Italicizing/explaining authentic words in historicals

c.e.lawson · Aug 9, 2007

Well, something that came up in Doogs' fight post in the Historical SYW forum prompted me to post.

I'd appreciate it very much if you historical aficionados could comment on the use of italicized authentic words in a period piece. I'm writing a story based in ancient Sparta and, although I don't have much of the story written yet, I've already sprinkled a few of these in the first couple of chapters. I try to incorporate them into the story, but I'm just not sure how much of this is appropriate and at which point it becomes annoying to the reader (or agent, LOL).

Here are a couple of examples from my story:

The rough linen of her chiton draped over her legs, leaving only her toes exposed...

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

But then he turned to the sky and sighed. “It’s getting late. We’d better return for deipnon.”

Melaina didn’t argue – she was ready for their evening meal, having eaten nothing since her small plate of bread and figs in the late morning.

What do you all think about including terms like these and italicizing them and trying to give a little context? I'm trying to put that context as well into the story as I can, so it doesn't stand out, although I'm probably more successful at this some times than others. This is my first historical, so I'm a rookie concerning these sorts of questions.

Thanks,

c.e.
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Marlys · Aug 9, 2007

Interesting question. I wouldn't italicize chiton any more than I would toga or chemise--the original word was Greek, but we borrowed it into English to describe a particular garment. It's in our dictionaries.

Deipnon is another matter--it's a wholly foreign word. If you use it, I would italicize it as I would any foreign word that hasn't been adopted into English. But since from the context I would guess it means "dinner," I don't know why you're using it. I would save the foreign words for, well, foreign things.

job · Aug 9, 2007

Your publishing house will have a house policy on how to handle the italicization of foreign words. The Chicago Manual of Style, which Berkley uses, says to Italic foreign words that do not appear in Websters. 'Chiton', for instance, probably wouldn't be Italicked.

And you may be able to Italic words the first time, and then drop the Italics in later uses.

How much to use ... this isn't easy to say without looking at particular passages.

I'd say to write the early drafts using all the foreign words you want. Go wild.
Then beta your ms and see if you annoy the readers.

You could also look at how this is handled by Colleen McCullough and ilk.

c.e.lawson · Aug 9, 2007

I would save the foreign words for, well, foreign things.

Thank you, Marlys. That's an excellent point. Why use foreign words for something that's not unique to that era? To add to the atmosphere of the piece, I guess. That's probably not a good enough answer, though.

Your publishing house will have a house policy on how to handle the italicization of foreign words.

Well, I got my thrill of the night reading that first sentence, job! Maybe someday I can write "My publishing house..." LOL. But I'll get out my Webster's. Thanks so much for your advice. Sounds like a very sensible (and fun) approach.

c.e.

Doogs · Aug 10, 2007

Glad to see you posted the topic!

I have a few basic rules of thumb that I follow when it comes to this (though, as I'm finding out in my revisions, not always with the greatest consistency):

First - if there is a modern analogue that will suffice, I will use it instead. Especially for the mundane. (e.g., rather than triclinium, "dining room")

Second - this becomes muddied when there is something very specific or unique about the object, thing, activity, etc. A good example is the Roman pilum, which got this whole thing going. Yes, it is a javelin, but it is a very specific kind of javelin, distinct from those used by Rome's enemies and even a number of allies. It also has certain properties which lend it a devastating impact on the battlefield...so for those reasons I feel it has to be called out.

Third - personally, I don't italicize places or holidays. Thus I use "Via Latina" rather than "Via Latina", "Saturnalia" instead of "Saturnalia", etc.

Fourth - I DO italicize that for which there is no sufficient modern analogue, or for which the analogue is too cumbersome for common use. In my experience, these usually fall into two categories. The first - various bodies of soldiers. The triarii, for example, were the veteran soldiers who comprised a legion's third line. The second - internal attitudes and concepts. The Roman concepts of dignitas and auctoritas, etc.

Those are pretty much the rules I play by...excuse me if any of this seems rambling...haven't had my morning coffee yet!

JenNipps · Aug 10, 2007

How I've handled the explanation: If one character uses a foreign word (like calling someone a liar, as an example that I've actually used), the next line or two would have a bit of explanation, hopefully without seeming too obvious.

Let's see if I can find what I'm talking about real quick....

Here we go, though this isn't the instance I was thinking of, but it serves the purpose just as well.

(From my WIP, "Kiernan's Curse" [which I still need to start on revisions if I'm going to meet my September/October goal...])

"You make the policies or you change them.”

“It is not always so.” He stood.

“Breugair.” She looked him in the eye.

“When have I ever lied to you?” It took effort to keep from shouting it at her.

“I have no reason to think you have ever told me the truth.” She left him staring slack-jawed at the doorway.

In this case, "breugair" means "liar."

job · Aug 10, 2007

c.e.lawson said:
Maybe someday I can write "My publishing house..." LOL. But I'll get out my Webster's. Thanks so much for your advice. Sounds like a very sensible (and fun) approach. c.e.

One way to judge whether you're distracting the reader with foreign words is to substitute nonsense lettering for your Latin.
If a continual rain of, "She pulled the xythipit tighter around her waist and stepped from the hutchzt into the yorrild, seeking the ceir Futlagh,' annoys you in context, the Latin terms will annoy the reader.

That said, you're lucky it's this 'unrecognizable word' issue giving you problems.
It's an 'easy fix'. Awkwardness of the 'too many incomprehensible words' type is not the sort of awkwardness that will stand between you and publication.

An experienced editor will have met this many times and have a good feel for what's working for the reader and what isn't. She'll tone down the 'pluviums' and 'hypercausts' if they're getting out of line. Piece of cake.

So this is not a huge deal, IMO, and you can Latinate to please yourself and move on to worry about other things.

job · Aug 10, 2007

JenNipps said:
In this case, "breugair" means "liar."

Though I have to admit, my immediate guess, in context, and in spite of the comeback, would be that breugair meant something along the lines of 'sodding bastard', or 'bugger' or 'so's your old man'.

But then, it's often not necessary to precisely define terms of abuse for the reader because the literal and exact meaning is not what's important.

JenNipps · Aug 10, 2007

Heh. You raise a good point. I could make it clearer but still without explicitly saying it.

BTW, "bastard" would actually be "blaigeard" (and, yes, I use that in the story too

).

pdr · Aug 10, 2007

Interesting topic...

but I don't see the need to italicise the difficult or foreign words.

Use them in context and with sense. Even the most ardent reader of historicals gets miffed when struggling through four in a sentence.

Job, I agree an editor can tone things down, but you have to remember that the editor has to accept the novel first and too much self indulgence and 'look what I know' can put an editor off even the best story!

And there are a lot of readers out there who know exactly what a pilum is and don't want detailed explanations. I know Puma disagrees here and thinks everything needs explanations, but I have found the buyers and readers of historicals tend to be well read and knowledgeable about their favourite periods of history. What they do enjoy is catching out the writer in some minor howler!

Doogs · Aug 10, 2007

pdr said:
And there are a lot of readers out there who know exactly what a pilum is and don't want detailed explanations. I know Puma disagrees here and thinks everything needs explanations, but I have found the buyers and readers of historicals tend to be well read and knowledgeable about their favourite periods of history. What they do enjoy is catching out the writer in some minor howler!

I have no facts or figures to back me up in any way, but I would guess that, for every one reader with a good grounding of the period, there at least three or four who might know one fact, or who saw some movie set in the time period and some point and thought it was pretty good.

It's the same with, say, the auto industry. Auto enthusiasts, those who will buy a car based on performance and handling, who can tell you the dynamic differences between front and rear-wheel drive, what direct injection is, etc, make up 10% of carbuyers at an absolute maximum. Most people buy a car based on how it looks, where the cupholders are placed...

I think, in the end, it is a delicate balance, and a good novel, like a good car, should satisfy the educated and non-educated alike.

Which, of course, solves nothing...

c.e.lawson · Aug 10, 2007

Doogs - I like your 'rules'. They make good sense to me.

JenNipps - Good example for using context and dialogue to make the foreign word understandable. In your case you could have used liar, but I liked how using that word, though not obviously "telling" the reader, still added to the authentic feel of the piece. Thank you.

So this is not a huge deal, IMO, and you can Latinate to please yourself and move on to worry about other things.

Oh, job - I'm VERY good at worrying about other things!

But then, it's often not necessary to precisely define terms of abuse for the reader because the literal and exact meaning is not what's important.

Interesting point, job. If only everything could be so unproblematically vague as foreign terms of abuse, LOL.

Use them in context and with sense. Even the most ardent reader of historicals gets miffed when struggling through four in a sentence.

Well, pdr, my first chapter is over 5000 words and I only did this 4 times. (And I'm taking out the deipnon one and not italicizing chiton any longer, so that will make it two.) So hopefully I'm not overdoing it.

...but I have found the buyers and readers of historicals tend to be well read and knowledgeable about their favourite periods of history. What they do enjoy is catching out the writer in some minor howler!

*trembles*

I think, in the end, it is a delicate balance, and a good novel, like a good car, should satisfy the educated and non-educated alike.

Which, of course, solves nothing...

heh. So true, Doogs. At least we're all in this together!

Italicizing/explaining authentic words in historicals

c.e.lawson

Marlys

Resist. Love. Go outside.

job

In the end, it's just you and the manuscript

c.e.lawson

Doogs

JenNipps

Have you JHS today?

job

In the end, it's just you and the manuscript

job

In the end, it's just you and the manuscript

JenNipps

Have you JHS today?

pdr

Doogs

c.e.lawson