Averroes MD

Chicago vs MLA?

Recommended Posts

I think it's just that different disciplines prefer different citation styles. History uses Chicago whereas English/lit/critical theory use MLA, at least in my experience. I don't think any of them are more academic than the other, just different ways of accomplishing the same thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, alain said:

I think it's just that different disciplines prefer different citation styles. History uses Chicago whereas English/lit/critical theory use MLA, at least in my experience. I don't think any of them are more academic than the other, just different ways of accomplishing the same thing. 

 

Thanks. I wonder what Theology & Religious Studies use. I'm assuming Chicago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most RS and Theology programs use the notes and bibliography style of Chicago, while sciences use the author-date style of Chicago. Yes, there's two forms of Chicago but not much difference.

While Turabian use to be an ever slight deviation from Chicago, that's no longer the case. I *think* Turabian finally gave up and fully merged with Chicago in the latest addition.

Like you Averroes, I don't care much for MLA but that's b/c I've been using Chicago for the last 10 years or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it depends on your region and experience. I use MLA and APA because I started in Lit/Critical Theory and APA is standard in Latin American social sciences. 

 

I personally don't like Chicago. It's too exclusive for my tastes and needs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now