Skip to main content
Post Made Community Wiki by Ben Webster
more clarifications
Source Link

One thing that some people don't know is that in mostsome languages [that have them], nobiliary particles¹ are neither capitalised (unless they appear at the beginning of the name; i.e. when initials are omitted)² nor alphabetised. In Dutch, for example, van, de, van der, etc are ignored for alphabetisation purposes. In Flemish names, however, the particles are usually both alphabetised and capitalised.

Example. (Dutch) B. L. van der Waerden should be under W, not V. Another format³ would be Waerden, B. L. van der.

Example. (German) C. L. F. von Lindemann should be under L, not V.

Example. (French) P. de Fermat should be under F, not D.

Example. (Flemish) M. Van den Bergh is under V! Note also the capitalisation of Van, but not den. This is presumably because the V occurs at the beginning of the name.

However, it seems that sometimes theorems named after people with such names may or may not (presumably depending on the country) drop the particle altogether: e.g. Fermat's little theorem, Lindemann–Weierstraß theorem. In (modern) Dutch, you would never do this; e.g. De Bruijn–Erdős theorem (note that De is capitalised, since the initials are omitted).

Remark. I find it entertaining to see that some authors are aware of these rules and others aren't (or does it depend on their BibTeX setup?). Next time you try to find a name of this form in the references, take a look at how the author alphabetised it.

Conclusion. Every country has different conventions, and it's very confusing. However, the strategy of following what the author uses herself is a safe one.


¹Their name is somewhat misleading: they do not always indicate nobility (e.g. in the Netherlands they don't).

²I believe that in German, the particle is omitted altogether if the surname is not preceded by the initials.

³This is the Dutch format. I don't know the conventions of other countries.

One thing that some people don't know is that in most languages [that have them], nobiliary particles¹ are neither capitalised (unless they appear at the beginning of the name; i.e. when initials are omitted)² nor alphabetised. In Dutch, for example, van, de, van der, etc are ignored for alphabetisation purposes.

Example. (Dutch) B. L. van der Waerden should be under W, not V. Another format³ would be Waerden, B. L. van der.

Example. (German) C. L. F. von Lindemann should be under L, not V.

Example. (French) P. de Fermat should be under F, not D.

However, it seems that sometimes theorems named after people with such names may or may not (presumably depending on the country) drop the particle altogether: e.g. Fermat's little theorem, Lindemann–Weierstraß theorem. In (modern) Dutch, you would never do this; e.g. De Bruijn–Erdős theorem (note that De is capitalised, since the initials are omitted).

Remark. I find it entertaining to see that some authors are aware of these rules and others aren't (or does it depend on their BibTeX setup?). Next time you try to find a name of this form in the references, take a look at how the author alphabetised it.

¹Their name is somewhat misleading: they do not always indicate nobility (e.g. in the Netherlands they don't).

²I believe that in German, the particle is omitted altogether if the surname is not preceded by the initials.

³This is the Dutch format. I don't know the conventions of other countries.

One thing that some people don't know is that in some languages, nobiliary particles¹ are neither capitalised (unless they appear at the beginning of the name; i.e. when initials are omitted)² nor alphabetised. In Dutch, for example, van, de, van der, etc are ignored for alphabetisation purposes. In Flemish names, however, the particles are usually both alphabetised and capitalised.

Example. (Dutch) B. L. van der Waerden should be under W, not V. Another format³ would be Waerden, B. L. van der.

Example. (German) C. L. F. von Lindemann should be under L, not V.

Example. (French) P. de Fermat should be under F, not D.

Example. (Flemish) M. Van den Bergh is under V! Note also the capitalisation of Van, but not den. This is presumably because the V occurs at the beginning of the name.

However, it seems that sometimes theorems named after people with such names may or may not (presumably depending on the country) drop the particle altogether: e.g. Fermat's little theorem, Lindemann–Weierstraß theorem. In (modern) Dutch, you would never do this; e.g. De Bruijn–Erdős theorem (note that De is capitalised, since the initials are omitted).

Remark. I find it entertaining to see that some authors are aware of these rules and others aren't (or does it depend on their BibTeX setup?). Next time you try to find a name of this form in the references, take a look at how the author alphabetised it.

Conclusion. Every country has different conventions, and it's very confusing. However, the strategy of following what the author uses herself is a safe one.


¹Their name is somewhat misleading: they do not always indicate nobility (e.g. in the Netherlands they don't).

²I believe that in German, the particle is omitted altogether if the surname is not preceded by the initials.

³This is the Dutch format. I don't know the conventions of other countries.

fixed some mistakes
Source Link

One thing that some people don't know is that in most languages [that have them], nobiliary particles¹ are neither capitalised (unless they appear at the beginning of the name; i.e. when initials are omitted)² nor alphabetised. In Dutch, for example, van, de, van der, etc are ignored for alphabetisation purposes.

Example. (Dutch) B. L. van der Waerden should be under W, not V. Another format²format³ would be Waerden, B. L. van der.

Example. (German) C. L. F. von Lindemann should be under L, not V.

Example. (French) P. de Fermat should be under F, not D.

However, it seems that sometimes theorems named after people with such names may or may not (presumably depending on the country) drop the particle altogether: e.g. Fermat's little theorem, Lindemann–Weierstraß theorem. In (modern) Dutch, you would never do this; e.g. De Bruijn–Erdős theorem (note that De is capitalised, since the initials are omitted).

Remark. I find it entertaining to see that some authors are aware of these rules and others aren't (or does it depend on their BibTeX setup?). Next time you try to find a name of this form in the references, take a look at how the author alphabetised it.

¹Their name is somewhat misleading: they do not always indicate nobility (e.g. in the Netherlands they don't).

²In Dutch, I know²I believe that thisin German, the particle is how one would do thisomitted altogether if the surname is not preceded by the initials.

³This is the Dutch format. I don't know the conventions of other countries, but my guess is that they are similar.

One thing that some people don't know is that in most languages [that have them], nobiliary particles¹ are neither capitalised (unless they appear at the beginning of the name; i.e. when initials are omitted) nor alphabetised. In Dutch, for example, van, de, van der, etc are ignored for alphabetisation purposes.

Example. (Dutch) B. L. van der Waerden should be under W, not V. Another format² would be Waerden, B. L. van der.

Example. (German) C. L. F. von Lindemann should be under L, not V.

Example. (French) P. de Fermat should be under F, not D.

However, it seems that sometimes theorems named after people with such names may or may not (presumably depending on the country) drop the particle altogether: e.g. Fermat's little theorem, Lindemann–Weierstraß theorem. In (modern) Dutch, you would never do this; e.g. De Bruijn–Erdős theorem (note that De is capitalised, since the initials are omitted).

Remark. I find it entertaining to see that some authors are aware of these rules and others aren't (or does it depend on their BibTeX setup?). Next time you try to find a name of this form in the references, take a look at how the author alphabetised it.

¹Their name is somewhat misleading: they do not always indicate nobility (e.g. in the Netherlands they don't).

²In Dutch, I know that this is how one would do this. I don't know the conventions of other countries, but my guess is that they are similar.

One thing that some people don't know is that in most languages [that have them], nobiliary particles¹ are neither capitalised (unless they appear at the beginning of the name; i.e. when initials are omitted)² nor alphabetised. In Dutch, for example, van, de, van der, etc are ignored for alphabetisation purposes.

Example. (Dutch) B. L. van der Waerden should be under W, not V. Another format³ would be Waerden, B. L. van der.

Example. (German) C. L. F. von Lindemann should be under L, not V.

Example. (French) P. de Fermat should be under F, not D.

However, it seems that sometimes theorems named after people with such names may or may not (presumably depending on the country) drop the particle altogether: e.g. Fermat's little theorem, Lindemann–Weierstraß theorem. In (modern) Dutch, you would never do this; e.g. De Bruijn–Erdős theorem (note that De is capitalised, since the initials are omitted).

Remark. I find it entertaining to see that some authors are aware of these rules and others aren't (or does it depend on their BibTeX setup?). Next time you try to find a name of this form in the references, take a look at how the author alphabetised it.

¹Their name is somewhat misleading: they do not always indicate nobility (e.g. in the Netherlands they don't).

²I believe that in German, the particle is omitted altogether if the surname is not preceded by the initials.

³This is the Dutch format. I don't know the conventions of other countries.

Source Link

One thing that some people don't know is that in most languages [that have them], nobiliary particles¹ are neither capitalised (unless they appear at the beginning of the name; i.e. when initials are omitted) nor alphabetised. In Dutch, for example, van, de, van der, etc are ignored for alphabetisation purposes.

Example. (Dutch) B. L. van der Waerden should be under W, not V. Another format² would be Waerden, B. L. van der.

Example. (German) C. L. F. von Lindemann should be under L, not V.

Example. (French) P. de Fermat should be under F, not D.

However, it seems that sometimes theorems named after people with such names may or may not (presumably depending on the country) drop the particle altogether: e.g. Fermat's little theorem, Lindemann–Weierstraß theorem. In (modern) Dutch, you would never do this; e.g. De Bruijn–Erdős theorem (note that De is capitalised, since the initials are omitted).

Remark. I find it entertaining to see that some authors are aware of these rules and others aren't (or does it depend on their BibTeX setup?). Next time you try to find a name of this form in the references, take a look at how the author alphabetised it.

¹Their name is somewhat misleading: they do not always indicate nobility (e.g. in the Netherlands they don't).

²In Dutch, I know that this is how one would do this. I don't know the conventions of other countries, but my guess is that they are similar.