TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I should have given a little more context to my question "Is the word figure
singular or plural in-text
when describing alphabetically labeled divisions of a single numbered
figure? EXAMPLES *Fig. 12 (a), (b), and (c) shows* OR Figs. 12 *(a),
(b), and (c) show "
I am talking about academic engineering journal articles where the
abreviation "Fig." is the norm with or without parentheses.
*"This definition (6) may also be useful to attenuate small-scale
discontinuities or to take into account some geometrical features of the
images under study, see Figs. 3b and 3c."*
Also, it is fairly common practice to include a number of images in a single
numbered figure. This is probably a space saving device given the size
limitations of scientific articles. For example, there are three images in
Fig. 4 here:
*Fig. 4. (a)* Example of a realization of a CPC Q' (gray levels) with ð2Þ '
0:16—see (12) about the role of ð2Þ.* (b)* Estimated (log)histograms of
normalized wavelet coefficients at various octaves j: they are all clearly
non-Gaussian (Gaussian ) parabola).* (c) *Power law spectrum of Q'ðxÞ as a
function of k ¼ kkk over two decades: the observed slope is prescribed by
the choice of ð2Þ.* [some formatting may be lost. Bolding added]*
There does not seem to be any difference between refering to one figure
containing multiple images and separately numbered figures. Logically, there
should be a difference. Here are some text samples from different published
- *It can also be seen, by comparing Figs. 5(b) and 6(a),*
- *in Figs. 4 (a)–(c).
- *Typical analytical models are shown in Figs. 4 and 5. Some of the
failure mode shapes are shown in Fig. 6.*
I like Geoff's solution here. I have just abbreviated the word Figure.
"Fig. 12 (a, b, and c) shows"
We also know that published papers don't always show best practices, but I
would like to give guidelines to my graduate engineering students.
On 11/20/07, Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca> wrote:
> Adam Turner wondered: <<Is the word figure singular or plural in-text
> when describing alphabetically labeled divisions of a single numbered
> figure? EXAMPLES *Fig. 12 (a), (b), and (c) shows* OR Figs. 12 *(a),
> (b), and (c) show *>>
> Most style guides I've seen (specifically, the author guidelines
> published online by science journals) do not allow the abbreviation
> of "Figure" outside of brackets*, and few seem to use the brackets
> for the sub-figures. So I'd right this (and write this <grin>) as
> "Figure 12 shows". Note that there's only one figure, not three.
> * Nor do they permit the use of most abbreviations that require
> punctuation outside of brackets. This is for a very good reason: the
> period introduces needless punctuation and thus, creates needless
> complexity, in the sentence. Occasionally, it even makes the sentence
> significantly more difficult to parse.
> If you need the three letters (i.e., they are only three of many more
> sub-figures), try: "Figure 12 (a, b, and c) shows". Better still,
> don't cite more than one sub-figure when the meaning is only present
> in one. For example: "Figure 12a shows X, [Figure] 12b shows Y, and
> [Figure] 12c shows Z." Whether to repeat the word "Figure" is a style
> decision, but my take on this is that the further apart each number,
> the more useful the repetition becomes.
> Also note (as it's not a trivial point) that using the full word only
> adds two characters to the total length once you delete the period,
> so it's not like the abbreviation offers any advantage over the
> unabbreviated form. Engineers and scientists love their abbreviations
> far too well, and we sometimes fall into the trap of adopting their
> bad habits.
> -- Geoff Hart
> ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca / geoffhart -at- mac -dot- com
> ***Now available*** _Effective onscreen editing_
"If we knew what we were doing, we wouldn't call it research."
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-