Double Spacing After Periods

[Gori the Grey]

Fun fact: The dot above the "i" and "j" is called a "tittle."

Tittle.

I know, but it's still called 'dotless I' for some reason.

Try saying tittleless.

The growing tendency to omit the second of two spaces that properly follow a sentence-ending period marks the decline of critical thought in the West. The strongest sign of that decline is precisely the superficiality of the focus, in proponents of the omission, on the appearance of manuscripts on the page, on whether one or two spaces looks better. Although two spaces is also clearly the aesthetically superior option, the reason for the second space is not primarily aesthetic. Indeed, the value of the second space is not primarily for the reader of a manuscript, but for its author. The practice of typing two spaces after the period that ends a sentence represents an acquired mental and corporeal discipline by which an author marks, as much to himself as to his reader, the transition from one complete unit of thought to another. It has the secondary advantage of distinguishing the sentence-ending function of a period from its use in abbreviations. But its primary value is as an intentionally introduced compositional hiatus in which the author can register, and then confirm, that the preceding passage constitutes a complete sentence and communicates his intended thought. It simultaneously serves as a brief moment (a period, that is to say) in which the author might gather his semantic and syntactical forces for the subsequent sentence, a sort of hop and bound before beginning the jump that repesents a new sentence. One-spacing, along with other slovenly compositional practices that characterize our over-hasty era, has, as any reader of internet forums knows well, brought us to the precipice of a complete collapse of coherent thought. The remaining two-spacers (fewer and fewer each year) are the only ones keeping our culture prudently two steps back from that precipice.

 

[Farm Boy]

!

Massive brainfart, where are you from again Gori?

 

[bhsup]

For Gori.

 

[Takhisis]

AND my wife is Swedish, which accentuates your points even more!

Is she from the bikini team? Has she got any hopelessly mateless beautiful friends?

Try saying tittleless.

There's no problem with saying it. But try teaching such a word to the Turks.

 

[Harv]

Is she from the bikini team? Has she got any hopelessly mateless beautiful friends?

Would learning to single space after sentences help me with the tweenagers? How about learning to spell the word, "you" with a single letter?

 

[Phrossack]

I know, but it's still called 'dotless I' for some reason.

I know you know. I just like saying "tittle."

 

[cav scout]

The growing tendency to omit the second of two spaces that properly follow a sentence-ending period marks the decline of critical thought in the West...

Beautiful post. Gori for Mod.

 

[Zelig]

Try saying tittleless.

The growing tendency to omit the second of two spaces that properly follow a sentence-ending period marks the decline of critical thought in the West. The strongest sign of that decline is precisely the superficiality of the focus, in proponents of the omission, on the appearance of manuscripts on the page, on whether one or two spaces looks better. Although two spaces is also clearly the aesthetically superior option, the reason for the second space is not primarily aesthetic. Indeed, the value of the second space is not primarily for the reader of a manuscript, but for its author. The practice of typing two spaces after the period that ends a sentence represents an acquired mental and corporeal discipline by which an author marks, as much to himself as to his reader, the transition from one complete unit of thought to another. It has the secondary advantage of distinguishing the sentence-ending function of a period from its use in abbreviations. But its primary value is as an intentionally introduced compositional hiatus in which the author can register, and then confirm, that the preceding passage constitutes a complete sentence and communicates his intended thought. It simultaneously serves as a brief moment (a period, that is to say) in which the author might gather his semantic and syntactical forces for the subsequent sentence, a sort of hop and bound before beginning the jump that repesents a new sentence. One-spacing, along with other slovenly compositional practices that characterize our over-hasty era, has, as any reader of internet forums knows well, brought us to the precipice of a complete collapse of coherent thought. The remaining two-spacers (fewer and fewer each year) are the only ones keeping our culture prudently two steps back from that precipice.

Here, you should find this helpful: http://wps.pearsoncustom.com/pls_1256647969_pwo/217/55692/14257341.cw/content/index.html

Linked sources at the bottom are good too.

 

[Goodfella]

He's joking.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Here, you should find this helpful: http://wps.pearsoncustom.com/pls_1256647969_pwo/217/55692/14257341.cw/content/index.html

Linked sources at the bottom are good too.

tl;dr

What that site seemed to be driving at might more briefly be conveyed by saying, "Don't use more words than are necessary."

If you are experiencing the sophistication of my post as inconcision, I can simplify it for you: single space = bad. Does that help?

 

[Hygro]

Try saying tittleless.

The growing tendency to omit the second of two spaces that properly follow a sentence-ending period marks the decline of critical thought in the West. The strongest sign of that decline is precisely the superficiality of the focus, in proponents of the omission, on the appearance of manuscripts on the page, on whether one or two spaces looks better. Although two spaces is also clearly the aesthetically superior option, the reason for the second space is not primarily aesthetic. Indeed, the value of the second space is not primarily for the reader of a manuscript, but for its author. The practice of typing two spaces after the period that ends a sentence represents an acquired mental and corporeal discipline by which an author marks, as much to himself as to his reader, the transition from one complete unit of thought to another. It has the secondary advantage of distinguishing the sentence-ending function of a period from its use in abbreviations. But its primary value is as an intentionally introduced compositional hiatus in which the author can register, and then confirm, that the preceding passage constitutes a complete sentence and communicates his intended thought. It simultaneously serves as a brief moment (a period, that is to say) in which the author might gather his semantic and syntactical forces for the subsequent sentence, a sort of hop and bound before beginning the jump that repesents a new sentence. One-spacing, along with other slovenly compositional practices that characterize our over-hasty era, has, as any reader of internet forums knows well, brought us to the precipice of a complete collapse of coherent thought. The remaining two-spacers (fewer and fewer each year) are the only ones keeping our culture prudently two steps back from that precipice.

I agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't change the modality for the writer over the reader but I don't find double spaces after periods to read better as the reader.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't change the modality for the writer over the reader but I don't find double spaces after periods to read better as the reader.

[pre]Hygro, whom I will take as a representative of all single-space advocates,
has acknowledged that the aesthetic preferences of readers should not supersede
the compositional utility for writers of the two spaces that properly follow
a sentence-ending period and has thereby in effect conceded the entire argument
as to which is to be preferred. For all that, he obstinately maintains that,
as a reader, he finds the single space preferable. Fully cognizant of the folly
in attempting to persuade someone in matters of aesthetic judgment through rational
argumentation (de gustibus non est disputandum), I nevertheless accept the challenge
of explaining why, were his tastes not corrupted, Hygro would acknowledge that
two spaces after a sentence-ending period are aesthetically superior to just one.
Multiple well-established aesthetic principles clearly indicate why this should be so.
First, there is the pleasing balance of two symmetrical units, the right-hand space
and the left-hand in a taut-but-relaxed interplay with one another, a sort of
achromatic chiaroscuro, if you will. Second, there is the so-called golden mean,
which suggests that human beings find the ratio of 5:8 particularly appealing. In
typography, the standard ratio of height to width for individual letters is 5:3, with
a single unit of separation between letters. This makes the height-to-width ratio of
two em-spaces and their separation 5:8, a proportion on which the beauty of such
disparate splendors as the Parthenon and Dali’s “Sacrament of the Last Supper” are
understood to depend. Finally, what a work of art suggests is generally held to be
more powerful and compelling than what it directly expresses. La Giocanda is the more
beguiling in that the viewer is allowed and encouraged to speculate regarding the
grounds for her smile. What Hamlet has “within which passes show” is never explicitly
revealed, and the play is the more powerful for letting its viewer supply the answer. A
two-space interval between sentences possesses just such a pregnant suggestiveness,
often more powerful than what the sentences themselves convey. A single space
is no more than intervenes between “Mr.” and “Ed,” and thus (of course) holds no richness
of implication. I dare suggest that Hygro has never actually bothered to look at a dychora,
and if he were to, really look, he would immediately apprehend how a single space is nothing,
whereas two nothings . . . now that is something![/pre]

 

[cybrxkhan]

What, Gori the Grey, are you even using double spaces?

 

[Gori the Grey]

Yes, I am, cybrxkhan.

But as Farm Boy pointed out, modern word processors effectively remove the typed second space. Your distress at not seeing them in my most recent post is a testament to their aesthetic power--as one would feel if, looking at Michelangelo's David, it were suddenly snatched from one's view.

I will see whether I can edit my post to a monospaced font, so that you can see my glorious double spaces after sentence-ending periods. Thank you for your concern.

 

[Takhisis]

Unfortunately, that is not enough. You have to use the [pre][/pre] tags to preserve correct spacing.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Thank you, Takhisis. I tried that, but it turned my long post into a single line.

So even what you propose is not enough. I would also need to learn to be concise.

What do you think it says, though, that our machines are now working to impede the lovely dying art of double-spacing after a period?

 

[r16]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=13120382&postcount=139
I am now wondering exactly where this gentleman is from.

from Turkey . ı don't deserve I , start paragraphs in small case , following sentences get a capital . There's nothing mysterious to me and ı never claim to be James Tiberius Kirk .

 

[Takhisis]

Gori, please, any person with decent typing skills knows when to use line breaks.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I thought about that after I last posted, Takhisis.

I hope everybody's getting ready for a paean to the carriage return, a practice (unlike double spacing) that I have lost in these years away from typewriters.

 

[Farm Boy]

I thought about that after I last posted, Takhisis.

I hope everybody's getting ready for a paean to the carriage return, a practice (unlike double spacing) that I have lost in these years away from typewriters.

Keystroke carriage return or levershove?