If I remember correctly from English class, then one should put a comma after "i.e.", i.e., the Latin abbreviation for id est.
But lately I've seen the comma after "i.e." dropped in books. So what is the rule or consensus here if any?
|
If I remember correctly from English class, then one should put a comma after "i.e.", i.e., the Latin abbreviation for id est. But lately I've seen the comma after "i.e." dropped in books. So what is the rule or consensus here if any? |
|||||||||
|
|
Some books & journals use American English, while some use British English. In the American style of writing, a comma is inserted before and after i.e. However, in the British style of writing, a comma is inserted before but not after i.e. |
|||
|
|
|
It seems that the use of comma is found more often in American English, and even there, it is not always required.
|
||||
|
|
|
Personally, my UK-centric view is that I would put a comma after 'that is'; that is, if I were to use the long-hand, so to speak. But I would not put a comma after 'id est'; i.e. although it may seem 'correct', I feel it impedes understanding, rather than aiding it. |
|||
|
|
|
As indicated in The Elements of Style, abbreviations are "parenthetic and should be punctuated accordingly". It also says "never omit one comma and leave the other". For me, this means if you put a comma before "i.e.", there has to be another comma after it. I don't think every rule in The Elements of Style is critical or mandatory to proper writing, but it is safe and trouble-free to follow most of them. |
|||||||||
|
|
I have been doing technical writing for over 30 years and have always separated the substitution with a comma. For some years, printers dropped the comma to save ink and space. I refuse to accept cost as a reason to override logic and clarity. |
|||
|
|