Kata Markon

["L. J. Swain" <larry.swain AT wmich.edu>]

Joe, 

You've been informed by multiple sources now, and Eric even cited for
you not only Fowler, a standard, but current practice of a major British
publisher in the theological field.  Should that not be sufficient?

JFAlward AT aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 10/17/02 1:31:05 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> eric.eve AT harris-manchester.oxford.ac.uk writes:
> 
> << I can't speak for American usage, but whence do you derive this rule for
> British usage? H.W. Fowler and F.G. Fowler _The King's English_ devote a
> couple of pages to this question and certainly do not espouse the rule you
> state, but recommend that the punctuation mark should go before the closing
> quote mark only if it is part of the quote.  >>
> 
> That's interesting, Eric.  Are you sure the punctuation marks Fowler et al
> were referring to were not just the question mark and the exclamation mark?
> They must be put inside the quotation mark only if they are part of the
> quote, of course.

Yes. 


> A check of the major British newspapers and magazines show that more often
> then not, the comma and period go before the closing quotation mark.
> Unfortunately, the editors sometimes will put the period inside in the
> quotation marks in one place, and in the same paragraph they will put the
> period or comma outside.  They often seem, like Goodacre, not to be
> consistent, or else they don't care.  Now, irrespective of what Fowler et al
> may say, it would seem to me that if the King James Bible exhibits not a
> single instance of the comma or period appearing after the closing quotation
> mark, it makes sense for Bible scholars to use the same rule.  At the very
> least, authors need to pick a rule, and stick to it, rather than flip a coin
> each time.

I just reread Mark's paper looking for this kind of error.  I detected
none.  Where the period occurs within the quotes, it does so because it
is part of the material being quoted.  In every other case I found in
Mark's paper, the comma or period occurs OUTSIDE the quotation marks,
according to standard British usage.  So pull some examples from Mark's
paper if you disagree or found something different.

And whose King James Bible?  a) do you really think that something done
in 1611 is indicative of 21st century usage and orthography?  Surely you
jest?  and b) did you happen to check a King James Bible printed in
England and edited by an English editor or did you grab a KJV edited and
printed by an American publisher?  My guess is the latter, in which case
your judging British usage by an American editor's usage, not quite
cricket there ol' boy.



Finally, Fowler has been consistently updated and reissued, the newest I
believe is the 3rd edition, was put out in 2000.  Not sure if that is
the edition Eric was using or not, but best not criticize there either
until your certain he was using the 1908 version, and that you can
demonstrate from other newer and better sources (other than your own
uncatalogued and unverified observation) that the British norm has
sufficiently changed to warrant challenging that venerable tool.
 
As someone else remarked, this conversation smacks more of personal
attack than it does of serious critiquing of Jeffrey's paper and
argument.  I would prefer to return to the paper.........