“Figure 1 and 2” or “Figures 1 and 2”
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to know which one of the following is correct:
- Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
- Figure 1 and 2 indicate that...
- Figure 1 and 2 indicates that...
- other possibilities?
grammatical-number
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to know which one of the following is correct:
- Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
- Figure 1 and 2 indicate that...
- Figure 1 and 2 indicates that...
- other possibilities?
grammatical-number
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to know which one of the following is correct:
- Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
- Figure 1 and 2 indicate that...
- Figure 1 and 2 indicates that...
- other possibilities?
grammatical-number
I would like to know which one of the following is correct:
- Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
- Figure 1 and 2 indicate that...
- Figure 1 and 2 indicates that...
- other possibilities?
grammatical-number
grammatical-number
edited Nov 14 '13 at 13:12
mplungjan
27.4k371108
27.4k371108
asked Nov 14 '13 at 12:49
SoftTimur
296159
296159
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Try substituting your terms for others while keeping the grammar, and it'll be a bit more natural.
1. Cats Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
2. Cat Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
3. Cat Bob and Jim coughs up hair balls
I'm pretty sure you should be using the plural form (Figures, Cats) for the noun. I'm not so sure about the verb (indicate, cough), but using the singular seems to imply that it's something that happens in general, while the plural is more active. I'd go with 1 myself.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The correct is
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that
We do not use "Figures" because the word is not used as common noun but as a proper noun with identifier 1 and 2.
So it is basically "Figure 1 and Figure 2"; to reduce wordings we compact it as "Figure 1 and 2". Capitalization of "F" is required.
Since subject is plural the verb would be "indicate".
Though, some journals accept and prefer as Figures 1 and 2, so in such case, we edit as "Figures 1 and 2 indicate". "Figures 1-4 indicate"
Best Sci-Edit Publications (sci-edit.net)
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I agree with Sci-Edit Publications. Bob and Jim (as per xpdite's examples) are names/titles and not positions (e.g., 1 and 2), hence their usage is different. Consider the collections in the attached image. You can refer to an item in a collection either by its name/title or its position. The names/titles of figures in a text could be lengthy or identical, hence are preferably identified by their position.
In my opinion, the following is correct, depending on the intended usage:
Bob and Jim cough up hair...
Cat 1 and Cat 2 cough up hair...
Cat 1 and 2 cough up hair... (short form)
Similarly:
- The age chart and population plot indicate that...
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that... (short form)
Notice the use of "Cat" and "Figure" instead of "cat" and "figure".
And if this is still unconvincing, consider the sentence: January 1 and 2 are public holidays.
In analytics, the result relies on taking all relevant information and combining. So the "analysis" of a large amount of information, figures, and charts leads to meaningful findings. Referring to Project-Process-Management. Example: The analysis of figure one and two indicates....
– FrankMK
Nov 30 '17 at 9:25
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If you aren't writing for Sci-Edit Publications, you may be interested in how other publications handle in-text references to multiple numbered figures (illustrations). As a freelance copy editor, I have worked for many book publishers with differing preferences on such things as whether to capitalize the word figure in an in-text cross reference, whether to identify individual figures within a chapter as (for example) Figure 1-1 or Figure 1.1, and whether to render the word figure in the caption itself as initial-cap F and lowercase igure or as large-cap F and small-cap IGURE.
In a similar vein, some publications insist on repeating the word in in-text references to multiple figures (as in "see Figure 2-6 and Figure 2-7"), while others approve of using plural figures in such situations (as in "see figures 12 and 13"). But I have never worked for a publisher that insisted on using singular Figure as a lead-in to a reference to multiple figure numbers (as in "see Figure 4.6 and 4.7").
The Chicago Manual of Style, sixteenth edition (2010) has a fairly brief discussion of in-text cross references, which includes these relevant remarks:
3.9 Text references in numbered illustrations. If there are more than a handful of illustrations in a work, they normally beat numbers [cross reference to a discussion of working numbers for unnumbered illustrations omitted], and all text references to them should be by the numbers: "as figure 1 shows...," "compare figures 4 and 5." ... In text, the word figure is typically set roman, lowercased, and spelled out except in parenthetical references ("fig. 10").
Evidently, Chicago is not swayed by the theory that "Figure 1" is a proper name, rather than a simple number-associated designation.
Most (but not all) of the U.S. publishers I've worked with follow Chicago in lowercasing the word figure in cross references. On the other hand, many (and perhaps most) break with Chicago in spelling out figure even in parenthetical references. I should note that most of my work is in mainstream nonfiction and college textbook publishing, rather than in strictly scientific publishing, that work experience may skew my impression of industry standards somewhat.
If you are writing or editing for a mainstream U.S. publisher, your primary authority for handling in-text references will be the publisher's house style. If it doesn't have a rule on this point (which is unlikely) and your text isn't governed by a specialty style such as MLA, you are free to act on your own preferences. On this point of style, as on most others, Chicago's guidelines are generally reasonable and consistent, and they are widely respected in U.S. publishing. I would be more inclined to follow its recommendations than those of a random publisher that happens to be very enthusiastic—not to say proselytical—about the idiosyncratic house style that it has adopted.
To sum up, if you choose to follow Chicago to the letter, you would express your example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and figure 2 indicate that...
On the other hand, if you establish a rule to spell Figure (when used to indicate numbered illustrations) with an initial-cap F throughout your book, but elect to follow Chicago in all other respects, you would express you example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Either way, the figures are plural and the verb indicate is plural, too.
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Try substituting your terms for others while keeping the grammar, and it'll be a bit more natural.
1. Cats Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
2. Cat Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
3. Cat Bob and Jim coughs up hair balls
I'm pretty sure you should be using the plural form (Figures, Cats) for the noun. I'm not so sure about the verb (indicate, cough), but using the singular seems to imply that it's something that happens in general, while the plural is more active. I'd go with 1 myself.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Try substituting your terms for others while keeping the grammar, and it'll be a bit more natural.
1. Cats Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
2. Cat Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
3. Cat Bob and Jim coughs up hair balls
I'm pretty sure you should be using the plural form (Figures, Cats) for the noun. I'm not so sure about the verb (indicate, cough), but using the singular seems to imply that it's something that happens in general, while the plural is more active. I'd go with 1 myself.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Try substituting your terms for others while keeping the grammar, and it'll be a bit more natural.
1. Cats Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
2. Cat Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
3. Cat Bob and Jim coughs up hair balls
I'm pretty sure you should be using the plural form (Figures, Cats) for the noun. I'm not so sure about the verb (indicate, cough), but using the singular seems to imply that it's something that happens in general, while the plural is more active. I'd go with 1 myself.
Try substituting your terms for others while keeping the grammar, and it'll be a bit more natural.
1. Cats Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
2. Cat Bob and Jim cough up hair balls
3. Cat Bob and Jim coughs up hair balls
I'm pretty sure you should be using the plural form (Figures, Cats) for the noun. I'm not so sure about the verb (indicate, cough), but using the singular seems to imply that it's something that happens in general, while the plural is more active. I'd go with 1 myself.
answered Nov 14 '13 at 13:16
xpdite
561
561
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The correct is
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that
We do not use "Figures" because the word is not used as common noun but as a proper noun with identifier 1 and 2.
So it is basically "Figure 1 and Figure 2"; to reduce wordings we compact it as "Figure 1 and 2". Capitalization of "F" is required.
Since subject is plural the verb would be "indicate".
Though, some journals accept and prefer as Figures 1 and 2, so in such case, we edit as "Figures 1 and 2 indicate". "Figures 1-4 indicate"
Best Sci-Edit Publications (sci-edit.net)
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The correct is
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that
We do not use "Figures" because the word is not used as common noun but as a proper noun with identifier 1 and 2.
So it is basically "Figure 1 and Figure 2"; to reduce wordings we compact it as "Figure 1 and 2". Capitalization of "F" is required.
Since subject is plural the verb would be "indicate".
Though, some journals accept and prefer as Figures 1 and 2, so in such case, we edit as "Figures 1 and 2 indicate". "Figures 1-4 indicate"
Best Sci-Edit Publications (sci-edit.net)
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
The correct is
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that
We do not use "Figures" because the word is not used as common noun but as a proper noun with identifier 1 and 2.
So it is basically "Figure 1 and Figure 2"; to reduce wordings we compact it as "Figure 1 and 2". Capitalization of "F" is required.
Since subject is plural the verb would be "indicate".
Though, some journals accept and prefer as Figures 1 and 2, so in such case, we edit as "Figures 1 and 2 indicate". "Figures 1-4 indicate"
Best Sci-Edit Publications (sci-edit.net)
The correct is
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that
We do not use "Figures" because the word is not used as common noun but as a proper noun with identifier 1 and 2.
So it is basically "Figure 1 and Figure 2"; to reduce wordings we compact it as "Figure 1 and 2". Capitalization of "F" is required.
Since subject is plural the verb would be "indicate".
Though, some journals accept and prefer as Figures 1 and 2, so in such case, we edit as "Figures 1 and 2 indicate". "Figures 1-4 indicate"
Best Sci-Edit Publications (sci-edit.net)
edited 5 mins ago
answered Oct 8 '15 at 7:06
Sci-Edit Publications
112
112
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I agree with Sci-Edit Publications. Bob and Jim (as per xpdite's examples) are names/titles and not positions (e.g., 1 and 2), hence their usage is different. Consider the collections in the attached image. You can refer to an item in a collection either by its name/title or its position. The names/titles of figures in a text could be lengthy or identical, hence are preferably identified by their position.
In my opinion, the following is correct, depending on the intended usage:
Bob and Jim cough up hair...
Cat 1 and Cat 2 cough up hair...
Cat 1 and 2 cough up hair... (short form)
Similarly:
- The age chart and population plot indicate that...
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that... (short form)
Notice the use of "Cat" and "Figure" instead of "cat" and "figure".
And if this is still unconvincing, consider the sentence: January 1 and 2 are public holidays.
In analytics, the result relies on taking all relevant information and combining. So the "analysis" of a large amount of information, figures, and charts leads to meaningful findings. Referring to Project-Process-Management. Example: The analysis of figure one and two indicates....
– FrankMK
Nov 30 '17 at 9:25
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I agree with Sci-Edit Publications. Bob and Jim (as per xpdite's examples) are names/titles and not positions (e.g., 1 and 2), hence their usage is different. Consider the collections in the attached image. You can refer to an item in a collection either by its name/title or its position. The names/titles of figures in a text could be lengthy or identical, hence are preferably identified by their position.
In my opinion, the following is correct, depending on the intended usage:
Bob and Jim cough up hair...
Cat 1 and Cat 2 cough up hair...
Cat 1 and 2 cough up hair... (short form)
Similarly:
- The age chart and population plot indicate that...
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that... (short form)
Notice the use of "Cat" and "Figure" instead of "cat" and "figure".
And if this is still unconvincing, consider the sentence: January 1 and 2 are public holidays.
In analytics, the result relies on taking all relevant information and combining. So the "analysis" of a large amount of information, figures, and charts leads to meaningful findings. Referring to Project-Process-Management. Example: The analysis of figure one and two indicates....
– FrankMK
Nov 30 '17 at 9:25
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I agree with Sci-Edit Publications. Bob and Jim (as per xpdite's examples) are names/titles and not positions (e.g., 1 and 2), hence their usage is different. Consider the collections in the attached image. You can refer to an item in a collection either by its name/title or its position. The names/titles of figures in a text could be lengthy or identical, hence are preferably identified by their position.
In my opinion, the following is correct, depending on the intended usage:
Bob and Jim cough up hair...
Cat 1 and Cat 2 cough up hair...
Cat 1 and 2 cough up hair... (short form)
Similarly:
- The age chart and population plot indicate that...
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that... (short form)
Notice the use of "Cat" and "Figure" instead of "cat" and "figure".
And if this is still unconvincing, consider the sentence: January 1 and 2 are public holidays.
I agree with Sci-Edit Publications. Bob and Jim (as per xpdite's examples) are names/titles and not positions (e.g., 1 and 2), hence their usage is different. Consider the collections in the attached image. You can refer to an item in a collection either by its name/title or its position. The names/titles of figures in a text could be lengthy or identical, hence are preferably identified by their position.
In my opinion, the following is correct, depending on the intended usage:
Bob and Jim cough up hair...
Cat 1 and Cat 2 cough up hair...
Cat 1 and 2 cough up hair... (short form)
Similarly:
- The age chart and population plot indicate that...
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Figure 1 and 2 indicate that... (short form)
Notice the use of "Cat" and "Figure" instead of "cat" and "figure".
And if this is still unconvincing, consider the sentence: January 1 and 2 are public holidays.
edited Nov 30 '17 at 7:36
answered Nov 30 '17 at 4:00
amatek
11
11
In analytics, the result relies on taking all relevant information and combining. So the "analysis" of a large amount of information, figures, and charts leads to meaningful findings. Referring to Project-Process-Management. Example: The analysis of figure one and two indicates....
– FrankMK
Nov 30 '17 at 9:25
add a comment |
In analytics, the result relies on taking all relevant information and combining. So the "analysis" of a large amount of information, figures, and charts leads to meaningful findings. Referring to Project-Process-Management. Example: The analysis of figure one and two indicates....
– FrankMK
Nov 30 '17 at 9:25
In analytics, the result relies on taking all relevant information and combining. So the "analysis" of a large amount of information, figures, and charts leads to meaningful findings. Referring to Project-Process-Management. Example: The analysis of figure one and two indicates....
– FrankMK
Nov 30 '17 at 9:25
In analytics, the result relies on taking all relevant information and combining. So the "analysis" of a large amount of information, figures, and charts leads to meaningful findings. Referring to Project-Process-Management. Example: The analysis of figure one and two indicates....
– FrankMK
Nov 30 '17 at 9:25
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If you aren't writing for Sci-Edit Publications, you may be interested in how other publications handle in-text references to multiple numbered figures (illustrations). As a freelance copy editor, I have worked for many book publishers with differing preferences on such things as whether to capitalize the word figure in an in-text cross reference, whether to identify individual figures within a chapter as (for example) Figure 1-1 or Figure 1.1, and whether to render the word figure in the caption itself as initial-cap F and lowercase igure or as large-cap F and small-cap IGURE.
In a similar vein, some publications insist on repeating the word in in-text references to multiple figures (as in "see Figure 2-6 and Figure 2-7"), while others approve of using plural figures in such situations (as in "see figures 12 and 13"). But I have never worked for a publisher that insisted on using singular Figure as a lead-in to a reference to multiple figure numbers (as in "see Figure 4.6 and 4.7").
The Chicago Manual of Style, sixteenth edition (2010) has a fairly brief discussion of in-text cross references, which includes these relevant remarks:
3.9 Text references in numbered illustrations. If there are more than a handful of illustrations in a work, they normally beat numbers [cross reference to a discussion of working numbers for unnumbered illustrations omitted], and all text references to them should be by the numbers: "as figure 1 shows...," "compare figures 4 and 5." ... In text, the word figure is typically set roman, lowercased, and spelled out except in parenthetical references ("fig. 10").
Evidently, Chicago is not swayed by the theory that "Figure 1" is a proper name, rather than a simple number-associated designation.
Most (but not all) of the U.S. publishers I've worked with follow Chicago in lowercasing the word figure in cross references. On the other hand, many (and perhaps most) break with Chicago in spelling out figure even in parenthetical references. I should note that most of my work is in mainstream nonfiction and college textbook publishing, rather than in strictly scientific publishing, that work experience may skew my impression of industry standards somewhat.
If you are writing or editing for a mainstream U.S. publisher, your primary authority for handling in-text references will be the publisher's house style. If it doesn't have a rule on this point (which is unlikely) and your text isn't governed by a specialty style such as MLA, you are free to act on your own preferences. On this point of style, as on most others, Chicago's guidelines are generally reasonable and consistent, and they are widely respected in U.S. publishing. I would be more inclined to follow its recommendations than those of a random publisher that happens to be very enthusiastic—not to say proselytical—about the idiosyncratic house style that it has adopted.
To sum up, if you choose to follow Chicago to the letter, you would express your example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and figure 2 indicate that...
On the other hand, if you establish a rule to spell Figure (when used to indicate numbered illustrations) with an initial-cap F throughout your book, but elect to follow Chicago in all other respects, you would express you example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Either way, the figures are plural and the verb indicate is plural, too.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If you aren't writing for Sci-Edit Publications, you may be interested in how other publications handle in-text references to multiple numbered figures (illustrations). As a freelance copy editor, I have worked for many book publishers with differing preferences on such things as whether to capitalize the word figure in an in-text cross reference, whether to identify individual figures within a chapter as (for example) Figure 1-1 or Figure 1.1, and whether to render the word figure in the caption itself as initial-cap F and lowercase igure or as large-cap F and small-cap IGURE.
In a similar vein, some publications insist on repeating the word in in-text references to multiple figures (as in "see Figure 2-6 and Figure 2-7"), while others approve of using plural figures in such situations (as in "see figures 12 and 13"). But I have never worked for a publisher that insisted on using singular Figure as a lead-in to a reference to multiple figure numbers (as in "see Figure 4.6 and 4.7").
The Chicago Manual of Style, sixteenth edition (2010) has a fairly brief discussion of in-text cross references, which includes these relevant remarks:
3.9 Text references in numbered illustrations. If there are more than a handful of illustrations in a work, they normally beat numbers [cross reference to a discussion of working numbers for unnumbered illustrations omitted], and all text references to them should be by the numbers: "as figure 1 shows...," "compare figures 4 and 5." ... In text, the word figure is typically set roman, lowercased, and spelled out except in parenthetical references ("fig. 10").
Evidently, Chicago is not swayed by the theory that "Figure 1" is a proper name, rather than a simple number-associated designation.
Most (but not all) of the U.S. publishers I've worked with follow Chicago in lowercasing the word figure in cross references. On the other hand, many (and perhaps most) break with Chicago in spelling out figure even in parenthetical references. I should note that most of my work is in mainstream nonfiction and college textbook publishing, rather than in strictly scientific publishing, that work experience may skew my impression of industry standards somewhat.
If you are writing or editing for a mainstream U.S. publisher, your primary authority for handling in-text references will be the publisher's house style. If it doesn't have a rule on this point (which is unlikely) and your text isn't governed by a specialty style such as MLA, you are free to act on your own preferences. On this point of style, as on most others, Chicago's guidelines are generally reasonable and consistent, and they are widely respected in U.S. publishing. I would be more inclined to follow its recommendations than those of a random publisher that happens to be very enthusiastic—not to say proselytical—about the idiosyncratic house style that it has adopted.
To sum up, if you choose to follow Chicago to the letter, you would express your example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and figure 2 indicate that...
On the other hand, if you establish a rule to spell Figure (when used to indicate numbered illustrations) with an initial-cap F throughout your book, but elect to follow Chicago in all other respects, you would express you example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Either way, the figures are plural and the verb indicate is plural, too.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
If you aren't writing for Sci-Edit Publications, you may be interested in how other publications handle in-text references to multiple numbered figures (illustrations). As a freelance copy editor, I have worked for many book publishers with differing preferences on such things as whether to capitalize the word figure in an in-text cross reference, whether to identify individual figures within a chapter as (for example) Figure 1-1 or Figure 1.1, and whether to render the word figure in the caption itself as initial-cap F and lowercase igure or as large-cap F and small-cap IGURE.
In a similar vein, some publications insist on repeating the word in in-text references to multiple figures (as in "see Figure 2-6 and Figure 2-7"), while others approve of using plural figures in such situations (as in "see figures 12 and 13"). But I have never worked for a publisher that insisted on using singular Figure as a lead-in to a reference to multiple figure numbers (as in "see Figure 4.6 and 4.7").
The Chicago Manual of Style, sixteenth edition (2010) has a fairly brief discussion of in-text cross references, which includes these relevant remarks:
3.9 Text references in numbered illustrations. If there are more than a handful of illustrations in a work, they normally beat numbers [cross reference to a discussion of working numbers for unnumbered illustrations omitted], and all text references to them should be by the numbers: "as figure 1 shows...," "compare figures 4 and 5." ... In text, the word figure is typically set roman, lowercased, and spelled out except in parenthetical references ("fig. 10").
Evidently, Chicago is not swayed by the theory that "Figure 1" is a proper name, rather than a simple number-associated designation.
Most (but not all) of the U.S. publishers I've worked with follow Chicago in lowercasing the word figure in cross references. On the other hand, many (and perhaps most) break with Chicago in spelling out figure even in parenthetical references. I should note that most of my work is in mainstream nonfiction and college textbook publishing, rather than in strictly scientific publishing, that work experience may skew my impression of industry standards somewhat.
If you are writing or editing for a mainstream U.S. publisher, your primary authority for handling in-text references will be the publisher's house style. If it doesn't have a rule on this point (which is unlikely) and your text isn't governed by a specialty style such as MLA, you are free to act on your own preferences. On this point of style, as on most others, Chicago's guidelines are generally reasonable and consistent, and they are widely respected in U.S. publishing. I would be more inclined to follow its recommendations than those of a random publisher that happens to be very enthusiastic—not to say proselytical—about the idiosyncratic house style that it has adopted.
To sum up, if you choose to follow Chicago to the letter, you would express your example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and figure 2 indicate that...
On the other hand, if you establish a rule to spell Figure (when used to indicate numbered illustrations) with an initial-cap F throughout your book, but elect to follow Chicago in all other respects, you would express you example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Either way, the figures are plural and the verb indicate is plural, too.
If you aren't writing for Sci-Edit Publications, you may be interested in how other publications handle in-text references to multiple numbered figures (illustrations). As a freelance copy editor, I have worked for many book publishers with differing preferences on such things as whether to capitalize the word figure in an in-text cross reference, whether to identify individual figures within a chapter as (for example) Figure 1-1 or Figure 1.1, and whether to render the word figure in the caption itself as initial-cap F and lowercase igure or as large-cap F and small-cap IGURE.
In a similar vein, some publications insist on repeating the word in in-text references to multiple figures (as in "see Figure 2-6 and Figure 2-7"), while others approve of using plural figures in such situations (as in "see figures 12 and 13"). But I have never worked for a publisher that insisted on using singular Figure as a lead-in to a reference to multiple figure numbers (as in "see Figure 4.6 and 4.7").
The Chicago Manual of Style, sixteenth edition (2010) has a fairly brief discussion of in-text cross references, which includes these relevant remarks:
3.9 Text references in numbered illustrations. If there are more than a handful of illustrations in a work, they normally beat numbers [cross reference to a discussion of working numbers for unnumbered illustrations omitted], and all text references to them should be by the numbers: "as figure 1 shows...," "compare figures 4 and 5." ... In text, the word figure is typically set roman, lowercased, and spelled out except in parenthetical references ("fig. 10").
Evidently, Chicago is not swayed by the theory that "Figure 1" is a proper name, rather than a simple number-associated designation.
Most (but not all) of the U.S. publishers I've worked with follow Chicago in lowercasing the word figure in cross references. On the other hand, many (and perhaps most) break with Chicago in spelling out figure even in parenthetical references. I should note that most of my work is in mainstream nonfiction and college textbook publishing, rather than in strictly scientific publishing, that work experience may skew my impression of industry standards somewhat.
If you are writing or editing for a mainstream U.S. publisher, your primary authority for handling in-text references will be the publisher's house style. If it doesn't have a rule on this point (which is unlikely) and your text isn't governed by a specialty style such as MLA, you are free to act on your own preferences. On this point of style, as on most others, Chicago's guidelines are generally reasonable and consistent, and they are widely respected in U.S. publishing. I would be more inclined to follow its recommendations than those of a random publisher that happens to be very enthusiastic—not to say proselytical—about the idiosyncratic house style that it has adopted.
To sum up, if you choose to follow Chicago to the letter, you would express your example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and figure 2 indicate that...
On the other hand, if you establish a rule to spell Figure (when used to indicate numbered illustrations) with an initial-cap F throughout your book, but elect to follow Chicago in all other respects, you would express you example as
Figures 1 and 2 indicate that...
or
Figure 1 and Figure 2 indicate that...
Either way, the figures are plural and the verb indicate is plural, too.
answered Nov 30 '17 at 8:42
Sven Yargs
110k18234490
110k18234490
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage 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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f137647%2ffigure-1-and-2-or-figures-1-and-2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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