Proper use of "i.e."

[Maggie_the_Ocelot]

@BigT

It’s not like “etc,” which people read out loud as et cetera.

Most famously, Yul Brynner.

[AskNott]

I got in the habit of thinking of and explaining the abbreviation in English. I don’t speak Latin intentionally.

i.e. = in explanation, and

e.g. = example given.

[astro]

@Carl_Pham

If you want to start a sentence with a Latin phrase, you should spell it out, not use the abbreviation. The abbreviations are reserved for interior use.

Exempli gratia, if you want to begin a sentence with the Latin for “in other words” you write “id est,” while if it occurs as an introduction to a subordinate clause “i.e.” is fine. If you want to begin a sentence with the Latin for “for example” you write “exempli gratia,” while if it occurs midsentence you write “e.g.” And so on.

I would say it falls under the same kind of logic that has you writing out numbers when they begin a sentence (“Four score and seven years ago…”).f

Can you give some example of this being done in contemporary published writing? I have never seen this done re fully spelling out a Latin phrase that beings a sentence.

[UncaStuart]

@Colibri

The general answer to questions like this is to re-write your sentence so it doesn’t start with i.e. or any other awkward expression.

Agree. Also, in technical publication groups for which I have worked, i.e., e.g., and etc. are all banned anyway, in any position in a sentence.

[Colibri]

@astro

Can you give some example of this being done in contemporary published writing? I have never seen this done re fully spelling out a Latin phrase that beings a sentence.

Likewise, I have never seen this. I doubt there is a specific rule in most style manuals because no good writer would ever structure a sentence that way.

@UncaStuart

Agree. Also, in technical publication groups for which I have worked, i.e., e.g., and etc. are all banned anyway, in any position in a sentence.

These abbreviations have fallen out of favor in popular writing in general. I personally never use them in articles intended for a general audience. They may be used to some degree in scientific publications, but even there not as much as formerly. (An exception is et al., which is standard when referring to a publication with multiple authors.)

[ftg]

I am quite used to seeing, and using a variety of Latin abbreviations in scientific papers.

One set that is relevant are the “footnote” ones. E.g.,

1. Adams, Cecil, The Straight Dope (Chicago Review Press), pp 44.
2. Ibid., pp 99.
3. Adams, op. cit., pp 122.
4. Loc. cit.

So 2 of the 3 can appear at the beginning of a “sentence” and are capitalized. The other is apparently not properly used at the beginning of a sentence.

The abbreviations “cp.” “cf.” and “ca./c.” (circa) sometimes appear at the beginning of sentences and are capitalized.

There are some like “N.B.” (nota bene). Usually both are capitalized regardless of position. Ditto “Q.E.D”, “C.V.” and several others. Also the periods are usually dropped which may be part of the reason.