<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Chicago Manual of Style</title>
	<atom:link href="http://reesabrown.com/2009/11/19/chicago-manual-of-style/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://reesabrown.com/2009/11/19/chicago-manual-of-style/</link>
	<description>the life and writerly times of Reesa Brown</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:11:46 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lynn</title>
		<link>http://reesabrown.com/2009/11/19/chicago-manual-of-style/#comment-591</link>
		<dc:creator>Lynn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:30:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reesabrown.com/?p=329#comment-591</guid>
		<description>Ha!  I was first exposed to this book  in 7th grade by the same nerdish prof who spent the whole year breaking down English grammar and syntax.  

My personal irritation was wondering, all through high school and college, if every subsequent paper grade would be judged by CMoS.  In the age before word processors/computers, this weighed heavily. At some point I realized that only the NY Times and Wall Street Journal seemed to write up to that level so I eventually relaxed my own standards.  It's good to know that the book made such an impression on someone else.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ha!  I was first exposed to this book  in 7th grade by the same nerdish prof who spent the whole year breaking down English grammar and syntax.  </p>
<p>My personal irritation was wondering, all through high school and college, if every subsequent paper grade would be judged by CMoS.  In the age before word processors/computers, this weighed heavily. At some point I realized that only the NY Times and Wall Street Journal seemed to write up to that level so I eventually relaxed my own standards.  It&#8217;s good to know that the book made such an impression on someone else.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anne KG Murphy</title>
		<link>http://reesabrown.com/2009/11/19/chicago-manual-of-style/#comment-590</link>
		<dc:creator>Anne KG Murphy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:08:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reesabrown.com/?p=329#comment-590</guid>
		<description>I now have a novelist living with me and I took much glee in pulling out the Chicago Manual of Style the first time she asked me for a clarification on something.  However, the Manual of Style said the same thing I had said, which was, effectively, "usage varies" (the question had to do with the form of the posessive in the case of a name ending in s.  Either Harris' or Harris's is acceptable, depending on your publication, but the manual at least had good arguments for both, which helped her to decide which one she favored, led by the question of how she would pronounce it when spoken out loud).

I *do* like how it is indexed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I now have a novelist living with me and I took much glee in pulling out the Chicago Manual of Style the first time she asked me for a clarification on something.  However, the Manual of Style said the same thing I had said, which was, effectively, &#8220;usage varies&#8221; (the question had to do with the form of the posessive in the case of a name ending in s.  Either Harris&#8217; or Harris&#8217;s is acceptable, depending on your publication, but the manual at least had good arguments for both, which helped her to decide which one she favored, led by the question of how she would pronounce it when spoken out loud).</p>
<p>I *do* like how it is indexed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

