Give something official to win this argument!

[minervasolo]

Settle an argument: italics for emphasis in an Eng Lit MA?

Personally, I'm against any kind of emphasis; I should think sentence structure ought to provide all the emphasis you need. And if you're determined, it really shouldn't be in the same format as book titles, which are always italicised.

Comments

[ultharkitty.livejournal.com]

My initial thought is: only if it is essential for the meaning. It's the kind of thing you can only get away with if your work is already distinction standard.

I'm with you that the sentence structure should stand by itself, but very high standard work can be enhanced by a little flair :P

[minervasolo.livejournal.com]

He's using Chicago, so it's italics all the way on books (and, to be honest, most of the tutors seem to prefer it that way). Italcising within quotes for emphasis I hve no problem with, but within the body of the argument, especially as often as he's doing it, doesn't appeal to me. Still, Chicago says it's okay (though loses impact with overuse), so off he goes.

[apiphile.livejournal.com]

I like them, thank you. I was not reprimanded for my overwhelming reliance on italics in my BA dissertation. If you want variant, bolding is considered acceptable in official documentation.

[minervasolo.livejournal.com]

Chicago Style Manual backs you up on this (the lengths I go to, well, lose an argument with my housemate include signing up for a 30 free trial with them). I quite like bolding, but I still think my housemate is overusing either, and am proceeding to cover his dissertation with notes telling him so.

[eliyes.livejournal.com]

Use italics for emphasis; book titles should always be underlined.