[Taxacom] Best usage - spp (no period) or spp.?
sean.r.edwards at btinternet.com
Tue Oct 9 11:06:14 CDT 2012
Well, sorry if this has been already covered -- I tended to dip out and
delete when the puns got too irritating.
At the risk of getting serious, Stephen's is the first reply that stated
what I was always taught and practised: Wikipedia's "In British English
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_English>, according to Hart's
Rules <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hart%27s_Rules>, the general rule is
that abbreviations (in the narrow sense that includes only words with
the ending, and not the middle, dropped) terminate with a full stop
(period), whereas contractions (in the sense of words missing a middle
part) do not." For example "Mr", "Dr" and so on. But "Prof." and "Rev.".
This, for example, neatly distinguishes "St" (Saint) from "St."
(Street), should you ever -- improbably -- be confused as to which was
Interestingly, when I transcribed all of Richard Spruce's hand-written
letters at Manchester in 1994, it was necessary to represent his
Victorian way of abbreviating. He abbreviated words with the centre
omitted and the end superscripted over a point -- as well as
straight-forward truncating with a point.
I listed 14 notes on the transcription, the first of which was: "1)
Spruce regularly abbreviates words by omitting part and terminating the
word with the last letter(s) written superscript over a point (or
perhaps sometimes a hyphen, or occasionally nothing at all); these are
all transcribed with a point preceding the last letter(s) typed in
normal size. On other occasions Spruce abbreviates a word by
substituting the last part with a point, and this distinction I have
maintained." Examples would be transcribed as "Jun.r" and "M.r", "Yours
obed.y", "descr.n" (description), "c.d" (could), "gath.d", "exam.d"
(examined), &c.. Although superscripting is quite possible in
word-processing (even in 1994 -- and even with a typewriter), the
point-in-the-middle works quickly and well to show where the omission
was, because it was important to convey as accurately as reasonably
possible what Spruce had written. Old fashioned maybe, but logical and
clear. A more modern variant uses an inverted comma for an internal
omission, particularly for a penultimate "e" as in push'd, also for
longer omissions such as "c'd". It's about all you can do for OCR'd.
Spruce was somewhat inconsistent, using either "D.r" or "Dr." for
Doctor, and "D.r" as in Dear Sir. He would use e.g. "H." or "H.m" for
the moss /Hypnum/.
However, when not transcribing so punctiliously (...), most older people
I know over here use Hart's Rules.
P.S.: Incidentally, the Spruce document is now available in Acrobat,
64,256 words, 1,235 KB. I hyperlink-indexed of all his taxa (666
entries) using expanded names. However, to my knowledge, it has never
been published, including on the web. A pity because it is a remarkable
insight into one of our best Victorian botanists. But I'm sure that
Herb. MANCH would make it available if asked. My version was last edited
21 October 2002.
P.P.S.: I'd go for "spp.". Period. But "cf." (conferre) rather than
Sean Edwards, Thursley, UK, email:sean.r.edwards at btinternet.com
On 09/10/2012 03:54, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> From:"Tony.Rees at csiro.au" <Tony.Rees at csiro.au>
More information about the Taxacom