Underlines or Italics?

When submitting a manuscript for professional publication, should the author use underlines or italics?

Before the age of computers, underlining was the rule, of course. But back in the late ’80 when home computers were not quite the norm and dot matrix printers were still king, at least one profession author recommend always to underline. Italic print could be easily overlooked by the typesetters used to seeing underlines.

Nowadays things might be different. Which should be used? Assume the author is writing before finding a publisher and doesn’t have specific guidelines.

If it’s being submitted for assessment, I’d don’t see there’s any reason to not use italics. The only purpose of underlining was to indicate italics in the first place, because they were so rarely available outside of professional print shops. (Even the painfully staid world of academic theses now expects italics in place of underlining.) If it’s then going to be published, it’ll almost certainly go through numerous draft stages before it gets near a typesetter.

Tenny weeny niggle - it’s a typescript, not a manuscript. :slight_smile:

Italic vs. Underline for what? In citations? If there, then follow the guidelines set forth by the style (Chicago, APA, etc) you’re using for your citations - typically as established by the publisher.

If within the text, I’d go with italics, mainly for the same reasons that GorillaMan mentioned.