TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Minimal reproducible example:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}
\begin{document}
\begin{lemma}
Suppose that \(a\) and \(b\) are integers.
\end{lemma}
\end{document}
Here, the math expressions are placed in an italic context.
However, it seems that they receive more spacing on the right than the left.
Is this observation true?
If so, can I work around it (without manually adding something like \! each time)?
Is this observation true?
Truth, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder....
If you add \showoutput to your document then you will see
....\OT1/cmr/m/it/10 t
....\glue 3.57774 plus 1.53333 minus 1.0222
....\mathon
....\OML/cmm/m/it/10 a
....\mathoff
....\glue 3.57774 plus 1.53333 minus 1.0222
....\OT1/cmr/m/it/10 a
....\OT1/cmr/m/it/10 n
....\OT1/cmr/m/it/10 d
....\glue 3.57774 plus 1.53333 minus 1.0222
....\mathon
....\OML/cmm/m/it/10 b
....\mathoff
....\glue 3.57774 plus 1.53333 minus 1.0222
....\OT1/cmr/m/it/10 a
So that as far as TeX is concerned there is only a normal word space either side of the math letters, however TeX is positioning rectangular boxes and you are looking at sloped non-rectangular letters. Personally I'd let it go but (essentially the opposite of italic correction \/) you could insert some thin negative space but you would have to do this "by hand" TeX has no information about the letter shapes, so can not really help here.
\mathon and \mathoff, I guess?
– L. F.
Oct 8 '19 at 11:09
You wrote,
Here, the math expressions
aandbare placed in an italic context. However, it seems that they receive more spacing on the right than the left. Is this observation true?
The answer depends very much on the letter that's rendered either in math mode or in text-italic mode in the italics group. Here are several examples -- the black part uses math mode, and the superimposed red part uses text-italic mode:
For the a-b example you considered in your posting, it is true that the combined whitespace on either side of a and b is about the same for both a and b, and also that there's more asymmetry -- less whitespace to the left and more whitespace to the right -- for the math mode case than for the text-italic case.
More generally, though, the exact differences in the horizontal offsets depend both on which letters are rendered in math mode and on the letter(s) -- if any -- that immediately precede the space before the math mode material.
\documentclass[border=1pt,preview]{standalone}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\newlength\mylen
\newcommand\blurba[2]{\textit{that $#1$ and $#2$ are}}
\newcommand\blurbb[2]{\textit{that #1 and #2 are}}
\newcommand\mykern[2]{\settowidth{\mylen}{\blurba{#1}{#2}}%
\kern-\mylen}
\newcommand\blurb[2]{\blurba{#1}{#2}%
\mykern{#1}{#2}%
\textcolor{red}{%
\blurbb{#1}{#2}}}
\begin{document}
\obeylines
\blurb{a}{b}
\blurb{d}{l}
\blurb{u}{v}
\blurb{x}{z}
\end{document}
I have confirmed that this is purely a font design issue by using \usepackage{mathptmx}:
Now the problem does not exist anymore.
