using ellipsis inside quotation marks

[enydia]

Hi, everyone.

If the words I want to leave out are at the end of the quotation, how to punctuate the sentence? Here is an example:
"He disagreed with my suggestion that we go home immediately," she said.
If I want to omit "that we go home immediately," should I punctuate the sentence as this:
"He disagreed with my suggestion...," she said. (a comma after ellipsis mark)
Or as this:
"He disagreed with my suggestion ..." she said. (a space in between suggestion and ellipsis mark)
Or as this:
"He disagreed with my suggestion..." she said. (no space in between suggestion and ellipsis mark)

Thanks.

[RedMtl]

Hi, everyone.

If the words I want to leave out are at the end of the quotation, how to punctuate the sentence? Here is an example:
"He disagreed with my suggestion that we go home immediately," she said.
If I want to omit "that we go home immediately," should I punctuate the sentence as this:
"He disagreed with my suggestion...," she said. (a comma after ellipsis mark)
Or as this:
"He disagreed with my suggestion ..." she said. (a space in between suggestion and ellipsis mark)
Or as this:
"He disagreed with my suggestion..." she said. (no space in between suggestion and ellipsis mark)

Thanks.

There are a number of variations on this, and they can all be researched on the Internet.

Replying to you from the perspective of a librarian, who has been editing materials for 25 years, I would correct it as follows:

"'He disagreed with my suggestion . . .,' she said."

Note that you need opening quotation marks to start your quotation. You need secondary quotation marks to quote the already quoted material and finally, you need a space between the periods used as the ellipses, with the exception of the last one, which is followed immediately by the comma.

This is a basic format, used by Turabian (a baby version of CMS). Other formats are possible -- and they are common, especially in the science fields.

Good luck -- you'll need it. I'd advise you to contact whoever your instructor is, and get his or her preferences for bibliographic notation and usage. Then, stick to what is wanted by the instructor; it can make the difference between a good grade, and a better one!

[David L.]

The only format I've ever encountered in science, scientific, and humanities writings - never mind all the other books one reads as a dilettante, and as sojourner in other fields of study - is:

"He disagreed with my suggestion..." she said.

He disagreed most vehemently and emphatically with my suggestion.
"He disagreed...with my suggestion."

[RedMtl]

The only format I've ever encountered in science, scientific, and humanities writings - never mind all the other books one reads as a dilettante, and as sojourner in other fields of study - is:

"He disagreed with my suggestion..." she said.

He disagreed most vehemently and emphatically with my suggestion.
"He disagreed...with my suggestion."

Note the following, directly quoted from CMS (Chicago Manual of Style):

Definition and form

An ellipsis—the omission of a word, phrase, line, paragraph, or more from a quoted passage—is indicated by ellipsis points (or dots), not by asterisks. Ellipsis points are three spaced periods (. . .), sometimes preceded or followed by other punctuation. They must always appear together on the same line, but any preceding punctuation may appear at the end of the line above.


And the following from MLA (Modern Language Association):

The usual style of ellipsis is: space-period-space-period-space-period-space that is: Abede . . . hijklmn . . . tuww . . . (etc.)


Emphasis/italics mine.


The above example would therefore be rendered: "He disagreed . . . with my suggestion."


Also, the original query included quoted material, or, in this case what appeared to be dialogue. When material is already enclosed in quotation marks, those marks must be preserved in the re-quoting of said material. Thus: "Don't run so fast!" said the mother to her child


Would be re-quoted in a term paper (or whatever) as:


The text reads: "'Don't run so fast!' said the mother to her child."


Note also that I did say there were variations, however CMS is generally considered a bible of bibliographic usage, and is accepted worldwide. In the absence of specific requirements for a document being edited (such as the doctoral dissertation I just completed for a Université de Montréal student), CMS is the reference of choice.


Why UdeM is so lax in not having a specific guideline, I haven't a clue -- but it is a university with rather odd departmental quirks, and this is one of them.

This is not an area in which I merely dabble. I have 25 years of editing experience in several fields -- including language. Personally, one of the formats I detest is the MLA (Modern Language Association) method of citation, which to my eye looks sloppy overall. This said, both are consistent in stating that the periods in ellipses are preceded and followed by spacing.

This is why I pointed out that consulting the instructor for his/her preferences is the best route. I know professors in language who dislike MLA (the language standard for such things), and while they will accept it as standard, they prefer other formats. Using what is preferred will always get a higher standard of approval -- be that fair or unfair.

As an instructor in the language field, I was forced to use MLA for certain things. I always disliked it, and unless absolutely required, I will not use it, preferring instead CMS.

[enydia]

There are a number of variations on this, and they can all be researched on the Internet.

Replying to you from the perspective of a librarian, who has been editing materials for 25 years, I would correct it as follows:

"'He disagreed with my suggestion . . .,' she said."

Note that you need opening quotation marks to start your quotation. You need secondary quotation marks to quote the already quoted material and finally, you need a space between the periods used as the ellipses, with the exception of the last one, which is followed immediately by the comma.

This is a basic format, used by Turabian (a baby version of CMS). Other formats are possible -- and they are common, especially in the science fields.

Good luck -- you'll need it. I'd advise you to contact whoever your instructor is, and get his or her preferences for bibliographic notation and usage. Then, stick to what is wanted by the instructor; it can make the difference between a good grade, and a better one!

Thank you very much for your smart suggestion.
Though I am an English learner, I don't have a instructor now

[enydia]

The only format I've ever encountered in science, scientific, and humanities writings - never mind all the other books one reads as a dilettante, and as sojourner in other fields of study - is:

"He disagreed with my suggestion..." she said.

He disagreed most vehemently and emphatically with my suggestion.
"He disagreed...with my suggestion."

In fact, I see the format you provid most frequently.
Thank you very much.
ps：What is the difference between "science writings" and "scientific writings"?

[RedMtl]

In fact, I see the format you provid most frequently.
Thank you very much.
ps：What is the difference between "science writings" and "scientific writings"?

Do note that what you see in printed material, and how you write ellipses, may not be the same thing. The original question was very clearly about how to use them in writing something. That is what I replied to, and the formats I gave are standard. It is how a term paper, a research paper, a dissertation or a manuscript should be prepared.

When you read printed material, such as a book or a journal, you may very well find that the ellipses are presented differently. Typesetters have their own way of rendering the ellipses, which often results in them appearing closer together. However, even they are working from a prepared original manuscript, and in the original convention should have been followed.

Professionally published output renders a number of things differently, not the least being spacing between both words and lines. The "manuscript" will have been submitted with double-spacing; the printed document will have that changed to single-spacing.

As the question was about writing, and not about publishing, that is what I addressed.

As for science vs. scientific writing -- I will leave that to a person in such a field to comment upon.

[enydia]

Note the following, directly quoted from CMS (Chicago Manual of Style):

Definition and form

An ellipsis—the omission of a word, phrase, line, paragraph, or more from a quoted passage—is indicated by ellipsis points (or dots), not by asterisks. Ellipsis points are three spaced periods (. . .), sometimes preceded or followed by other punctuation. They must always appear together on the same line, but any preceding punctuation may appear at the end of the line above.


And the following from MLA (Modern Language Association):

The usual style of ellipsis is: space-period-space-period-space-period-space that is: Abede . . . hijklmn . . . tuww . . . (etc.)


Emphasis/italics mine.


The above example would therefore be rendered: "He disagreed . . . with my suggestion."


Also, the original query included quoted material, or, in this case what appeared to be dialogue. When material is already enclosed in quotation marks, those marks must be preserved in the re-quoting of said material. Thus: "Don't run so fast!" said the mother to her child


Would be re-quoted in a term paper (or whatever) as:


The text reads: "'Don't run so fast!' said the mother to her child."


Note also that I did say there were variations, however CMS is generally considered a bible of bibliographic usage, and is accepted worldwide. In the absence of specific requirements for a document being edited (such as the doctoral dissertation I just completed for a Université de Montréal student), CMS is the reference of choice.


Why UdeM is so lax in not having a specific guideline, I haven't a clue -- but it is a university with rather odd departmental quirks, and this is one of them.

This is not an area in which I merely dabble. I have 25 years of editing experience in several fields -- including language. Personally, one of the formats I detest is the MLA (Modern Language Association) method of citation, which to my eye looks sloppy overall. This said, both are consistent in stating that the periods in ellipses are preceded and followed by spacing.

This is why I pointed out that consulting the instructor for his/her preferences is the best route. I know professors in language who dislike MLA (the language standard for such things), and while they will accept it as standard, they prefer other formats. Using what is preferred will always get a higher standard of approval -- be that fair or unfair.

As an instructor in the language field, I was forced to use MLA for certain things. I always disliked it, and unless absolutely required, I will not use it, preferring instead CMS.

wow, very professional!
I wonder whether you have some comments on Robert Bringhurst's Elements of Typographic Style. I found some of his examples from wiki:
i ... j
k....
l..., l
l, ... l
m...?
n...!

[enydia]

Do note that what you see in printed material, and how you write ellipses, may not be the same thing. The original question was very clearly about how to use them in writing something. That is what I replied to, and the formats I gave are standard. It is how a term paper, a research paper, a dissertation or a manuscript should be prepared.

When you read printed material, such as a book or a journal, you may very well find that the ellipses are presented differently. Typesetters have their own way of rendering the ellipses, which often results in them appearing closer together. However, even they are working from a prepared original manuscript, and in the original convention should have been followed.

Professionally published output renders a number of things differently, not the least being spacing between both words and lines. The "manuscript" will have been submitted with double-spacing; the printed document will have that changed to single-spacing.

As the question was about writing, and not about publishing, that is what I addressed.

As for science vs. scientific writing -- I will leave that to a person in such a field to comment upon.

Very helpful!
Thank you very much!