Does ‘overleaf’ necessarily imply turning over paper?
I have a sneaking suspicion that I may, for a long time, have been using the term overleaf in an unorthodox way, but I cannot really find a good way to search for corroboration or refutation.
The definition given in dictionaries all seem to run along the same course, more or less what the ODO definition has:
On the other side of the page.
This is clear enough when something is actually on the back of the paper. In a normal book, where odd pages are on the right in a spread and even pages are on the left, a reference on page 53 to a figure on page 54 could very obviously use overleaf.
I’ve always extended this to also apply to cases where the reference is to a figure on page 52 instead—that is, where the figure is on the opposite page on the same spread—but I cannot find any evidence that this usage is common—unless the opposite page on a spread also counts as “the other side of the page” (which, to someone not involved in book production, is not inconceivable, but to most people would probably be a stretch).
Looking through some of the concrete examples of the word overleaf in actual use on Google Books didn’t really tell me an awful lot. A lot of the instances were people who were—in my view—clearly misusing the term by using it to refer to things that were several spreads away from their references; many had no page numbers, making it nigh impossible to tell what would originally have been left and right pages; and in the majority of the instances, the thing referred to was either not included in the preview or something not numbered that you’d have to read the whole thing to find.
A book I’m currently editing has quite a lot of figures and illustrations that consist of several images, many of which straddle a spread. All figures are accompanied by descriptive captions, and multiple images in one figure are described separately. If they’re on the same page, they are referenced easily enough with top/bottom, above/below, left/right, etc.; and I’ve been using overleaf/this page thus far when they are on opposite pages on their spread.
Am I misusing the term?
Can the opposite page on a spread be called overleaf?
If not, is there a more elegant term for it than just opposite page?
(Bonus question: This page also irks me a bit as being not very elegant. Is there a more elegant term for content that is on the same page as the reference and not on the opposite page?)
meaning-in-context terminology
asked Jun 14 '17 at 17:42
Janus Bahs JacquetJanus Bahs Jacquet
29.3k569126
|
show 3 more comments
I have a sneaking suspicion that I may, for a long time, have been using the term overleaf in an unorthodox way, but I cannot really find a good way to search for corroboration or refutation.
The definition given in dictionaries all seem to run along the same course, more or less what the ODO definition has:
On the other side of the page.
This is clear enough when something is actually on the back of the paper. In a normal book, where odd pages are on the right in a spread and even pages are on the left, a reference on page 53 to a figure on page 54 could very obviously use overleaf.
I’ve always extended this to also apply to cases where the reference is to a figure on page 52 instead—that is, where the figure is on the opposite page on the same spread—but I cannot find any evidence that this usage is common—unless the opposite page on a spread also counts as “the other side of the page” (which, to someone not involved in book production, is not inconceivable, but to most people would probably be a stretch).
Looking through some of the concrete examples of the word overleaf in actual use on Google Books didn’t really tell me an awful lot. A lot of the instances were people who were—in my view—clearly misusing the term by using it to refer to things that were several spreads away from their references; many had no page numbers, making it nigh impossible to tell what would originally have been left and right pages; and in the majority of the instances, the thing referred to was either not included in the preview or something not numbered that you’d have to read the whole thing to find.
A book I’m currently editing has quite a lot of figures and illustrations that consist of several images, many of which straddle a spread. All figures are accompanied by descriptive captions, and multiple images in one figure are described separately. If they’re on the same page, they are referenced easily enough with top/bottom, above/below, left/right, etc.; and I’ve been using overleaf/this page thus far when they are on opposite pages on their spread.
Am I misusing the term?
Can the opposite page on a spread be called overleaf?
If not, is there a more elegant term for it than just opposite page?
(Bonus question: This page also irks me a bit as being not very elegant. Is there a more elegant term for content that is on the same page as the reference and not on the opposite page?)
meaning-in-context terminology
asked Jun 14 '17 at 17:42
Janus Bahs JacquetJanus Bahs Jacquet
29.3k569126
Keep in mind that the author of a book may not know whether something is going to fall on an even page or an odd one, so "overleaf" is often used when it might be more accurate (but not a nice-sounding) to say "on the next page".
– Hot Licks
Jun 14 '17 at 18:18
@HotLicks The author will almost certainly not know. It is the job of the publisher’s manuscript editor (= me) to check that all such references are correct once the text has been set and composed.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:22
... Do subsequent reformattings similarly get checked?
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 14 '17 at 19:27
1
@EdwinAshworth Once the book is printed, there are no subsequent reformattings (unless it gets reprinted in a different format, in which case yes, they do). Things like references, footnote numbering, running headers, page numbers, etc., are always double-checked extensively in the final imposition proof.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 19:34
Some such expressions, with literal reference to print and paper, can and do apply by extension to Web publications--I am thinking here of the use of "below the fold" in Daily Kos, for instance.
– Brian Donovan
Jun 14 '17 at 20:20
|
show 3 more comments
I have a sneaking suspicion that I may, for a long time, have been using the term overleaf in an unorthodox way, but I cannot really find a good way to search for corroboration or refutation.
The definition given in dictionaries all seem to run along the same course, more or less what the ODO definition has:
On the other side of the page.
This is clear enough when something is actually on the back of the paper. In a normal book, where odd pages are on the right in a spread and even pages are on the left, a reference on page 53 to a figure on page 54 could very obviously use overleaf.
I’ve always extended this to also apply to cases where the reference is to a figure on page 52 instead—that is, where the figure is on the opposite page on the same spread—but I cannot find any evidence that this usage is common—unless the opposite page on a spread also counts as “the other side of the page” (which, to someone not involved in book production, is not inconceivable, but to most people would probably be a stretch).
Looking through some of the concrete examples of the word overleaf in actual use on Google Books didn’t really tell me an awful lot. A lot of the instances were people who were—in my view—clearly misusing the term by using it to refer to things that were several spreads away from their references; many had no page numbers, making it nigh impossible to tell what would originally have been left and right pages; and in the majority of the instances, the thing referred to was either not included in the preview or something not numbered that you’d have to read the whole thing to find.
A book I’m currently editing has quite a lot of figures and illustrations that consist of several images, many of which straddle a spread. All figures are accompanied by descriptive captions, and multiple images in one figure are described separately. If they’re on the same page, they are referenced easily enough with top/bottom, above/below, left/right, etc.; and I’ve been using overleaf/this page thus far when they are on opposite pages on their spread.
Am I misusing the term?
Can the opposite page on a spread be called overleaf?
If not, is there a more elegant term for it than just opposite page?
(Bonus question: This page also irks me a bit as being not very elegant. Is there a more elegant term for content that is on the same page as the reference and not on the opposite page?)
meaning-in-context terminology
asked Jun 14 '17 at 17:42
Janus Bahs JacquetJanus Bahs Jacquet
29.3k569126
I have a sneaking suspicion that I may, for a long time, have been using the term overleaf in an unorthodox way, but I cannot really find a good way to search for corroboration or refutation.
The definition given in dictionaries all seem to run along the same course, more or less what the ODO definition has:
On the other side of the page.
This is clear enough when something is actually on the back of the paper. In a normal book, where odd pages are on the right in a spread and even pages are on the left, a reference on page 53 to a figure on page 54 could very obviously use overleaf.
I’ve always extended this to also apply to cases where the reference is to a figure on page 52 instead—that is, where the figure is on the opposite page on the same spread—but I cannot find any evidence that this usage is common—unless the opposite page on a spread also counts as “the other side of the page” (which, to someone not involved in book production, is not inconceivable, but to most people would probably be a stretch).
Looking through some of the concrete examples of the word overleaf in actual use on Google Books didn’t really tell me an awful lot. A lot of the instances were people who were—in my view—clearly misusing the term by using it to refer to things that were several spreads away from their references; many had no page numbers, making it nigh impossible to tell what would originally have been left and right pages; and in the majority of the instances, the thing referred to was either not included in the preview or something not numbered that you’d have to read the whole thing to find.
A book I’m currently editing has quite a lot of figures and illustrations that consist of several images, many of which straddle a spread. All figures are accompanied by descriptive captions, and multiple images in one figure are described separately. If they’re on the same page, they are referenced easily enough with top/bottom, above/below, left/right, etc.; and I’ve been using overleaf/this page thus far when they are on opposite pages on their spread.
Am I misusing the term?
Can the opposite page on a spread be called overleaf?
If not, is there a more elegant term for it than just opposite page?
(Bonus question: This page also irks me a bit as being not very elegant. Is there a more elegant term for content that is on the same page as the reference and not on the opposite page?)
meaning-in-context terminology
meaning-in-context terminology
asked Jun 14 '17 at 17:42
Janus Bahs JacquetJanus Bahs Jacquet
29.3k569126
asked Jun 14 '17 at 17:42
Janus Bahs JacquetJanus Bahs Jacquet
29.3k569126
edited Jun 14 '17 at 18:45
Janus Bahs Jacquet
asked Jun 14 '17 at 17:42
Janus Bahs JacquetJanus Bahs Jacquet
29.3k569126
asked Jun 14 '17 at 17:42
Janus Bahs JacquetJanus Bahs Jacquet
29.3k569126
asked Jun 14 '17 at 17:42
Janus Bahs JacquetJanus Bahs Jacquet
29.3k569126
29.3k569126
Keep in mind that the author of a book may not know whether something is going to fall on an even page or an odd one, so "overleaf" is often used when it might be more accurate (but not a nice-sounding) to say "on the next page".
– Hot Licks
Jun 14 '17 at 18:18
@HotLicks The author will almost certainly not know. It is the job of the publisher’s manuscript editor (= me) to check that all such references are correct once the text has been set and composed.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:22
... Do subsequent reformattings similarly get checked?
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 14 '17 at 19:27
1
@EdwinAshworth Once the book is printed, there are no subsequent reformattings (unless it gets reprinted in a different format, in which case yes, they do). Things like references, footnote numbering, running headers, page numbers, etc., are always double-checked extensively in the final imposition proof.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 19:34
Some such expressions, with literal reference to print and paper, can and do apply by extension to Web publications--I am thinking here of the use of "below the fold" in Daily Kos, for instance.
– Brian Donovan
Jun 14 '17 at 20:20
|
show 3 more comments
Keep in mind that the author of a book may not know whether something is going to fall on an even page or an odd one, so "overleaf" is often used when it might be more accurate (but not a nice-sounding) to say "on the next page".
– Hot Licks
Jun 14 '17 at 18:18
@HotLicks The author will almost certainly not know. It is the job of the publisher’s manuscript editor (= me) to check that all such references are correct once the text has been set and composed.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:22
... Do subsequent reformattings similarly get checked?
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 14 '17 at 19:27
1
@EdwinAshworth Once the book is printed, there are no subsequent reformattings (unless it gets reprinted in a different format, in which case yes, they do). Things like references, footnote numbering, running headers, page numbers, etc., are always double-checked extensively in the final imposition proof.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 19:34
Some such expressions, with literal reference to print and paper, can and do apply by extension to Web publications--I am thinking here of the use of "below the fold" in Daily Kos, for instance.
– Brian Donovan
Jun 14 '17 at 20:20
Keep in mind that the author of a book may not know whether something is going to fall on an even page or an odd one, so "overleaf" is often used when it might be more accurate (but not a nice-sounding) to say "on the next page".
– Hot Licks
Jun 14 '17 at 18:18
Keep in mind that the author of a book may not know whether something is going to fall on an even page or an odd one, so "overleaf" is often used when it might be more accurate (but not a nice-sounding) to say "on the next page".
– Hot Licks
Jun 14 '17 at 18:18
@HotLicks The author will almost certainly not know. It is the job of the publisher’s manuscript editor (= me) to check that all such references are correct once the text has been set and composed.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:22
@HotLicks The author will almost certainly not know. It is the job of the publisher’s manuscript editor (= me) to check that all such references are correct once the text has been set and composed.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:22
... Do subsequent reformattings similarly get checked?
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 14 '17 at 19:27
... Do subsequent reformattings similarly get checked?
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 14 '17 at 19:27
1
1
@EdwinAshworth Once the book is printed, there are no subsequent reformattings (unless it gets reprinted in a different format, in which case yes, they do). Things like references, footnote numbering, running headers, page numbers, etc., are always double-checked extensively in the final imposition proof.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 19:34
@EdwinAshworth Once the book is printed, there are no subsequent reformattings (unless it gets reprinted in a different format, in which case yes, they do). Things like references, footnote numbering, running headers, page numbers, etc., are always double-checked extensively in the final imposition proof.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 19:34
Some such expressions, with literal reference to print and paper, can and do apply by extension to Web publications--I am thinking here of the use of "below the fold" in Daily Kos, for instance.
– Brian Donovan
Jun 14 '17 at 20:20
Some such expressions, with literal reference to print and paper, can and do apply by extension to Web publications--I am thinking here of the use of "below the fold" in Daily Kos, for instance.
– Brian Donovan
Jun 14 '17 at 20:20
|
show 3 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Here is a more unambiguous definition of overleaf (M-W):
overleaf
adverb
: on the other side of a leaf (as of a book) : find the answers overleaf
leaf
noun, often attributive
2 : something suggestive of a leaf: such as
a : a part of a book or folded sheet containing a page on each side
Clearly, using overleaf to denote a facing page is misleading.
An alternative to opposite page is facing page. Refer to the following definition extract of page from Macmillan:
page
NOUN [COUNTABLE]
1 one side of a sheet of paper in a book, newspaper, or magazine
opposite/facing page: Can you identify the four pictures on the facing page?
ODO:
facing
ADJECTIVE
[attributive] Positioned with the front toward a certain direction;
opposite.
‘The result, when compared with the original on the facing page, is
that we do not have a translation of the poem, but an interpretation
of it.’
‘While he writes normally with one hand, he produces a mirror image on
the facing page with the other.’
answered Jun 14 '17 at 18:21
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26k63894
I wasn't able to find any dictionary definitions that really allowed my interpretation either; but I was really wondering whether my usage actually enjoys some currency in actual use despite not being codified in dictionaries, or whether I've just made it up myself. So even though I agree that M-W’s definition is more unambiguous, I would ideally like something stronger than just negative results from dictionaries. +1 for facing (page), though, which didn't pop up in my head while I was thinking about this earlier.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:44
Perhaps current page can replace this page. In fact even that may be redundant if we use above/below/left/right.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:45
I don't know if it's just me, but if I am on page 2 and see overleaf, I would most certainly refer to page 1 (turn the page backwards) rather than refer to the facing page (3). If it turns out to be otherwise, I would take it as an error.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:55
1
The old "recto / verso" distinction might be worth considering in this context. -- in modern terms, "facing page" / "next page". I'd tend to interpret "overleaf" as (strictly) the following page, but I suspect actual usage doesn't necessarily retain this distinction
– Robin Hamilton
Jun 14 '17 at 20:39
add a comment |
The sources I will present below use the words overleaf and opposite page according to the following rules:
In words:
Rule 1. The text on a verso (left) page refers to the items on the immediately following recto (right) page as being on the opposite page.
Rule 2. Conversely, the text on a recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately preceding verso (left) page also as being on the opposite page.
Rule 3. A recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately following verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is obvious, as these two pages are in fact the two sides of the same sheet).
Rule 4. A verso (left) page refers to the items on the next-in-sequence verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is perhaps a surprise; it says that the word overleaf denotes the exact same page regardless of whether the word appears in the text on a verso page, or in the text on the recto page that immediately follows the verso page. One might have thought that the word would instead refer to the recto page immediately preceding the present verso page.)
Consider this book. On p. 66 it says that A good sixteen microtypographic errors are hidden in the example on the opposite page, and that search for mistakes is helped overleaf. And indeed, on p. 67 is some dummy text (in accordance with Rule 1), and on p. 68 the 'solution', with the errors highlighted (in accordance with Rule 4). A different part of the same book says, on p. 31, that The critical letter combinations in the various typefaces are compared overleaf. According to Rule 3, this should mean p. 32, and it is indeed so. Unfortunately, there is no instance of Rule 2 in this book (at least not in what's accessible on google books).
The same three rules are used in this book.
Rule 2 is illustrated in this book: on p. 35, it is stated that an illustration of the spinal cord is given on the opposite page, and indeed there is such an illustration on p. 34. The multiple usages of overleaf on p. 35 all refer to the illustration on p. 36, in accordance with Rule 3.
Another illustration of Rule 2 is in this final book. On p. 339 it is talks about certain items on the opposite page, namely 'a dancer carrying the kāpā' at the top, and 'dancers executing subdued movement' at the bottom. And photos of both of these are found respectively at the top and the bottom of p. 338. (I'll admit that I don't know what the word overleaf on p. 338 refers to. There doesn't seem to be any images corresponding to the stated description either on p. 340, as Rule 4 would demand, or on p. 337, as the 'common sense' interpretation would suggest.)
answered 2 days ago
linguisticturnlinguisticturn
5,4011332
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f393939%2fdoes-overleaf-necessarily-imply-turning-over-paper%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Here is a more unambiguous definition of overleaf (M-W):
overleaf
adverb
: on the other side of a leaf (as of a book) : find the answers overleaf
leaf
noun, often attributive
2 : something suggestive of a leaf: such as
a : a part of a book or folded sheet containing a page on each side
Clearly, using overleaf to denote a facing page is misleading.
An alternative to opposite page is facing page. Refer to the following definition extract of page from Macmillan:
page
NOUN [COUNTABLE]
1 one side of a sheet of paper in a book, newspaper, or magazine
opposite/facing page: Can you identify the four pictures on the facing page?
ODO:
facing
ADJECTIVE
[attributive] Positioned with the front toward a certain direction;
opposite.
‘The result, when compared with the original on the facing page, is
that we do not have a translation of the poem, but an interpretation
of it.’
‘While he writes normally with one hand, he produces a mirror image on
the facing page with the other.’
answered Jun 14 '17 at 18:21
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26k63894
I wasn't able to find any dictionary definitions that really allowed my interpretation either; but I was really wondering whether my usage actually enjoys some currency in actual use despite not being codified in dictionaries, or whether I've just made it up myself. So even though I agree that M-W’s definition is more unambiguous, I would ideally like something stronger than just negative results from dictionaries. +1 for facing (page), though, which didn't pop up in my head while I was thinking about this earlier.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:44
Perhaps current page can replace this page. In fact even that may be redundant if we use above/below/left/right.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:45
I don't know if it's just me, but if I am on page 2 and see overleaf, I would most certainly refer to page 1 (turn the page backwards) rather than refer to the facing page (3). If it turns out to be otherwise, I would take it as an error.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:55
1
The old "recto / verso" distinction might be worth considering in this context. -- in modern terms, "facing page" / "next page". I'd tend to interpret "overleaf" as (strictly) the following page, but I suspect actual usage doesn't necessarily retain this distinction
– Robin Hamilton
Jun 14 '17 at 20:39
add a comment |
Here is a more unambiguous definition of overleaf (M-W):
overleaf
adverb
: on the other side of a leaf (as of a book) : find the answers overleaf
leaf
noun, often attributive
2 : something suggestive of a leaf: such as
a : a part of a book or folded sheet containing a page on each side
Clearly, using overleaf to denote a facing page is misleading.
An alternative to opposite page is facing page. Refer to the following definition extract of page from Macmillan:
page
NOUN [COUNTABLE]
1 one side of a sheet of paper in a book, newspaper, or magazine
opposite/facing page: Can you identify the four pictures on the facing page?
ODO:
facing
ADJECTIVE
[attributive] Positioned with the front toward a certain direction;
opposite.
‘The result, when compared with the original on the facing page, is
that we do not have a translation of the poem, but an interpretation
of it.’
‘While he writes normally with one hand, he produces a mirror image on
the facing page with the other.’
answered Jun 14 '17 at 18:21
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26k63894
I wasn't able to find any dictionary definitions that really allowed my interpretation either; but I was really wondering whether my usage actually enjoys some currency in actual use despite not being codified in dictionaries, or whether I've just made it up myself. So even though I agree that M-W’s definition is more unambiguous, I would ideally like something stronger than just negative results from dictionaries. +1 for facing (page), though, which didn't pop up in my head while I was thinking about this earlier.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:44
Perhaps current page can replace this page. In fact even that may be redundant if we use above/below/left/right.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:45
I don't know if it's just me, but if I am on page 2 and see overleaf, I would most certainly refer to page 1 (turn the page backwards) rather than refer to the facing page (3). If it turns out to be otherwise, I would take it as an error.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:55
1
The old "recto / verso" distinction might be worth considering in this context. -- in modern terms, "facing page" / "next page". I'd tend to interpret "overleaf" as (strictly) the following page, but I suspect actual usage doesn't necessarily retain this distinction
– Robin Hamilton
Jun 14 '17 at 20:39
add a comment |
Here is a more unambiguous definition of overleaf (M-W):
overleaf
adverb
: on the other side of a leaf (as of a book) : find the answers overleaf
leaf
noun, often attributive
2 : something suggestive of a leaf: such as
a : a part of a book or folded sheet containing a page on each side
Clearly, using overleaf to denote a facing page is misleading.
An alternative to opposite page is facing page. Refer to the following definition extract of page from Macmillan:
page
NOUN [COUNTABLE]
1 one side of a sheet of paper in a book, newspaper, or magazine
opposite/facing page: Can you identify the four pictures on the facing page?
ODO:
facing
ADJECTIVE
[attributive] Positioned with the front toward a certain direction;
opposite.
‘The result, when compared with the original on the facing page, is
that we do not have a translation of the poem, but an interpretation
of it.’
‘While he writes normally with one hand, he produces a mirror image on
the facing page with the other.’
answered Jun 14 '17 at 18:21
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26k63894
Here is a more unambiguous definition of overleaf (M-W):
overleaf
adverb
: on the other side of a leaf (as of a book) : find the answers overleaf
leaf
noun, often attributive
2 : something suggestive of a leaf: such as
a : a part of a book or folded sheet containing a page on each side
Clearly, using overleaf to denote a facing page is misleading.
An alternative to opposite page is facing page. Refer to the following definition extract of page from Macmillan:
page
NOUN [COUNTABLE]
1 one side of a sheet of paper in a book, newspaper, or magazine
opposite/facing page: Can you identify the four pictures on the facing page?
ODO:
facing
ADJECTIVE
[attributive] Positioned with the front toward a certain direction;
opposite.
‘The result, when compared with the original on the facing page, is
that we do not have a translation of the poem, but an interpretation
of it.’
‘While he writes normally with one hand, he produces a mirror image on
the facing page with the other.’
answered Jun 14 '17 at 18:21
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26k63894
edited Jun 14 '17 at 18:42
answered Jun 14 '17 at 18:21
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26k63894
answered Jun 14 '17 at 18:21
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26k63894
answered Jun 14 '17 at 18:21
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26k63894
26k63894
I wasn't able to find any dictionary definitions that really allowed my interpretation either; but I was really wondering whether my usage actually enjoys some currency in actual use despite not being codified in dictionaries, or whether I've just made it up myself. So even though I agree that M-W’s definition is more unambiguous, I would ideally like something stronger than just negative results from dictionaries. +1 for facing (page), though, which didn't pop up in my head while I was thinking about this earlier.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:44
Perhaps current page can replace this page. In fact even that may be redundant if we use above/below/left/right.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:45
I don't know if it's just me, but if I am on page 2 and see overleaf, I would most certainly refer to page 1 (turn the page backwards) rather than refer to the facing page (3). If it turns out to be otherwise, I would take it as an error.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:55
1
The old "recto / verso" distinction might be worth considering in this context. -- in modern terms, "facing page" / "next page". I'd tend to interpret "overleaf" as (strictly) the following page, but I suspect actual usage doesn't necessarily retain this distinction
– Robin Hamilton
Jun 14 '17 at 20:39
add a comment |
I wasn't able to find any dictionary definitions that really allowed my interpretation either; but I was really wondering whether my usage actually enjoys some currency in actual use despite not being codified in dictionaries, or whether I've just made it up myself. So even though I agree that M-W’s definition is more unambiguous, I would ideally like something stronger than just negative results from dictionaries. +1 for facing (page), though, which didn't pop up in my head while I was thinking about this earlier.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:44
Perhaps current page can replace this page. In fact even that may be redundant if we use above/below/left/right.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:45
I don't know if it's just me, but if I am on page 2 and see overleaf, I would most certainly refer to page 1 (turn the page backwards) rather than refer to the facing page (3). If it turns out to be otherwise, I would take it as an error.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:55
1
The old "recto / verso" distinction might be worth considering in this context. -- in modern terms, "facing page" / "next page". I'd tend to interpret "overleaf" as (strictly) the following page, but I suspect actual usage doesn't necessarily retain this distinction
– Robin Hamilton
Jun 14 '17 at 20:39
I wasn't able to find any dictionary definitions that really allowed my interpretation either; but I was really wondering whether my usage actually enjoys some currency in actual use despite not being codified in dictionaries, or whether I've just made it up myself. So even though I agree that M-W’s definition is more unambiguous, I would ideally like something stronger than just negative results from dictionaries. +1 for facing (page), though, which didn't pop up in my head while I was thinking about this earlier.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:44
I wasn't able to find any dictionary definitions that really allowed my interpretation either; but I was really wondering whether my usage actually enjoys some currency in actual use despite not being codified in dictionaries, or whether I've just made it up myself. So even though I agree that M-W’s definition is more unambiguous, I would ideally like something stronger than just negative results from dictionaries. +1 for facing (page), though, which didn't pop up in my head while I was thinking about this earlier.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:44
Perhaps current page can replace this page. In fact even that may be redundant if we use above/below/left/right.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:45
Perhaps current page can replace this page. In fact even that may be redundant if we use above/below/left/right.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:45
I don't know if it's just me, but if I am on page 2 and see overleaf, I would most certainly refer to page 1 (turn the page backwards) rather than refer to the facing page (3). If it turns out to be otherwise, I would take it as an error.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:55
I don't know if it's just me, but if I am on page 2 and see overleaf, I would most certainly refer to page 1 (turn the page backwards) rather than refer to the facing page (3). If it turns out to be otherwise, I would take it as an error.
– alwayslearning
Jun 14 '17 at 18:55
1
1
The old "recto / verso" distinction might be worth considering in this context. -- in modern terms, "facing page" / "next page". I'd tend to interpret "overleaf" as (strictly) the following page, but I suspect actual usage doesn't necessarily retain this distinction
– Robin Hamilton
Jun 14 '17 at 20:39
The old "recto / verso" distinction might be worth considering in this context. -- in modern terms, "facing page" / "next page". I'd tend to interpret "overleaf" as (strictly) the following page, but I suspect actual usage doesn't necessarily retain this distinction
– Robin Hamilton
Jun 14 '17 at 20:39
add a comment |
The sources I will present below use the words overleaf and opposite page according to the following rules:
In words:
Rule 1. The text on a verso (left) page refers to the items on the immediately following recto (right) page as being on the opposite page.
Rule 2. Conversely, the text on a recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately preceding verso (left) page also as being on the opposite page.
Rule 3. A recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately following verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is obvious, as these two pages are in fact the two sides of the same sheet).
Rule 4. A verso (left) page refers to the items on the next-in-sequence verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is perhaps a surprise; it says that the word overleaf denotes the exact same page regardless of whether the word appears in the text on a verso page, or in the text on the recto page that immediately follows the verso page. One might have thought that the word would instead refer to the recto page immediately preceding the present verso page.)
Consider this book. On p. 66 it says that A good sixteen microtypographic errors are hidden in the example on the opposite page, and that search for mistakes is helped overleaf. And indeed, on p. 67 is some dummy text (in accordance with Rule 1), and on p. 68 the 'solution', with the errors highlighted (in accordance with Rule 4). A different part of the same book says, on p. 31, that The critical letter combinations in the various typefaces are compared overleaf. According to Rule 3, this should mean p. 32, and it is indeed so. Unfortunately, there is no instance of Rule 2 in this book (at least not in what's accessible on google books).
The same three rules are used in this book.
Rule 2 is illustrated in this book: on p. 35, it is stated that an illustration of the spinal cord is given on the opposite page, and indeed there is such an illustration on p. 34. The multiple usages of overleaf on p. 35 all refer to the illustration on p. 36, in accordance with Rule 3.
Another illustration of Rule 2 is in this final book. On p. 339 it is talks about certain items on the opposite page, namely 'a dancer carrying the kāpā' at the top, and 'dancers executing subdued movement' at the bottom. And photos of both of these are found respectively at the top and the bottom of p. 338. (I'll admit that I don't know what the word overleaf on p. 338 refers to. There doesn't seem to be any images corresponding to the stated description either on p. 340, as Rule 4 would demand, or on p. 337, as the 'common sense' interpretation would suggest.)
answered 2 days ago
linguisticturnlinguisticturn
5,4011332
add a comment |
The sources I will present below use the words overleaf and opposite page according to the following rules:
In words:
Rule 1. The text on a verso (left) page refers to the items on the immediately following recto (right) page as being on the opposite page.
Rule 2. Conversely, the text on a recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately preceding verso (left) page also as being on the opposite page.
Rule 3. A recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately following verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is obvious, as these two pages are in fact the two sides of the same sheet).
Rule 4. A verso (left) page refers to the items on the next-in-sequence verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is perhaps a surprise; it says that the word overleaf denotes the exact same page regardless of whether the word appears in the text on a verso page, or in the text on the recto page that immediately follows the verso page. One might have thought that the word would instead refer to the recto page immediately preceding the present verso page.)
Consider this book. On p. 66 it says that A good sixteen microtypographic errors are hidden in the example on the opposite page, and that search for mistakes is helped overleaf. And indeed, on p. 67 is some dummy text (in accordance with Rule 1), and on p. 68 the 'solution', with the errors highlighted (in accordance with Rule 4). A different part of the same book says, on p. 31, that The critical letter combinations in the various typefaces are compared overleaf. According to Rule 3, this should mean p. 32, and it is indeed so. Unfortunately, there is no instance of Rule 2 in this book (at least not in what's accessible on google books).
The same three rules are used in this book.
Rule 2 is illustrated in this book: on p. 35, it is stated that an illustration of the spinal cord is given on the opposite page, and indeed there is such an illustration on p. 34. The multiple usages of overleaf on p. 35 all refer to the illustration on p. 36, in accordance with Rule 3.
Another illustration of Rule 2 is in this final book. On p. 339 it is talks about certain items on the opposite page, namely 'a dancer carrying the kāpā' at the top, and 'dancers executing subdued movement' at the bottom. And photos of both of these are found respectively at the top and the bottom of p. 338. (I'll admit that I don't know what the word overleaf on p. 338 refers to. There doesn't seem to be any images corresponding to the stated description either on p. 340, as Rule 4 would demand, or on p. 337, as the 'common sense' interpretation would suggest.)
answered 2 days ago
linguisticturnlinguisticturn
5,4011332
add a comment |
The sources I will present below use the words overleaf and opposite page according to the following rules:
In words:
Rule 1. The text on a verso (left) page refers to the items on the immediately following recto (right) page as being on the opposite page.
Rule 2. Conversely, the text on a recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately preceding verso (left) page also as being on the opposite page.
Rule 3. A recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately following verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is obvious, as these two pages are in fact the two sides of the same sheet).
Rule 4. A verso (left) page refers to the items on the next-in-sequence verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is perhaps a surprise; it says that the word overleaf denotes the exact same page regardless of whether the word appears in the text on a verso page, or in the text on the recto page that immediately follows the verso page. One might have thought that the word would instead refer to the recto page immediately preceding the present verso page.)
Consider this book. On p. 66 it says that A good sixteen microtypographic errors are hidden in the example on the opposite page, and that search for mistakes is helped overleaf. And indeed, on p. 67 is some dummy text (in accordance with Rule 1), and on p. 68 the 'solution', with the errors highlighted (in accordance with Rule 4). A different part of the same book says, on p. 31, that The critical letter combinations in the various typefaces are compared overleaf. According to Rule 3, this should mean p. 32, and it is indeed so. Unfortunately, there is no instance of Rule 2 in this book (at least not in what's accessible on google books).
The same three rules are used in this book.
Rule 2 is illustrated in this book: on p. 35, it is stated that an illustration of the spinal cord is given on the opposite page, and indeed there is such an illustration on p. 34. The multiple usages of overleaf on p. 35 all refer to the illustration on p. 36, in accordance with Rule 3.
Another illustration of Rule 2 is in this final book. On p. 339 it is talks about certain items on the opposite page, namely 'a dancer carrying the kāpā' at the top, and 'dancers executing subdued movement' at the bottom. And photos of both of these are found respectively at the top and the bottom of p. 338. (I'll admit that I don't know what the word overleaf on p. 338 refers to. There doesn't seem to be any images corresponding to the stated description either on p. 340, as Rule 4 would demand, or on p. 337, as the 'common sense' interpretation would suggest.)
answered 2 days ago
linguisticturnlinguisticturn
5,4011332
The sources I will present below use the words overleaf and opposite page according to the following rules:
In words:
Rule 1. The text on a verso (left) page refers to the items on the immediately following recto (right) page as being on the opposite page.
Rule 2. Conversely, the text on a recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately preceding verso (left) page also as being on the opposite page.
Rule 3. A recto (right) page refers to the items on the immediately following verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is obvious, as these two pages are in fact the two sides of the same sheet).
Rule 4. A verso (left) page refers to the items on the next-in-sequence verso (left) page as being overleaf. (This is perhaps a surprise; it says that the word overleaf denotes the exact same page regardless of whether the word appears in the text on a verso page, or in the text on the recto page that immediately follows the verso page. One might have thought that the word would instead refer to the recto page immediately preceding the present verso page.)
Consider this book. On p. 66 it says that A good sixteen microtypographic errors are hidden in the example on the opposite page, and that search for mistakes is helped overleaf. And indeed, on p. 67 is some dummy text (in accordance with Rule 1), and on p. 68 the 'solution', with the errors highlighted (in accordance with Rule 4). A different part of the same book says, on p. 31, that The critical letter combinations in the various typefaces are compared overleaf. According to Rule 3, this should mean p. 32, and it is indeed so. Unfortunately, there is no instance of Rule 2 in this book (at least not in what's accessible on google books).
The same three rules are used in this book.
Rule 2 is illustrated in this book: on p. 35, it is stated that an illustration of the spinal cord is given on the opposite page, and indeed there is such an illustration on p. 34. The multiple usages of overleaf on p. 35 all refer to the illustration on p. 36, in accordance with Rule 3.
Another illustration of Rule 2 is in this final book. On p. 339 it is talks about certain items on the opposite page, namely 'a dancer carrying the kāpā' at the top, and 'dancers executing subdued movement' at the bottom. And photos of both of these are found respectively at the top and the bottom of p. 338. (I'll admit that I don't know what the word overleaf on p. 338 refers to. There doesn't seem to be any images corresponding to the stated description either on p. 340, as Rule 4 would demand, or on p. 337, as the 'common sense' interpretation would suggest.)
answered 2 days ago
linguisticturnlinguisticturn
5,4011332
answered 2 days ago
linguisticturnlinguisticturn
5,4011332
answered 2 days ago
linguisticturnlinguisticturn
5,4011332
answered 2 days ago
linguisticturnlinguisticturn
5,4011332
5,4011332
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f393939%2fdoes-overleaf-necessarily-imply-turning-over-paper%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Keep in mind that the author of a book may not know whether something is going to fall on an even page or an odd one, so "overleaf" is often used when it might be more accurate (but not a nice-sounding) to say "on the next page".
– Hot Licks
Jun 14 '17 at 18:18
@HotLicks The author will almost certainly not know. It is the job of the publisher’s manuscript editor (= me) to check that all such references are correct once the text has been set and composed.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 18:22
... Do subsequent reformattings similarly get checked?
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 14 '17 at 19:27
1
@EdwinAshworth Once the book is printed, there are no subsequent reformattings (unless it gets reprinted in a different format, in which case yes, they do). Things like references, footnote numbering, running headers, page numbers, etc., are always double-checked extensively in the final imposition proof.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Jun 14 '17 at 19:34
Some such expressions, with literal reference to print and paper, can and do apply by extension to Web publications--I am thinking here of the use of "below the fold" in Daily Kos, for instance.
– Brian Donovan
Jun 14 '17 at 20:20