and comments: ‘I could be a Social Affairs Correspondent. Hang on, that’s not a job title: he’s a Social affairs correspondent. Friendly, adulterous and communicative, in that order?’
It’s a fair point. Capitalization seems to be becoming random, yet the dozen or so grammar sites I’ve checked this morning agree that a job title relating to a specific person and role, following the person’s name and identifying the capacity is which that person is operating in the immediate circumstances (e.g., John Cross, Features Editor), should be capitalized, whereas the term used to describe a working role more broadly (John Cross is a features editor or John Cross is the features editor) should not.
It makes sense: this is, after all, related to the issue of common and proper nouns. In the case of the fictitious John Cross, the compound noun in John Cross is the features editor is a generic descriptor of a role, and thus a common noun; while the construction John Cross, Features Editor presents Features Editor as a formal job title and a proper noun.
In today’s example, Michael Buchanan is writing not in his private capacity, but specifically in his role as Social Affairs Correspondent for BBC News, and so should use capitals. If the byline offered a descriptor instead of a formal job title (Michael Buchanan is a/the social affairs correspondent for BBC News), capitals would not be appropriate.
It’s a fair point. Capitalization seems to be becoming random, yet the dozen or so grammar sites I’ve checked this morning agree that a job title relating to a specific person and role, following the person’s name and identifying the capacity is which that person is operating in the immediate circumstances (e.g., John Cross, Features Editor), should be capitalized, whereas the term used to describe a working role more broadly (John Cross is a features editor or John Cross is the features editor) should not.
It makes sense: this is, after all, related to the issue of common and proper nouns. In the case of the fictitious John Cross, the compound noun in John Cross is the features editor is a generic descriptor of a role, and thus a common noun; while the construction John Cross, Features Editor presents Features Editor as a formal job title and a proper noun.
In today’s example, Michael Buchanan is writing not in his private capacity, but specifically in his role as Social Affairs Correspondent for BBC News, and so should use capitals. If the byline offered a descriptor instead of a formal job title (Michael Buchanan is a/the social affairs correspondent for BBC News), capitals would not be appropriate.
This is something that a spell-checker cannot correct…
No comments:
Post a Comment