Punctuate Outside Quotation Marks

[nemorathwald]

Yes! Slate discusses the trend toward what's called "logical punctuation".

Proofreaders for convention publications tend to call me out on this, but I hold fast:

The computer programmers of the world have presented new legislation to the Emperor of English decreeing-- should his highness choose not to veto it-- that ending commas always fall outside the end quote. It's stuck in legislative committee, but look out for it.

When I put punctuation outside quote marks, it is not by accident. It took years of practice to break my habit of putting a period before an end-quote. Now I consistently put them at the end.

The Chicago Manual of Style is wrong. Strunk and White is wrong. Tradition is wrong. Placing punctuation inside the quote mark often alters the original quotation where no such punctuation occurred. So long as the concluding mark is correct for your containing sentence, placing it outside the quote is always correct, even when that mark appeared in the original quote, because it will accurately quote the original passage, title, or utterance up to just before that mark.

There are several things wrong with the English language (such as gender-neutral pronouns) for which the only solutions are unworkably clumsy. This one is easy.

Comments

[crywolf.livejournal.com]

As a pedantic proofreader, I pretty much agree. Punctuation goes inside the quotes if it's part of what you're quoting (especially when quoting speech, of course). Otherwise, it always looks like it messes up the phrase, or whatever is being quoted.

I think text is a lot less formal than it used to be, and now tends to more resemble how the language is spoken. Although based on that, a lot of people speak with mouths full of marbles.