Comments on: Officer Titles http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2006/09/24/officer-titles/ Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:23:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Ken Adams http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2006/09/24/officer-titles/comment-page-1/#comment-1486 Ken Adams Thu, 14 Dec 2006 16:01:46 +0000 http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2006/09/24/officer-titles/#comment-1486 Postscript: I ran my issue with longer titles by the Chicago Manual of Style's online Q&A, giving them the example I used in my post plus one other. This is what they said: "Chicago style lowercases the title and we feel no reluctance! Your sentences look just fine to me. But if you're uncomfortable lowercasing, by all means uppercase them. It would be a bad idea to mix and match styles for titles of different lengths, however." So with renewed confidence I'll advocate lowercase across the board. Ken Postscript: I ran my issue with longer titles by the Chicago Manual of Style’s online Q&A, giving them the example I used in my post plus one other. This is what they said:

“Chicago style lowercases the title and we feel no reluctance! Your sentences look just fine to me. But if you’re uncomfortable lowercasing, by all means uppercase them. It would be a bad idea to mix and match styles for titles of different lengths, however.”

So with renewed confidence I’ll advocate lowercase across the board.

Ken

]]> By: Ken Adams http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2006/09/24/officer-titles/comment-page-1/#comment-933 Ken Adams Fri, 06 Oct 2006 13:34:24 +0000 http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2006/09/24/officer-titles/#comment-933 Michael: Regarding your question, I don't have a problem with using "the" in the defined term "the Customer." In fact, I prefer including "the." (See MSCD 2.39.) We are, after all, dealing with a common noun rather than a name. You wouldn't, after all, tell your sales staff "Customer is always right!" You'd say "The Customer is always right." (Assuming you share that sentiment!) Ken Michael: Regarding your question, I don’t have a problem with using “the” in the defined term “the Customer.” In fact, I prefer including “the.” (See MSCD 2.39.) We are, after all, dealing with a common noun rather than a name. You wouldn’t, after all, tell your sales staff “Customer is always right!” You’d say “The Customer is always right.” (Assuming you share that sentiment!) Ken

]]> By: Michael Fleming http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2006/09/24/officer-titles/comment-page-1/#comment-807 Michael Fleming Sun, 24 Sep 2006 22:20:47 +0000 http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2006/09/24/officer-titles/#comment-807 When the word is preceded by the article 'the' it does not appear to be used as a title of a particular person, but rather to point the office. So, unless it was a defined term from elsewhere in the agreement, it seems natural to go without a capital. As for examples where the long-title issue arises, it seems hard to come up with a practical one that is not as in the above -- Stating what so-and-so's title will be now that so-and-so has accepted the job. Speaking of 'the' -- Is it fair to complain about a contract that creates a defined term for one of the parties that is also a generic for the role of the party in the contract, such as 'Customer,' and then goes on to put 'the' in front of the defined term for the party? That seems to me to be saying something like, "I was speaking to the Ken Adams the other day, and he said..." When the word is preceded by the article ‘the’ it does not appear to be used as a title of a particular person, but rather to point the office. So, unless it was a defined term from elsewhere in the agreement, it seems natural to go without a capital.

As for examples where the long-title issue arises, it seems hard to come up with a practical one that is not as in the above — Stating what so-and-so’s title will be now that so-and-so has accepted the job.

Speaking of ‘the’ — Is it fair to complain about a contract that creates a defined term for one of the parties that is also a generic for the role of the party in the contract, such as ‘Customer,’ and then goes on to put ‘the’ in front of the defined term for the party? That seems to me to be saying something like, “I was speaking to the Ken Adams the other day, and he said…”

]]>