Punctuation

A. In English? Yes, a space would be incorrect. But if you’re writing for a French audience, such a space would be expected. Just make sure it’s a nonbreaking space (see CMOS 6.129).

If you set your proofing language to French (under Review > Language), Microsoft Word will add a nonbreaking space next to certain marks of punctuation automatically as you type—not only before question marks and exclamation points but before colons and semicolons and between French quotation marks (or guillemets, « ») and the text they enclose. Word includes more than a dozen varieties of French, from Belgian French to Swiss French, and most add these spaces; the setting for Canadian French adds them only for colons and guillemets.

In English, however, such spaces are not required even if you’re quoting a French source verbatim in an otherwise English-language document. For more details, see CMOS 11.31.

Did you know? French typesetters used to add spaces before commas also (but not periods). See “One Space or Two” at CMOS Shop Talk (esp. footnote †).

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. The period does look good between the two marks—where it solves the spacing problem between consecutive single and double quotation marks (we’ve added a narrow nonbreaking space to the first version of the title in your question, per CMOS 6.11)—but it’s not Chicago style.

And though we could make an exception for titles like the one you cite, we’d arguably then need to apply that same exception for periods (and commas) relative to single quotation marks everywhere for the sake of consistency—which, again, wouldn’t be Chicago style.

As for searches, the placement of the period (as well as its presence or absence) didn’t seem to make any difference in our tests, whereas the quotation marks and other marks of punctuation in the article title caused the occasional hiccup in certain library databases.

For a brief history of quotation marks relative to periods and commas—including the rationale for Chicago style (and, by extension, American English style)—see “Commas and Periods with Quotation Marks” at CMOS Shop Talk.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. In the scenario you describe, the colon belongs to the word it’s next to rather than to the words that follow. If the former is in a bold font—or in italics or a different color—then the colon would be styled to match:

Warning: Don’t press this button.

Note: Some buttons are more important than others.

See CMOS 6.2 and 6.3 for some additional considerations and examples.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. No, those wouldn’t be exceptions. In a style like Chicago’s that puts commas and periods inside closing quotation marks, the punctuation is assumed to belong to the text and not to the quotation. This convention, though it has its drawbacks (your question reveals the main one), has the advantage of allowing commas and periods to stay with the words they follow instead of getting separated by the width of the quotation mark. Consider also that there’s no such thing as a party, or parties. (with the comma or period attached).

For a more detailed look at this convention (and its history relative to the alternative British practice, which does put periods and commas outside closing quotation marks, though not in every context), see “Commas and Periods with Quotation Marks,” at CMOS Shop Talk.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. Parentheses and slashes can both denote alternatives, but the use of parentheses in that role is limited. For most alternatives, the slash is best. The form “on/off” means either “on” or “off.”

The form “on (off),” on the other hand, would tend to suggest (illogically) that “on” is equivalent to (rather than an alternative for) “off.” To fix that, you’d need to add an “or”: “on (or off).”

But parentheses can be useful for alternative word endings. For example, instead of “return your manuscript to the author or authors” or “author/​authors,” a more concise form is “return your manuscript to the author(s).”

That works best with simple s or es plural endings, in which the parentheses show a letter or letters that would be added to the term. Anything more than that—e.g., “warranty(ies),” in which “ies” is an alternative to “y”—though useful in a pinch, can quickly start to become unclear.

[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]

A. Any of the approaches you mention can be valid when used consistently. But when you’re using an ellipsis character (or unspaced periods, which are similar) rather than three spaced periods in a manuscript that’s otherwise in Chicago style, put a space on either side of the ellipsis except immediately before another mark of punctuation:

This ellipsis … is in the middle of a sentence.
This one is at the end. … Note the space after the period.
This ellipsis is preceded by a comma, … with similar spacing.
What do you mean? … More of the same.
But when punctuation follows …, close it up to the ellipsis.
Is that wise …? We think so.

Do this whether you’re using the ellipsis to stand in for an omission (as in quoted text) or to signal a faltering or hesitation (as in fictional narrative or dialogue). But note that in fiction, periods and commas aren’t typically used next to an ellipsis (see this recent Q&A for more details).

An editor following Chicago style would then replace each instance of “…” with “. . .”—making sure to include a nonbreaking space before and after the middle period and between the last period and any comma or other mark of punctuation (except for a parenthesis or quotation mark) that immediately follows the third period.

Usage outside Chicago varies, as you suggest. AP, for example, recommends unspaced periods used similarly to the examples above. BuzzFeed’s advice depends on whether the ellipsis indicates a pause or an omission. Whatever you end up doing, apply it consistently (and according to a consistent logic).

[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]

A. Yes, it can . . . But keep in mind that there are at least two ways to use an ellipsis. In the first of these, an ellipsis represents a lapse of some sort—for example, a faltering, a trailing off, or a pause. For that kind of ellipsis, use only three dots wherever the ellipsis occurs (as at the start of this answer).

But when the dots represent an omission within a quotation, retain a period at the end of a grammatically complete sentence. Put this period before the ellipsis, even if that’s not where the sentence ends in the original source: “Vanity and pride are different things. . . . Pride relates more to our opinion of ourselves, vanity to what we would have others think of us” (Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice).

[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]

A. We wouldn’t say always. In writing that is both formal and technical, contractions are still generally discouraged (as you will find, for example, in the latest editions of Scientific Style and Format and the style manual of the American Medical Association). But in nontechnical contexts, any rule against using contractions works against writing that sounds natural and is therefore easy (or at least pleasant) to read. Chicago therefore doesn’t prohibit them. What’s more, the first edition (published in 1906, in the era of spats) included a few (and not only as examples demonstrating how an apostrophe is used). Here’s one: “Don’t stultify yourself and discredit the office by asking foolish questions on the proof” (p. 99). That advice might just as well apply to contractions: “Don’t stultify yourself by avoiding the apostrophe.” As for the phrase “what’s more,” if the apostrophe bothers you (or if it’s forbidden by your style guide), try “furthermore” instead.

[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]

A. The nice thing about using an apostrophe to help form a plural is that it does it so well; you’d never know that it was born under questionable circumstances, or that it doesn’t have a right to play that role. You’ll find it in Shakespeare: “By my life this is my Ladies hand: these bee her very C’s, her V’s, and her T’s, and thus makes shee her great P’s. It is in contempt of question her hand” (Twelfth Night, act 2, scene 5 [1st folio, 1623]; and note the absence of an apostrophe, and the plural ending, in the possessive “Ladies”). In its first eleven editions, CMOS advised writing “the three R’s,” after which it became “the three Rs.” But the intent of the rule has remained the same: use an apostrophe wherever it is needed to prevent a misreading. And as anyone who got A’s in chemistry (or knows their Agatha Christie) might tell you, sometimes an apostrophe can spell the difference between a letter grade and a poison.

[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]

A. First, don’t use a question mark immediately followed by a colon, or vice versa (neither :? nor ?:); instead, use the stronger mark. Assuming a direct question, the question mark is usually stronger.

Which fruit would you be most likely to recognize by texture alone?

banana
apple
blueberry
cherry
pineapple

A signal like “the following” can be helpful in such cases: “Which of the following fruits . . .”

If you incorporate the list into a sentence, the question mark can follow the last item.

Which fruit would you be most likely to recognize by texture alone: bananas, apples, blueberries, cherries, or pineapples?

Especially for shorter sentences, a comma can be used instead of a colon to introduce the list.

Which fruit do you like best, bananas or pineapples?

but

Do you prefer apples or bananas or blueberries? [See CMOS 6.67.]

[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]