Copyright, schmopyright: redundancy with symbols
I never thought about it before I became a proofreader more than a decade ago. I’d venture to guess that most people don’t think about it, either, or ever will. And yet now that I know the difference, it bugs me enough to write an entry on it.
On what?
On the copyright symbol — © — and the redundant use of the word copyright alongside the symbol.
If you look at the copyright information on just about anything, you may very well see something like this:
Copyright © 1989, 1996 by …. (This particular instance is from the parenting book “What to Expect the First Year.”)
The problem with the above information is that it is repeating the idea of copyright: the word, then the symbol. It’s akin to “I’d like $40 dollars, please.” The dollar sign ($) and the word dollars mean exactly the same thing, so if you said it out loud, you’d say, “I’d like dollars 40 dollars, please.” You see the ick factor, grammatically speaking, yes?
So, regarding the copyright issue, two correct ways to write it would be, in the “What to Expect the First Year” example:
Copyright 1989, 1996 by …
or
© 1989, 1996 by …
This singular copyright construction also aligns with AP Stylebook conventions. And that, as you faithful Bloody Well Write readers know, makes the world right as far as I’m concerned.
My preference is the second option, mainly because symbols are, well, cute. Symbols make phrases look somehow more professional, more acceptable. They also take up less space than the word or words they symbolize, and that often comes in handy when you’re limited with space issues.
Happy trails!
SAK
Tags: AP Stylebook, copyright, symbol, ©
Sheila,
What about other forms of redundancy? For instance, when using foreign words in english sentances. As an example, “I crossed the Rio Grande River.” The redundancy is that “Rio” is the spanish word for river so, in effect, you are saying “I crossed the River Grande River.” Is it correct to just say “Rio Grande” and leave river off, or does English demand that the river be installed?
Does it bug you too? Sure does me!
Todd
Hi, Todd.
Yes, other forms of redundancy should be eliminated. The Rio Grande is an excellent example. I don’t know of any English convention that would require “river” to be tacked on at the end. Just doesn’t make sense. Great comment!
[...] the entire article. Tags: AP Stylebook, copyright, symbol, [...]
I heard of a store clerk who was confused by the funny symbols on the cash register and said “that’ll be a dollar two eighty.”