policywonk, are you around to reassure me about something?

[Threadwworm]

I've got an author who is fretting because I have imposed double quotemarks throughout in place of his inconsistent efforts to distinguish between actual quotes (double quotemarks) and cases where quotemarks are used to indicate the distinctive treatment of a word (irony, discussing the word itself, etc. -- for which, single quotemarks).

I know that what I've done is right but his late night email is unnerving me.

I'm not wrong to use double quote marks for all of these cases, am I? I preserve the use of duoble and single quotemarks where practical, but in this case it was not practical

Why wasn't it practical?

Use of double/single quote marks is down to personal preference or organisational style AFAIK but in your example single for emphasis and double for speech would aid clarity. Although personally I'd try to ditch as many of the 'look at me' single quote marks for emphasis as I could. Looks immature/lacking in confidence IMO. (I'm not a book editor, though, merely a hack.)

I don't tend to distinguish between types of q marks - I just go for double or single (usually single in the case of the people I work for) and do it throughout. I've never come across a case of a text using double for one and single for another.

Have you checked St Judith?

Ah right, she does say:

'Some authors have their own systems of quotation marks, which they are anxious to retain: for example double quotes for speech and single for thoughts, or double quotes for quotations and single quotes for words or phrases used in a special sense. If you retain an unusual system, warn the typesetter not to 'correct' it.'

Sorry, that's not very reassuring is it?

I gave up on St Judith when so many of my authors became American -- I go with Chicago Manual of Style, which is perfectly clear that I'm not wrong. Will ask Judith too.

Late at night my brain goes into obsessive mode and I can't work effectively without fretting about decisions. Time to stop working I suppose. Thanks both of you for replying.

Bugger 'im, he's only an author

Yes, go to bed.

Nothing a spot of search-and-replace can't fix, eh?

Oops, x-post.

I tried to follow his system, but it wasn't really very well imposed, and not at all easily correctable.

I tend to kick decisions like this upstairs (to publisher's contact) to be honest - but you project manage as well, don't you?

Editing is really just obsessing for profit sometimes

I should stick to basket weaving really

Nooooo, don't use the 'sad' emoticon. Tis only a silly book that no-one will ever read.

It's quite a good book actually.

Will report it to my in-house person, though too late to do much more than flag it up as a warning of possible corrections at proof.

Fuck, I ought to talk about something else. It is a tiny worry and I am riht anyway. I get really hung up about work, really anxious. I shouldn't really be allowed out.

Well, you're probably very good at it (editing, not obsessing) then. My problem is that I'm disposed to think 'Ah fuckit, it's a monograph about parish planning policies' (my most recent one ) and do a less than brilliant job as a consequence.

will do jezza. It's that first email - it's a bit momentous. Have to think of something suitably...

Anyway I'm offering on-board reassurance tonight. Need any reassuring?

Guess not then.

Levels of assurance are HIGH

The assurisercizer is now CLOSED

Well...I am a bit fretful re my facial span...
Could you somehow assure me that I am, in fact, beautiful and slim of face??
TIA.

Oh bloody bollocks.
Always the way with these 'cpnvenience' set ups. Give me a 24hr sure-mart anyday...

No can do. Your face has broken my assurisercizer.

Witch.

Can you believe that I double-checked how I was spelling 'assurisercizer'?

I bet threadwworm can

Right I'm really going to bed now. Will send you something tomorrow.

I'm not that into flowers, could you just send food. Chocolate flavoured food.
Thanks. Night x