0

My article is titled, Bridge Snacks for Thought. Obviously, a play on words for "Food for Thought." Seems I should punctuate it: "Bridge Snacks" for Thought.

And, it also could be Bridge "Snacks" for Thought. Or, something else...

I should add that local bridge clubs, snacks always are served.

|improve this question
  • 2
    Why use the quotes at all? That seems to me like a big red arrow labeled "Hey, just in case you're too dense to get it, this is a joke". – StoneyB on hiatus Jul 2 '18 at 19:44
  • 1
    You're asking something completely subjective. Without more criteria, any answer could be as good as any other . . . – Jason Bassford Supports Monica Jul 2 '18 at 19:45
  • Food for Thinkin' might be more effective if the article is about "brain foods" that may enhance play performance ;) – DukeZhou Jul 2 '18 at 20:20
1

You need no quotation marks.

The lingering doubt you have is due to the rampant abuse of them seen everywhere in modern life. But you are neither quoting someone, nor defining a term of art. No quotes.

|improve this answer
  • I almost feel like we need a symbol for "air quotes" as a form of quotation marks in "quotes" – DukeZhou Jul 2 '18 at 20:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.