3

Is there a simple way to change biblatex-chicago's treatment of \volcite commands such that when citing a volume and page of a multi-volume book, it outputs "[vol]:[page(s)]" instead of "vol. [vol], p./pp. [page(s)]"? (But when citing only the volume or volumes, but no page, I don't want it to change the output.)

Here is my MWE:

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage[notes]{biblatex-chicago}
\addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}

\begin{document}
\volcite{1}[50]{knuth:ct}. \mancite

\volcite{1--2}{knuth:ct}.
\end{document}

I would like the output to be

Donald E. Knuth, Computers & Typesetting, 5 vols. (Reading, Mass.: Addison- Wesley, 1984–1986), 1:50.

Knuth, Computers & Typesetting, vols. 1–2.

4

You can do this by redefining \volcitedelim and \mkvolcitenote.

The one caveat is that something like \volcite{1}[a note]{knuth:ct} will give slightly unexpected results. But is is easy enough to work around by putting non-page number postnotes outside the citation command.

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage[notes]{biblatex-chicago}
\addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}

\renewcommand*{\volcitedelim}{\addcolon}

\renewrobustcmd*{\mkvolcitenote}[2]{%
  \ifblank{#2}
    {\printtext[volcitevolume]{#1}}
    {\printtext{#1}\volcitedelim\printtext{#2}}}

\begin{document}
\volcite{1}[50]{knuth:ct}. \mancite

\volcite{1--2}{knuth:ct}.
\end{document}

output

  • Thank you! This is perfect. I noticed that the style guidelines I am looking at eliminate the comma after shorthands in the case of a multivolume work, e.g., "CCAG 5:102" instead of "CCAG, 5:102". (But still keeping the comma in the case of a shorthand followed by just a page number.) Is there an extra line one could add for that functionality? – Alex Roberts Jan 27 at 16:36
  • 2
    @AlexRoberts, this is probably worth a separate question. biblatex-chicago is not always easy to modify and you will get a better quality of answer if others see it too. – David Purton Jan 28 at 10:19
  • you're right, I should make it a separate question. I'll do that now. – Alex Roberts Jan 28 at 15:42
  • The separate question about the comma is here. – Alex Roberts Jan 28 at 16:02

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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