Take the 2-minute tour ×
TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

How should one typeset an elided passage in a quote?

An example:

\begin{quotation}
some text [...] then some more
\end{quotation}

Elision in a quote is usually indicated by an ellipsis (three dots) in square brackets. I have tried variations on [ \ldots ], [\ldots], \emph{[ \ldots ]} and \emph{[\ldots]}, which all look quite ugly. Since the specific quotation environment typesets the quote in italics, the best so far seems to be \emph{[\,\ldots ]}.

However, this seems a horribly fragile and hacky way to achieve a nice-looking indication that some part of the quote has been left out. Is there a standard way to do this, or should I start experimenting with under-the-hood things like boxes, negative kerning, and \phantom?

(By the way, I'm not sure elision is the right technical term here, I'd welcome a pointer to the correct term.)

share|improve this question
2  
As an aside, its most common not to use square brackets with ellipsis for omissions, but only for added text; off the top of my head, only the MLA Handbook always wants them. Butcher's Copy-editing says "It is not usual to place ellipses in square brackets, unless they need to be distinguished from ellipses used by the quoted author". –  Charles Stewart Sep 23 '10 at 6:35
    
@Charles: Thanks for clarifying! –  András Salamon Sep 24 '10 at 15:56

2 Answers 2

up vote 7 down vote accepted

How about something like the following?

\newcommand*\elide{\textup{[\,\dots]}}
share|improve this answer
    
That looks promising, will try that. Is \dots the same as \ldots outside mathmode? –  András Salamon Sep 23 '10 at 2:23
    
@András Salamon: They're identical in every case. –  TH. Sep 23 '10 at 2:43
    
I’m not really happy with the spacing command. Are you sure it belongs there? –  Konrad Rudolph Sep 23 '10 at 8:21
2  
\dots is not identical to \ldots in math mode if the amsmath package is loaded. –  Philipp Sep 23 '10 at 8:56
1  
@Philipp: Erm, it's not identical if I redefine it either. Looks like amsmath redefines \dots to try to be smart about what's coming up next in math mode. But I guess, you're right, I said "every case" and I should have said that the LaTeX kernel defines them to be identical, packages can change that. –  TH. Sep 23 '10 at 9:16

Elision is the omission of one or more sounds. If it can be applied as a typographical term, I am not sure. However, since an ellipsis represents dot-dot-dot an ellipsis within square brackets named an elision seems like a good idea.

Both \dots and \ldots would print the same. They are both defined the same way in TeX.

 \mathchardef\ldotp="613A % ldot as a punctuation mark
 \def\ldots{\mathinner{\ldotp\ldotp\ldotp}}
 \def\dots{\relax\ifmmode\ldots\else$\m@th\ldots\,$\fi}

The reason that Math mode is used is to ensure that the normal rules for spacing are not applied here.

An ellipsis within a square bracket looks ugly! It is an intrusion within the text. Bringhurst suggests that normally an ellipsis should be spaced fore-and-aft to separate it from the text, but when it combines with other punctuation, the leading space disappears and the other punctuation follows. So to define the command fully, one needs to take all aspects into consideration.

TH's suggestion is possibly the best you can get, I would just add xspace, in case someone sticks an elision at the end of the sentence or starts a new sentence after it.

 \newcommand*\elide{\textup{[\,\dots]}\xspace}

This should have gone probably as a comment rather than an answer, but I thought you would find the TeX code of interest.

share|improve this answer
    
LaTeX defines it quite differently. –  TH. Sep 23 '10 at 4:45
    
@TH Never thought, it would have been different! I will take a peek! –  Yiannis Lazarides Sep 23 '10 at 4:48
    
In writing, elision usually refers to contracting enumerations to ranges, e.g., "pages 73, 74, and 75" to "pp. 73-5". –  Charles Stewart Sep 23 '10 at 6:51
    
In my dictionary, "the omission of a sound or syllable when speaking; an omission of a passage in a book, speech, or film; the process of joining together or mergin things, esp. abstract ideas." –  TH. Sep 23 '10 at 7:01
    
@TH you are right that the LaTeX definition is different. They define it via \textellipsis, which ultimately depends on the font dimensions. –  Yiannis Lazarides Sep 23 '10 at 14:21

Your Answer

 
discard

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.