Well, I've looked into this, and it seems I wasn't completely correct. 
However, I also wasn't completely wrong.

On Saturday, December 28, 2002, at 05:07  AM, Aponar Kestrel wrote:

This is, however, a rule that Michael isn't making up. Forms of direct
address and nouns used as names must be capitalized. Cologne is using
"Great-Grandchild" as a name for Shampoo, not as a descriptive noun. If
she were to say "My great-grandchild is Shampoo" it would not be used 
as
a name and should not be capitalized. But if she said something like
"Great-Grandchild is becoming foolish" she would be using it as a name.

Using a noun as a form of address does _not_ mean that it is being used 
as a name.

By the Sword, Mercedes Lackey, page 53:

"This is my sword Need, Granddaughter--the sword I wore for most of my 
life."

I went to this book because I was sure to find such a reference. 
However, on the same page, it says, "She wants you all right, child." So 
here, the usage may not be consistent.

Ender's Shadow, Orson Scott Card, page 228:

"Oh, so it's Mr. Wiggin and Mr. Bean, is that it?"
"No. *Bean* is my first name."
Oh. So it's Mr. Wiggin and Who The Hell Are You."

However, the book also contains many examples of uncapitalized direct 
address, such as "sir," "commander," and various portuguese nicknames. 
The above usage appears to be for humorous effect.

The Chicago Manual of Style isn't conclusive, unfortunately. 7.28 
"Temporary, Role-Denoting Epithets" says such should not be capitalized 
when used before names, but doesn't mention how they should be treated 
when used in direct address. However, commonly accepted epithets should 
be capitalized at all times (7.29), but there's no mention of how often 
a name has to be used before it is commonly accepted.

However, at the beginning of chapter 7, Chicago says things like the 
following:

"Questions and differences of opinion arise over what constitudes a 
proper noun, other than the name of a person or a place. It is with this 
realm of uncertainty that the following rules attempt to deal."

"Experienced editors realize that no set of rules in the area of 
capitalization can be universally applied."

"Most authors, however, do not feel strongly about capitalization, and 
many are oblivious to inconsistencies in their manuscripts. The 
manuscript editor must therefore establish a logical, acceptable style 
and regularize any departures from it. The following categories and 
lists are meant to provide a helpful pattern for editors to follow. The 
editor, understanding the nature of the work, must use discretion, 
judgment, and intuition in deciding when to follow the pattern and when 
to depart from it."

It appears that the issue simply isn't as straightforward as I thought 
it was. I had always gathered that all forms of direct address should be 
capitalized along the lines of Mother and Father, but that does not 
appear to be true. Kinship names are, however, covered in one section:

7.31 "Kinship Names" says that kinship names are lowercased when 
preceded by modifiers, but when used before a proper name or alone, in 
place of a name, they are usually capitalized. It does not restrict this 
usage to Mother and Father, so at the very least, the capitalization of 
Great-Grandchild (when not preceded by a modifier such as "my") does 
appear to be supported by Chicago.

The above examples are quite correct -- 'Mother' et al., unlike 
'Great-Grandchild',
are commonly accepted proper nouns -- but they are not, unfortunately, 
relevant.
One need not use a name, nor anything resembling a name, to address 
someone.

 "Yes, sir."
 "How fare you, stranger?"
 "Shut up, you twit."
 "Of course, my liege."
 "Such trinkets as these, O most precious jewel of the sands, are as 
nothing compared to your own beauty."

I have often seen "Yes, Sir!" and seem to remember parallel usages to 
some of these others (but never something like "You Twit"). This last 
one here looks like it might be capitalized for humorous effect along 
the lines of Card's usage above.

But Ranma *is* using "Duck-Boy" as his name. If he were to say "Mousse
is a duck boy" that would be a simple descriptive noun. If he were to
say "That duck boy is a nuisance" it also would be a descriptive noun.
But if he said "Duck-Boy is a nuisance" he would be using the term as a
name, and such usages should be capitalized.

If 'Duck-Boy' is a pejorative nickname, it should be capitalized as a 
proper noun;
however, if it is just a descriptive noun, it oughtn't. The difference 
hinges on whether or not Ranma uses it commonly enough for it to be a 
nickname -- one can't just pull nouns out of the blue and call them 
names all of a sudden.

Ah, but can't you? What makes a name a name? When you name a child, you 
pull something out of the blue and attach it to the child. Should you 
not capitalize it until you've said it thirty times?

Seriously, I don't see why a nickname can't be a name even the very 
first time it's used. It should all depend on how the speaker intends 
the appellation, and in this case, it does sound to me like Ranma is 
using the term as a name for Mousse, not just a description.

However, I do see now that many forms of direct address should not be 
capitalized, including generic insults as well as common terms of 
endearment and even respect (sir, ma'am, milady, etc.). I think I've 
made the wrong decision in some recent circumstances....

Peter



             .---Anime/Manga Fanfiction Mailing List----.
             | Administrators - ffml-admins@anifics.com |
             | Unsubscribing - ffml-request@anifics.com |
             |     Put 'unsubscribe' in the subject     |
             `---- http://ffml.anifics.com/faq.txt -----'