In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

Does does anyone (particularly those who often read job market writing samples or regularly serve as a reviewer) have any advice as to when on when one can or should use "Cf." according to our disciplinary norms? I am aware that there is a bit of semantic drift going on and that people often use it beyond its official use of meaning something like "compare". One often finds it used as more or less synonymous with "see" in all sorts of published venues, particularly in empirical-adjacent philosophy journals. However, I am wondering whether some sticklers look down on this usage and whether it would thus be wise to avoid it even though I enjoy using it in the latter way.

I guess I'd be surprised if more than a few people are going to be concerned with this sort of thing, particularly given how rarely "Cf." appears to be used (at least in my experience). That said, when I use it, I use it according to its official meaning ("compare").

Any other readers have any tips?

Posted in ,

6 responses to “Disciplinary norms for using “Cf.””

  1. grymes

    I can confirm that there are sticklers who look down on using “cf.” to mean “see.” I do think there is something more than sticklerhood going on here: if I’m just reading your parenthetical or footnote that uses “cf”, I don’t know (without checking the reference) whether you mean “see” or “compare”. That’s (minorly) frustrating. If you want to say “see”, say “see”: it uses zero more characters. If you want to say “compare” or “but see”, feel free to use “cf.”

  2. sahpa

    ‘compare’ seems more transparent and thus more useful.

  3. Michel

    If you use Latin terms or abbreviations, you must use them properly.
    If you misuse them, I will correct you in the referee process. If I wasn’t your referee, I will be mildly annoyed when I read it. (Or puzzled, if I chase down the reference and it doesn’t seem to fit with what you claim.)

  4. Tell me what the source is doing

    In general, I very much appreciate when the author spells out how the cited source relates to what the auothir wrote, so I prefer never to see just cf., and even “see” only when it is very obvious what I’m supposed to see there

  5. I use it to mean “compare,” specifically where there’s a relevant contrast or difference that I am highlighting between what is in my text and what is in the cited text. I’m not really sure what the norm is, to the extent there is a norm. Anyone who cares about this cares about so many things that you’re probably going to run afoul of one of them or another, so I wouldn’t sweat it.

  6. an editor speaks

    I was an editor, until recently. Most people, most of the time should just write a sentence with “compare” in. “blah blah blah … Compare, for example, a watermelon and a Greek vase”

Leave a Reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading