1

I'm writing a book on philosophy of mathematics that employs a lot of logic symbols in math mode. In particular, I use many lower-case Greek symbols like $\varphi$, $\psi$, etc., as well as uppercase ones. I also use $\neg$, $\exists$, $\forall$, $\wedge$, $\vee$, $\rightrarrow$ for the logical operators. In the old preamble I had the font specified with \usepackage{latexsym}, which I guess is the default. The publisher wants me to use an 'older' looking font, and their choice is Crimson. So I changed the font specification in the preamble to \usepackage{crimson}, and sure enough the plain text looks great. BUT ... the command {\sc ...} now does nothing; and the stuff in math mode hasn't altered at all. Am I missing something basic here? Are there other \usepackage{...} commands needed in the preamble if one wants a font change to uniformly affect not just the prose but also the logical and mathematical symbols?

5
  • Welcome to the site. Math fonts and text fonts are separate beasts, because the requirements to support each mode are different. So the math font will have to be set too, but I don't know if their is intrinsic support for Crimson in math mode. Also, not all fonts support small caps. It will also depend on whether you use pdflatex, xelatex, or lualatex, whether the font is supportable. See tug.org/FontCatalogue May 5, 2021 at 23:41
  • Here's a page from that site on fonts with math support: tug.org/FontCatalogue/mathfonts.html May 5, 2021 at 23:45
  • see cochineal package for a font family derived from Crimson with many more variants and some math support. May 5, 2021 at 23:51
  • Re: David's response, ctan.org/pkg/cochineal May 6, 2021 at 0:02
  • not directly related but \sc hasn't been defined by default in latex since latex2e came out in 1993, \textsc{Abc} would be the standard command for caps and small caps May 6, 2021 at 0:04

1 Answer 1

2

As stated by others in the comments, a solution would be to use cochineal instead of Crimson. There is math support for this font with newtxmath. Here's an example of what is looks like.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{cochineal}
\usepackage[cochineal]{newtxmath}
\begin{document}
Here are the symbols in the question.
\[
\varphi\psi\neg\exists\forall\wedge\vee\rightarrow
\]
\textsc{Small caps} are also available.
\end{document}
2
  • Thank you so much for these suggestions. I've found that using cochineal with newtxmath unfortunately distorts all the horizontal and vertical spacings in my multiply embedded arrays that I use for formal logical proofs. It would take a very long time to kern them back into good shape. Also, the newtxmath math symbols are harder to read than their latexsym counterparts. The hash symbol, for example, which I use a lot (for 'number of') doesn't have its vertical and horizontal lines extending far enough (for my eyes, at least!). I'll follow the other helpful suggestion too. Thanks again! May 6, 2021 at 11:13
  • From the list to which Steven kindly supplied a link, I have chosen Stix font. Its math support is good enough not to occasion any need for wholesale kerning of formal proof-arrays in math mode, after the change of font from latexsym. The magic commands in the preamble are \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} and \usepackage{stix}. Thanks again everyone! May 7, 2021 at 0:38

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .