Skip to main content

capitalization - When to capitalize words such as "lake", and when can the whole word be omitted?


Which of the following sentences are correct?



"He gave two examples of large lakes, Lake Michigan and Lake Superior."


"He gave two examples of large lakes, Michigan and Superior."


"He gave two examples of large Lakes, Michigan and Superior."


"He gave two examples of large lakes, Lakes Michigan and Superior."



This question is primarily about what variants are formally correct, not which one sounds the best.


I think that the question should be valid for several words of the same kind, such as mountain (Mount), figure (Figure), table (Table) and so on.



Answer



You capitalize it when it is used as part of a proper noun. Your first, second, and fourth examples are correct, the third is not.



He gave two examples of large lakes, Michigan and Superior.



In this example, the Lake part in the proper nouns Lake Michigan and Lake Superior is omitted. The word lakes here is not part of a proper noun. So capitalizing it like this,



He gave two examples of large Lakes, Michigan and Superior.



Is incorrect.


In other cases, the same rule applies: capitalize the words when they appear as part of a proper noun, such as Mount McKinley or Round Table, but not when they appear as common noun, such as the tallest mount/mountain or coffee table.


It is also recommended to capitalize references to specific figures, tables, chapters, sections, equations—particularly when they appear with a number or letter identifying them:



This trend is demonstrated in Figure 5 in Appendix C



But again, not when simply using the common noun.



This trend is demonstrated in figure below.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more