Talk:History of sentence spacing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Split content from Sentence spacing[edit]

Page development[edit]

The current content was summarized, in part, from earlier material that was posted in the Sentence spacing article. Thus, a few items that were included there might merit reinclusion here due to the broader scope of this article (such as topics that tangentially relate to this subject—like historical spacing before punctuation, for example). I deleted them on the Sentence spacing article because of the size of the article and because they did not strictly fit into the scope of spacing after terminal punctuation.

I suggest that some additional sub-headers might help to segment the matter into sections that might be more readable, but not to the point to where it returns to the form of a stilted group of postings.

My thoughts on the "macro" evolution of single spacing:

  • Early years (Gutenberg - mid-1800s)
Various spacing methods used with movable type and other equipment available. James Felici provides a decent coverage of the various techniques employed on this website [2].
  • Widespread use of the typewriter (~1880–~1980s)
The double space convention is widely used by typists
Linotype and Monotype operators have other options, but generally assume typewriter spacing conventions. David Jury's 2009 book, What is Typography, has a good section on this. The relevant pages are available online. [3]. Bringhurst's book, Elements of Topographic Style, also has some excellent history notes.
  • Movement to single spacing for professionally published print media (books, magazines, newspapers) in America (1940s)
Various theories as to why, but have to be careful with speculation about cost concerns - except when reported in a WP:RS.
  • Movement to single spacing for professionally published print media in England (1950s)
  • Advent of the computer, digital fonts, and the World Wide Web
Webpages primarily use HTML (which ignores extra spacing without a workaround), thus making the single space the convention for this media as well.

There could reasonably be a paragraph on the controversy here as well, since I think that is part of the history as well, from perhaps the 1980s to the current day. The main treatment would better belong in Sentence spacing—although if someone were ambitious, it could be made into a separate article, as there is plenty of material. I've lost steam on this project though, for the most part. Airborne84 (talk) 17:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Example[edit]

There are neither semicolons nor colons, neither exclamation marks nor question marks, neither single nor double quotation marks ( which in a French work would be guillemets ) in the image of a page purported to show "French spacing". Find a page with all these things to illustrate the different way that the French typeset, please. 74.10.198.105 (talk) 21:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, "French spacing" refers specifically to sentence spacing, which is the focus of this page. Additional space before colons and semicolons isn't "French spacing" since that was seen in spacing in early works of other languages as well (German, English).
On the other hand, there would be some utility to also showing the types of spacing you mention (even if it's only tangentially relevant to this article). If you can find a useful example, please improve the article. In the meantime, the example provided seems adequate to illlustrate the sentence-spacing technique in the image.
Thanks for your interest. This article can use quite a bit of improvement, if you'd care to contribute. --Airborne84 (talk) 00:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Single sentence spacing was not typically used in normal text.[edit]

This sentence previously read, "Double sentence-spacing was not typically used in normal text."  This is an obvious error since 1/2-em word spacing with 1-em sentence spacing is documented two sentences later.  I've made a minimal change, which is in the spirit of the sentence to foreshadow a controversy that will appear 100 years later.  However, I'd suggest that a better edit would be to delete the sentence as wordiness.  I've also edited the hyphen in "sentence-spacing".  RB  66.217.118.158 (talk) 17:59, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I deleted the sentence. By the way, of the "sentence spacing" articles, only the main article (Sentence spacing) is a Featured Article. This article, as well as Sentence spacing in the digital age and Sentence spacing in language and style guides, needs a lot of help. If you're interested in contributing, please feel free to improve the article[s]. Thanks for your interest. --Airborne84 (talk) 21:53, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Example links are wrong[edit]

Some links to Google Books to show the different spacing do not go where they claim to go. Here is the section in question:

The spacing differences between traditional typesetting and modern conventional printing standards are easily observed by comparing two different versions of the same book, from the Mabinogion:
1894: the Badger-in-the-bag game—traditional typesetting spacing rules: a single enlarged em-space between sentences
1999: the Badger-in-the-bag game—modern mass-production commercial printing: a single word space between sentences

The first link goes to Celtic Folk and Fairy Tales By Joseph Jacobs, and the second goes to Myths & legends of the British Isles By Richard W. Barber. They do show different spacings, but they are NOT two versions of the same book.

WesT (talk) 06:19, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still broken. htom (talk) 22:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the intent is to link to a similar passage in both books, and in the second book the page should be 319. I'll see if I can figure out how to fix it. Battling McGook (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's fixed it. I'm not sure that's really the best example of the change, because there's a ton of other formatting differences. It'd be nice to get two different editions of the exact same book. Should be easy, just find something with editions from before 1930 and from after 1950, and with both available on google books with the same previewable sections. Alternatively if such books were found in a library someone could just image a page from both and upload them. Battling McGook (talk) 23:16, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Much better. htom (talk) 00:19, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If I click on the first link, I only see the title page, and no actual content. --62.178.202.73 (talk) 15:23, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And to add to the confusion, the second is paginated in reverse. I have notified Google of the issue. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:43, 25 January 2016 (UTC).[reply]

French versus English spacing.[edit]

There's a new addition with a long list of examples of reversed meaning of French and English spacing. It seems more practical to describe that the reversal has occurred, and that modern sources are not consistent in their usage. In my opinion, a large section of only the reversed meanings has the potential of incorrectly informing those who only scan or skim the article.

There's a blog article that talks about the reversal, it's partly an opinion piece, but partly factual, with sources listed: http://widespacer.blogspot.com/2013/12/french-spacing.html Battling McGook (talk) 22:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • The blog states, "...the French would traditionally use a thin space before the period where English texts did not."  This would mean that French spacing is traditionally "<thin space><period><word space>", which is wider than we are telling readers.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • As for the quotes, they are telling a complex story which cannot be summarized with "there was a reversal".  I'd like to see the year of each of the quotes added and sequenced.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree there is a story here, I am reluctant to unpack it (that's partly why I didn't order the quotes much - though I did to some extent emphasize the earliest) as that verges on OR. I have since found a couple of earlier references (1939 and 1949):
  1. French spacing and American spacing refer to the amount of space between sentences. In the former only a spaceband follows the period. In the latter there is an en quad plus the spaceband.[1]
  2. French Spacing? Horrors! Reports that "French Spacing" might become more widley accpeted on account of the savings in money and time has caused at least one designer to remake "Preposterous." Another threatened "I'll shoot any compositor who does," and another claimed that someone was just trying to be different &emdash; "a brand of lunacy." Only one voice spoke in favor of such a trend. "French Spacing" or word spacing between sentences is one of the recent typographical innovations at the Waverly [Press?][2]
Certainly these citations imply that this is a term of the compositor's art, rather than the touch typist's.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 02:40, 25 January 2016 (UTC).[reply]
  1. ^ Christopher Orlando Sylvester Mawson; John William Robson (1939). The Complete Desk Book. Thomas Y. Crowell Company. p. 298.
  2. ^ Book Production. Caroline L. Lloyd, Incorporated. July 1949. p. 79.
As indeed does the blog entry @Battling McGook: refers to above - which I should have read before replying, instead of after. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 02:47, 25 January 2016 (UTC).[reply]
If there is a larger story to tell, then tell it don't imply it, and use references. If not, then this looks like original research. Right now the quotes have to be carefully read to figure out what each one is explaining, and there is no chronology there, so any deeper story is being lost anyway. I think its better to mention sources that talk about the reversal explicitly, although there are precious few. I know I've seen it mentioned elsewhere, but am having a hard time finding more sources. Battling McGook (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why two articles?[edit]

Why would the "History of sentence spacing" be a separate article from "sentence spacing"? The two combined come to only 28Kb of readable prose (and would be even less if combined). Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 01:47, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_sentence_spacing&oldid=1202733397"