2

Possible duplicates:

I use BibLaTeX and have three options to cite: \cite creates just text, like “Author, Year”. \parencite creates “(Author, Year)” and \footcite creates a footnote. When I cite something within the text, I usually use the following:

From \cite{source}, it follows that …

Which renders to:

From Author, Year, it follows that …

However, when I want to attribute something at the end of the sentence, where do I put the puncutation when I want to attribute the preceding sentence? Before the period, after it? Another period after the citation?

  1. This is a fact. (Author, Year) And another fact. (another Author, year)
  2. This is a fact. (Author, Year). And another fact. (another Author, year).
  3. This is a fact (Author, Year). And another fact (another Author, year).

The problem with 3. seems to be that it looks like the citation is attached to the word “fact”, not the whole sentence.

My field is Physics, and I would write in German and English.

What is the right way to do this?

closed as off-topic by Johannes_B, user31729, Thorsten, egreg, Svend Tveskæg Mar 28 '15 at 17:09

  • This question does not fall within the scope of TeX, LaTeX or related typesetting systems as defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 4
    This looks more like an 'academic style' question than anything TeX-related. Author-year styles seem to prefer the third option (I'm from a subject area which uses numerical citations, so I have limited experience.) – Joseph Wright Dec 12 '13 at 8:24
  • You mean this should be migrated to Academia? How do you do this with numerical citations? – Martin Ueding Dec 12 '13 at 8:25
  • 1
    I can certainly see a case for migration. For numerical citations, my subject area (chemistry) tends to use superscripts after punctuation. A few journals use either 'in line' numerals (before punctuation) or superscript citations before punctuation (e.g. Nature). In any case, you are best looking at what lead publications in your subject area do, and following them as this will be what is expected of you by others. – Joseph Wright Dec 12 '13 at 8:35
  • 3
    In Germany you have a specific rule: DIN 1505-02. The correct terminology is "Kurzbeleg" or "Harvard-Method". In this case you can find 1 and 3 as legal options. – Marco Daniel Dec 12 '13 at 9:02
  • 5
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it asks for the style of citing and should have been migrated to Academia. Too late now, pity. – Johannes_B Mar 28 '15 at 16:35

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.