: the name of concepts that are in a language other than English are italicized (e.g., yuan qi); names of people, deities, mountains, so forth are not italicized (e.g., Yuanshi tianzun). Further, it is punctum style to lighten a potential blow. This doesn't have to be so rigid, but it can alleviate some anxiety for both parties in giving and receiving comments. Conditionals such as "might consider" also lightenlist the blow. However, when it comes to bibliographic information, the editor should always give their recommendation with "should." 

Use “Question” when asking for clarificationterm in the textlanguage that cannot be resolved through suggesting or recommending revision.

E.g., “Question: does the antecedent “it” refer to X in the preceding sentence? If so, the Author might consider revising this for clarity.” E.g., “Question: what is the difference between “moralless and “moral-less”? Could “moralless” work here? “Moralless” is in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.”

Use “Suggestion” when you are suggesting that an author might consider changing something in the text that is not a hard rule or a CMoS issue but a style issue.

E.g., “Suggestion: though sentence X is technically grammatical, the Author might consider revising this sentence into two sentences for the reader's ease.”

Use “Recommendation" when you are recommending that the author should revise something in the text that breaks a CMoS grammar rule.

E.g., "Recommend: the Author might rephrase for clarity." E.g., "Recommend: the Author might supply the citation for this obscure reference here. She/they/he might insert the full citation in the footnote and enter the essay in the Bibliography." e.g., “Recommend: the Author might consider revising this sentence with fewer parenthetical statements to ensure legibility and clarity. See CMoS rule 6.95: “Parentheses—strongerother than aEnglish commafirst, andthen similar to the dash—are used to set off material from the surrounding text. Like dashes but unlike commas, parentheses can set off text that has no grammatical relationship to the rest of the sentence” and “For the use of parentheses as delimiters for letters or numbers in a list or outline, see 6.129.” e.g., "Recommend: the Author might revise/clarify/rephrase this sentence by breaking it into two. The thread of the sentence is tripping over the complex syntax."

Chapter Notes

Highlight the chapter title, create comment, and write “Notes for the Author,” or something like that. Keep track of consistent changes you make that you don’t want to repeat through the text and cite the relevant CMoS rule. Keep track of relevant comments regarding the text. You might like to include a comment of something the author does well.

E.g.: Notes:

When inconsistent with the rest of the text, I have altered the author’s style of translation: e.g., Lebenskraft (vital matter); that is, the original German precedesplace the English translation in parentheses. InLikewise, casestitles appeared in the same way, except in the bibliography where the authorEnglish hastranslation quotedis placed in brackets per Chicago style. This format borrows from otherthat works,in the following example: when an author shouldplaces, includefor anyexample, punctuationacronyms in parentheses, this signals that precedesthe orterm followsin the bracketedparentheses ellipseswill be the reference henceforth (e.g., “isthe keepingInternational Criminal Tribunal for the chasmformer ajar...Yugoslavia The[ICTY] onlywill otherbe option”referred shouldto read “is keepingas the chasmICTY ajar.henceforth). [...] The only other option,” whereLikewise, the appropriateEnglish punctuationterm fromis expected to be used throughout, though the originaloriginal-language text is included, and the ellipses, if they do not appear in the original, are bracketed.) Author should consider double checking these corrections to make sure the corrections are in line with the original texts. As well, quoted material can andterm should be consistent with the manuscript’s author’s syntax and punctuation, only as long as the quoted material maintains its original meaning. I have suggested moments where the Author could clarify the prose; for example, instances of over-complicated syntax and antecedent confusion. I have taken care not to adjust too much myself, but I have changed, for example, some gerunds to verbs and past participles used as adjectives to adjectives. I have recommended cuts for the less successful subsections. I do not make recommendations to cut on how much revision the subsection needs, though that might be the case at times. The cut sections should reflect in cuts from the table of contents and from the bibliography, if those works do not appear elsewhere. By “successful,” I mean that

the subsection can stand alone or is integral to the whole; the subsection is well composed with a self-contained unifying thread or a broader, widely applying observation; or the subsection adheres to few, but clear, references, each contributing to the subsection’s main theme or observation.

used..

Document Control

Document ID	POL-004005
Document Owner	Vincent
Version	1.0
Last Date of Change	November 10, 2025
Next Review Due Date
Version & Change Tracking