2
1
I would like to use the abbreviation cf. to mean see, like I do all the time when writing in French. E.g. "cf. figure 8" would mean "see/refer to/check out figure 8".
I read on Wikipedia that
While the use of cf. for "see" is widespread, The Chicago Manual of Style holds that it should not be used in this way but instead should only be used to mean "compare" or "see, by way of comparison". In some other languages, such as French and Italian, it is normal to use "cf." to mean "see".
The Chicago Manual of Style is "one of the most widely used and respected style guides in the United States". Does that mean that I should ban the use of "cf. figure 8", or is that some outdated rule that nobody cares anymore?
Do you even need to use "cf." at all? It would only be useful in highly formal writing. Is that where you want to use it? – Dangph – 2014-07-12T00:06:44.597
@Dangph Yes that would be for formal reports/articles (e.g. research articles). – Franck Dernoncourt – 2014-07-12T00:08:00.443
2Is there any writing that is so formal that "See Figure 8" would be inappropriate? – Peter Shor – 2014-07-12T18:31:28.747
@PeterShor Not really I guess. I thought the English "cf." would have the same level of formality as in French, where it's very common (and >99% of the time means "see", not compare), we can almost use "cf." when speaking, but I've learnt through this question it's not :) That said, I do see "viz." quite often (e.g. in some MIT lecture notes), while I read in StoneyB's answer that it sounds old fart and that the MLA/APA/Chicago expressly deprecate the use “viz.”... so as a non-native it's hard to assess how wary I should be of some MLA/APA/Chicago rules, which was the root of my question. – Franck Dernoncourt – 2014-07-14T16:18:33.130
In English, if you want to refer to a figure, "See Figure 8" is almost always used. See (vide?) Ngram. (Cf. isn't on the Ngram because it's too rare before "fig" to appear on the chart.
– Peter Shor – 2014-07-14T17:19:06.097