Rules from the Chicago Manual of Style1
14.19Numbers in text versus numbers in notes
Note reference numbers in text are set as superior (superscript) numbers. In the notes themselves, they are normally full size, not raised, and followed by a period.
“Nonrestrictive relative clauses are parenthetic, as are similar clauses introduced by conjunctions indicating time or place.”1
1. William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style, 4th ed. (New York: Allyn and Bacon, 2000), 3.
14.20Sequencing of note numbers and symbols
Notes, whether footnotes or endnotes, should be numbered consecutively, beginning with 1
14.21Placement of note number
A note number should generally be placed at the end of a sentence or at the end of a clause. The number normally follows a quotation (whether it is run in to the text or set as an extract). Relative to other punctuation, the number follows any punctuation mark except for the dash, which it precedes.
“This,” wrote George Templeton Strong, “is what our tailors can do.”1
14.24Purpose of shortened citations
To reduce the bulk of documentation in scholarly works that use footnotes or endnotes, subsequent citations of sources already given in full should be shortened whenever possible. The short form... should include enough information to remind readers of the full title or to lead them to the appropriate entry in the bibliography.
14.52Several citations in one note
The number of note references in a sentence or a paragraph can sometimes be reduced by grouping several citations in a single note. The citations are separated by semicolons and must appear in the same order as the text material (whether works, quotations, or whatever) to which they pertain. Take care to avoid any ambiguity as to what is documenting what.
Text:
Only when we gather the work of several scholars—Walter Sutton’s explications of some of Whitman’s shorter poems; Paul Fussell’s careful study of structure in “Cradle”; S. K. Coffman’s close readings of “Crossing Brooklyn Ferry” and “Passage to India”; and the attempts of Thomas I. Rountree and John Lovell, dealing with “Song of Myself” and “Passage to India,” respectively, to elucidate the strategy in “indirection”—do we begin to get a sense of both the extent and the specificity of Whitman’s forms.1
Note:
1. Sutton, “The Analysis of Free Verse Form, Illustrated by a Reading of Whitman,” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 18 (December 1959): 241–54; Fussell, “Whitman’s Curious Warble: Reminiscence and Reconciliation,” in The Presence of Walt Whitman, ed. R. W. B. Lewis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962), 28–51; Coffman, “ ‘Crossing Brooklyn Ferry’: A Note on the Catalog Technique in Whitman’s Poetry,”Modern Philology 51 (May 1954): 225–32; Coffman, “Form and Meaning in Whitman’s ‘Passage to India,’ ” PMLA 70 (June 1955): 337–49; Rountree, “Whitman’s Indirect Expression and Its Application to ‘Song of Myself,’ ”PMLA 73 (December 1958): 549–55; and Lovell, “Appreciating Whitman: ‘Passage to India,’ ” Modern Language Quarterly 21 (June 1960): 131–41.
1. The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th ed. (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2010), 14, accessed May 14, 2015, http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html.
