If it's referring to a person or thing from Sparta, then it should be capitalized. But if it's an adjective meaning austere, frugal, restrained, etc., it's generally uncapitalized.
Note from a cranky editor
- Thread starter Greg Cox
- Start date
If it's referring to a person or thing from Sparta, then it should be capitalized. But if it's an adjective meaning austere, frugal, restrained, etc., it's generally uncapitalized.
It depends. If you're talking about the people, they're Spartans or Lakedaemonians.
If you're talking about a room with nothing in it but a bed and a chair, then you'd call it spartan.
That's what I assumed, but I have read novels, Star Trek among them, that still capitalise the word when meaning austere etc and I started to believe that my usage was wrong.
I'm assuming Spartan is a proper noun, so it should be initial cap.
Yes, sometimes it's a proper noun and should be capitalized. But it's also a commonly used adjective meaning austere, frugal, or various other qualities that are historically associated with the Spartans, and adjectives aren't proper nouns and therefore don't need to be capitalized.
But whether "Spartan" or "spartan", it should never be used with a semi-colon. 
--Ted
--Ted
But whether "Spartan" or "spartan", it should never be used with a semi-colon.
He started feeling uneasy when he was nearly finished painting the spar; tan was entirely the wrong colour, he realized.
I agree, but my spellchecker (and some copyeditors) don't, which is probably why the capitalized version still pops up in books.
Spartan 117 model armour was a good look, Master Chief thought.
Does anybody have any idea why MSWord's spellchecker seems to think that "ag" (as in "short for agriculture") is supposed to be capped? I've wondered if it might be because Ag is the symbol for silver, but I don't know. I've also wondered if Word does this just to piss me off. Yes, I'm kidding in that last sentence, but only sort of kidding.
*applause*But whether "Spartan" or "spartan", it should never be used with a semi-colon.
He started feeling uneasy when he was nearly finished painting the spar; tan was entirely the wrong colour, he realized.
I don't think MS Word is smart enough to know there's a periodic table.
Fascinating. The capitalization rules have changed a lot since I was in grade school.
It's not uncommon to see words like manila folders instead of Manila folders, french fries instead of French fries, draconian for Draconian, etc.
Easy to test--try writing "au" or "pu"--if it caps those, it's the element.
Of course, if it's all capped, so it corrects to "AG," what it thinks you're doing is writing the abbreviation for Aktiengesallschaft, German "share company," identical (afaik) to the English "corporation." Example: "Volkswagen AG." It is essentially the same as "Inc." Presumably an AG can be closely held or public; but it is contrasted from a GmbH, which is like our LLC.
Ooh, I was supposed to italicize Aktiengesallschaft. I bet I'm in trouble now.
Fascinating. The capitalization rules have changed a lot since I was in grade school.
Once the word loses all real connection to the proper noun that spawned it, capitalization goes away. What connection manila folders have to do with the city of Manila is a mystery to me and to most other folks too, I'd guess.
As for french fries, that term never referred to "fries made the way they are made in France." In fact, as I understand it, what we in America refer to as french fries actually came from Belgium. The term is, instead, a reference to the verb frenched, a cooking term which means "cut into long, thin strips." Perhaps this verb has something to do with France, but the connection is pretty dang remote.
(I am not all that up on the Periodic Table, but cooking, that's a subject I know about!
)And speaking of the periodic table:
Great idea, and it sort of worked - Word wants me to write Pu just like that, with the initial letter capped. It didn't have any problem with au (lowercase a, lowercase u), though - maybe because of the French word au?
^Speaking of capitalization, JustKate, I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be "periodic table" and not "Periodic Table".
Hah! You didn't put the period inside your quotation marks!
It depends on whether you're doing British English or American English whether you put the period inside or outside the quote marks. It always ruffles my feathers to see a period outside, but I have to remind myself of the difference there. The American rule is periods and commas always in, semi-colons and colons always out, and quotation marks and exclamation marks either way depending on context.
^Speaking of capitalization, JustKate, I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be "periodic table" and not "Periodic Table".
Hah! You didn't put the period inside your quotation marks!
Yeah, exactly - this is one of those little Across the Pondifferences. In some cases, the British convention is more logical, but I have to admit that poor little comma or period (a.k.a. "full stop") looks pretty lonely out there all by itself without any quote marks to hug it.
^Thank you, Sakrysta. 
ETA: To tell you the truth, neither looks very correct to me. Putting commas and periods outside the quotation marks does make them look lonely, but I also feel that putting a period inside makes the whole sentence feel unfinished.
In dialogue, of course, the punctuation goes inside the quotes no matter which brand of English you subscribe to.
ETA: To tell you the truth, neither looks very correct to me. Putting commas and periods outside the quotation marks does make them look lonely, but I also feel that putting a period inside makes the whole sentence feel unfinished.
In dialogue, of course, the punctuation goes inside the quotes no matter which brand of English you subscribe to.
Similar threads
