TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I've now twice generated a bst file using makebst. Regardless of my choice when asked whether to use "and" or "&" for 3+ authors in the reference list, the style always uses "&". I would very much prefer "and" to be spelled out. Any idea how to fix this? I am using harvard, not natbib, but could be persuaded to change.

What initially led me to generate a new style was that kluwer.bst which I was previously using somehow didn't use "et al." for in-text citations (again for sources with 3+ authors) when the publication type is tech report but instead put all names into the citation, while it works fine for articles. A remedy for that would also be helpful.

I've looked into the .bst files, but I have really no idea what to change. Any help or hints towards a solution would be greatly appreciated as I really have to finish this article.

share|improve this question
what do the author fields in the bib file look like? – frabjous Feb 10 '11 at 17:50
doesnt really matter, I've tried different versions. I thought that was the reason at first because it was formatted like "first name last name and first name last name and ..." but even after I changed it to "last name, first name and ..." (which is what the author field is usually formatted like) it still lists all names instead of putting et al. for articles it also doesn't really matter how the author field is formatted, both versions work fine. – ilprincipe Feb 10 '11 at 21:15
up vote 4 down vote accepted

The harvard package defines a command \harvardand which, depending on the style, is set to '&'. This can be changed to 'and' with:

share|improve this answer
I have since changed to natbib, but this solution works. – ilprincipe Jul 11 '11 at 18:34

Search in the generated bst file for the FUNCTION {bbl.and} it should be:

FUNCTION {bbl.and}
{ "and"}
share|improve this answer
It actually is. Problem seems to be with the harvard package somehow, Ive just redone it using natbib and it seems to work. Maybe a fix for the second problem, getting kluwer.bst to use et al. for in-text citations of tech reports would be better. – ilprincipe Feb 10 '11 at 17:53
for the et al is a FUNCTION {bbl.etal} What does it define? – Herbert Feb 10 '11 at 18:27
The function does not appear in the file. You can find the file under the following link. ftp.fernuni-hagen.de/ftp-dir/pub/mirrors/www.ctan.org/macros/… – ilprincipe Feb 10 '11 at 21:07
kluwer expect for et. al. entries like "Donald Duck and others", which then is converted to "Donald Duck et al." That is defined in the Function format.names. – Herbert Feb 10 '11 at 21:41
that is a bit strange, because none of the entries in my bib file looks like that. they look normal, just as described in the comment to my original post. I really dont get why it also works fine for articles. – ilprincipe Feb 11 '11 at 10:52

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.