1

What's the right way to typeset an ellipsis in German quotation marks?

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[ngerman]{babel}
\usepackage{mathtools}
\mathtoolsset{mathic=true} %%% See https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/3496/
\begin{document}
Terme schreiben wir in Anführungszeichen "`\dots"'. %or "`\ldots"'
\end{document}

produces, when compiled with pdflatex,

Terme schreiben wir in Anführungszeichen „… “.

What's the canonical way to get rid of the space between … and “? Surely, we can write something like

\kern.1em\textellipsis\kern-.12em

, but the kerning amounts would be guessed and might not be portable when you change font families.

4
  • 1
    "`\dots\unkern"' might be worth a try, but what exactly 'looks right' is a matter of taste.
    – moewe
    Commented Mar 4, 2019 at 12:58
  • How is the mathtools stuff relevant to this question? mathic only applies to \(...\)
    – daleif
    Commented Mar 4, 2019 at 13:13
  • \dots and friends are defined via amsmath, which is loaded by mathtools.
    – daleif
    Commented Mar 4, 2019 at 13:26
  • mathtools does not change any dots.
    – daleif
    Commented Mar 4, 2019 at 13:39

1 Answer 1

1

One way could be to cancel out the kerning after the ellipsis with \unkern. I got the idea from browsing the csquotes documentation to see how csquotes handles its ellipsis.

Terme schreiben wir in Anführungszeichen "`\dots\unkern"'.

Terme schreiben wir in Anführungszeichen "`\dots\unkern"'.

The spacing seems less excessive now, but one might still feel the need for a little manual extra correction. What exactly looks right is to a certain degree a matter of taste.

It might be worth a try to use centred dots or one centred placeholder symbol instead of dots on the baseline. That way the apparent asymmetry with the closing upper quotation mark could be alleviated. Alternatively you could just fill in a dummy term.

0

You must log in to answer this question.