Is a citation typically considered plural or singular in academia?











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












My question parallels that of https://english.stackexchange.com/q/99886/117318, which asks whether "Gamma et al." should be considered singular or plural for verb conjugation. The top and accepted answer says that it depends whether the verb refers to the researchers (since the translation of the Latin is "Gamma and others", which is plural), or if it refers to the publication/work.



Which usage is conventional in academia?
Is there significant variation across fields that anyone is aware of? Are there best practices to avoid confusion?










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    "Is [anything] typically [anything] in academia?" No.
    – Mark Meckes
    3 hours ago















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












My question parallels that of https://english.stackexchange.com/q/99886/117318, which asks whether "Gamma et al." should be considered singular or plural for verb conjugation. The top and accepted answer says that it depends whether the verb refers to the researchers (since the translation of the Latin is "Gamma and others", which is plural), or if it refers to the publication/work.



Which usage is conventional in academia?
Is there significant variation across fields that anyone is aware of? Are there best practices to avoid confusion?










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    "Is [anything] typically [anything] in academia?" No.
    – Mark Meckes
    3 hours ago













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











My question parallels that of https://english.stackexchange.com/q/99886/117318, which asks whether "Gamma et al." should be considered singular or plural for verb conjugation. The top and accepted answer says that it depends whether the verb refers to the researchers (since the translation of the Latin is "Gamma and others", which is plural), or if it refers to the publication/work.



Which usage is conventional in academia?
Is there significant variation across fields that anyone is aware of? Are there best practices to avoid confusion?










share|improve this question













My question parallels that of https://english.stackexchange.com/q/99886/117318, which asks whether "Gamma et al." should be considered singular or plural for verb conjugation. The top and accepted answer says that it depends whether the verb refers to the researchers (since the translation of the Latin is "Gamma and others", which is plural), or if it refers to the publication/work.



Which usage is conventional in academia?
Is there significant variation across fields that anyone is aware of? Are there best practices to avoid confusion?







citations writing-style grammar






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 4 hours ago









jvriesem

2,9731932




2,9731932








  • 1




    "Is [anything] typically [anything] in academia?" No.
    – Mark Meckes
    3 hours ago














  • 1




    "Is [anything] typically [anything] in academia?" No.
    – Mark Meckes
    3 hours ago








1




1




"Is [anything] typically [anything] in academia?" No.
– Mark Meckes
3 hours ago




"Is [anything] typically [anything] in academia?" No.
– Mark Meckes
3 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote













If you say "Gemma et al." to mean the paper, then it is singular. (This is the usual case.) If you say "Gemma et al." to mean all the authors of the paper, then it is plural.




Gemma et. al. describes the ants of Southeast Asia.



But note: Gemma et. al. have never actually been to Southeast Asia.







share|improve this answer




























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    I'm going out on a limb here and making a wild guess. "Academia" is too broad. Some fields may use one more often than another, but I really doubt that it goes much beyond a single author and how he/she is thinking at the moment. I think you will find wide variety of usage even in the same field.



    However, I'll go out even further on the limb and suggest both a reason for this and what I consider a sensible way to write.



    Sometimes you want to refer specifically to a particular paper and your phrasing or context makes that clear. Whether the paper has multiple authors or not isn't relevant. The paper is it and it is singular.



    However, sometimes you want to refer more generally to the work of an author or a group of authors, of which a particular paper is only an instance. In such cases it is entirely natural to use singular or plural depending on the number of authors.



    But it is a bit more complicated. You could, in fact, even refer to the work of a particular lab (in general) independent of its members, in which case, it is, again, singular (in the US, at least - see below), depending on your overall phrasing and context.



    There is, I've noticed, a per-country convention in some of this. In the US, if I refer to the work of, for example, Google, I would use the singular (Google has produced...). But in the UK an organization is considered to be plural (Google have produced...). This same convention would naturally be applied to a lab considered as an organization.



    So, my conclusion is, don't look for any consistency for Academia. But try to make clear in your writing whether you are referring to a particular paper (singular) or to the work, more generally, of its authors (varies).






    share|improve this answer





















      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "415"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f121769%2fis-a-citation-typically-considered-plural-or-singular-in-academia%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      2
      down vote













      If you say "Gemma et al." to mean the paper, then it is singular. (This is the usual case.) If you say "Gemma et al." to mean all the authors of the paper, then it is plural.




      Gemma et. al. describes the ants of Southeast Asia.



      But note: Gemma et. al. have never actually been to Southeast Asia.







      share|improve this answer

























        up vote
        2
        down vote













        If you say "Gemma et al." to mean the paper, then it is singular. (This is the usual case.) If you say "Gemma et al." to mean all the authors of the paper, then it is plural.




        Gemma et. al. describes the ants of Southeast Asia.



        But note: Gemma et. al. have never actually been to Southeast Asia.







        share|improve this answer























          up vote
          2
          down vote










          up vote
          2
          down vote









          If you say "Gemma et al." to mean the paper, then it is singular. (This is the usual case.) If you say "Gemma et al." to mean all the authors of the paper, then it is plural.




          Gemma et. al. describes the ants of Southeast Asia.



          But note: Gemma et. al. have never actually been to Southeast Asia.







          share|improve this answer












          If you say "Gemma et al." to mean the paper, then it is singular. (This is the usual case.) If you say "Gemma et al." to mean all the authors of the paper, then it is plural.




          Gemma et. al. describes the ants of Southeast Asia.



          But note: Gemma et. al. have never actually been to Southeast Asia.








          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 4 hours ago









          GEdgar

          10.1k62138




          10.1k62138






















              up vote
              2
              down vote













              I'm going out on a limb here and making a wild guess. "Academia" is too broad. Some fields may use one more often than another, but I really doubt that it goes much beyond a single author and how he/she is thinking at the moment. I think you will find wide variety of usage even in the same field.



              However, I'll go out even further on the limb and suggest both a reason for this and what I consider a sensible way to write.



              Sometimes you want to refer specifically to a particular paper and your phrasing or context makes that clear. Whether the paper has multiple authors or not isn't relevant. The paper is it and it is singular.



              However, sometimes you want to refer more generally to the work of an author or a group of authors, of which a particular paper is only an instance. In such cases it is entirely natural to use singular or plural depending on the number of authors.



              But it is a bit more complicated. You could, in fact, even refer to the work of a particular lab (in general) independent of its members, in which case, it is, again, singular (in the US, at least - see below), depending on your overall phrasing and context.



              There is, I've noticed, a per-country convention in some of this. In the US, if I refer to the work of, for example, Google, I would use the singular (Google has produced...). But in the UK an organization is considered to be plural (Google have produced...). This same convention would naturally be applied to a lab considered as an organization.



              So, my conclusion is, don't look for any consistency for Academia. But try to make clear in your writing whether you are referring to a particular paper (singular) or to the work, more generally, of its authors (varies).






              share|improve this answer

























                up vote
                2
                down vote













                I'm going out on a limb here and making a wild guess. "Academia" is too broad. Some fields may use one more often than another, but I really doubt that it goes much beyond a single author and how he/she is thinking at the moment. I think you will find wide variety of usage even in the same field.



                However, I'll go out even further on the limb and suggest both a reason for this and what I consider a sensible way to write.



                Sometimes you want to refer specifically to a particular paper and your phrasing or context makes that clear. Whether the paper has multiple authors or not isn't relevant. The paper is it and it is singular.



                However, sometimes you want to refer more generally to the work of an author or a group of authors, of which a particular paper is only an instance. In such cases it is entirely natural to use singular or plural depending on the number of authors.



                But it is a bit more complicated. You could, in fact, even refer to the work of a particular lab (in general) independent of its members, in which case, it is, again, singular (in the US, at least - see below), depending on your overall phrasing and context.



                There is, I've noticed, a per-country convention in some of this. In the US, if I refer to the work of, for example, Google, I would use the singular (Google has produced...). But in the UK an organization is considered to be plural (Google have produced...). This same convention would naturally be applied to a lab considered as an organization.



                So, my conclusion is, don't look for any consistency for Academia. But try to make clear in your writing whether you are referring to a particular paper (singular) or to the work, more generally, of its authors (varies).






                share|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote









                  I'm going out on a limb here and making a wild guess. "Academia" is too broad. Some fields may use one more often than another, but I really doubt that it goes much beyond a single author and how he/she is thinking at the moment. I think you will find wide variety of usage even in the same field.



                  However, I'll go out even further on the limb and suggest both a reason for this and what I consider a sensible way to write.



                  Sometimes you want to refer specifically to a particular paper and your phrasing or context makes that clear. Whether the paper has multiple authors or not isn't relevant. The paper is it and it is singular.



                  However, sometimes you want to refer more generally to the work of an author or a group of authors, of which a particular paper is only an instance. In such cases it is entirely natural to use singular or plural depending on the number of authors.



                  But it is a bit more complicated. You could, in fact, even refer to the work of a particular lab (in general) independent of its members, in which case, it is, again, singular (in the US, at least - see below), depending on your overall phrasing and context.



                  There is, I've noticed, a per-country convention in some of this. In the US, if I refer to the work of, for example, Google, I would use the singular (Google has produced...). But in the UK an organization is considered to be plural (Google have produced...). This same convention would naturally be applied to a lab considered as an organization.



                  So, my conclusion is, don't look for any consistency for Academia. But try to make clear in your writing whether you are referring to a particular paper (singular) or to the work, more generally, of its authors (varies).






                  share|improve this answer












                  I'm going out on a limb here and making a wild guess. "Academia" is too broad. Some fields may use one more often than another, but I really doubt that it goes much beyond a single author and how he/she is thinking at the moment. I think you will find wide variety of usage even in the same field.



                  However, I'll go out even further on the limb and suggest both a reason for this and what I consider a sensible way to write.



                  Sometimes you want to refer specifically to a particular paper and your phrasing or context makes that clear. Whether the paper has multiple authors or not isn't relevant. The paper is it and it is singular.



                  However, sometimes you want to refer more generally to the work of an author or a group of authors, of which a particular paper is only an instance. In such cases it is entirely natural to use singular or plural depending on the number of authors.



                  But it is a bit more complicated. You could, in fact, even refer to the work of a particular lab (in general) independent of its members, in which case, it is, again, singular (in the US, at least - see below), depending on your overall phrasing and context.



                  There is, I've noticed, a per-country convention in some of this. In the US, if I refer to the work of, for example, Google, I would use the singular (Google has produced...). But in the UK an organization is considered to be plural (Google have produced...). This same convention would naturally be applied to a lab considered as an organization.



                  So, my conclusion is, don't look for any consistency for Academia. But try to make clear in your writing whether you are referring to a particular paper (singular) or to the work, more generally, of its authors (varies).







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 4 hours ago









                  Buffy

                  34.4k7107177




                  34.4k7107177






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f121769%2fis-a-citation-typically-considered-plural-or-singular-in-academia%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Михайлов, Христо

                      Гороховецкий артиллерийский полигон

                      Центральная группа войск