Quotation marks are a cornerstone of written language, but in the court reporting industry, they’re more than just punctuation—they’re a tool for clarity, accuracy, and integrity. The seemingly simple act of quoting a witness or a document can spark heated debates among court reporters and scopists alike. Why? Because their ultimate responsibility is to uphold the accuracy of the record while ensuring that anyone reading a transcript fully understands the context.
In this post, we’ll explore the most common debates surrounding quotation marks, examine guidance from industry experts, and summarize the essential rules that every court reporter and scopist should know. Whether you’re a student of the Complete Scoping Course by Scoping International or a seasoned professional, this guide will help you navigate the complexities of quoting in legal transcripts.
Why Quotation Marks Matter as a Scopist
In the legal field, words carry weight. Misplaced punctuation can alter meaning, create confusion, or even affect the outcome of a case. Court reporters—and by extension, scopists—must carefully consider when to use quotation marks to represent the words of witnesses, attorneys, and documents accurately.
The debate around quotation marks largely stems from the reporter’s responsibility to maintain a precise and unambiguous record. While everyday writing uses quotation marks to indicate speech or highlight a term, court reporting is about clarity, context, and trustworthiness. A properly placed quote can eliminate ambiguity and guide readers through complex testimony without misrepresenting the speaker.
Debate #1: Quoting a Witness Recounting a Conversation
One of the most common debates in court reporting is whether you can use quotation marks when a witness is recounting a conversation they had with someone else. Some reporters hesitate to use quotation marks in these cases because they were not present for the conversation or there is no recording to verify the exact wording.
Industry Guidance
- Morson (1997): “…remember that the witness is sworn to tell the truth, and this is the witness’s account of who said what. Use quotation marks as much as possible for clarity.”
- Wakeman Wells (2011): “If the criterion were simply that we cannot prove someone really said something, then nothing would ever be quoted. Since it is virtually impossible to relate a conversation and remember the exact words used, particularly in reporting when testimony often comes up considerably after the fact, it is necessary to use different criteria. So we will use this criterion: Are these the exact words you would use if you were talking face to face with someone? If so, they are quoted. If not, they are not quoted.”
Key takeaway: Quotation marks are used for clarity, not to guarantee the truthfulness or accuracy of a witness’s statement.
Example in Practice
- Without quotation marks:
Q. Did you say outright I don’t pay taxes? - With quotation marks:
Q. Did you say outright, “I don’t pay taxes”?
Notice how quotation marks immediately clarify the speaker’s words and intent. The first one could be misread as the witness accused the attorney of not paying taxes.
Cap and Comma Preference
Many reporters prefer to use the “cap and comma” method in order to avoid the possibility of being accused of ensuring the truthfulness of the comments by using quotation marks. (If this has actually ever happened, please let us know in the comments below!)
While using the “cap and comma” method is ALWAYS appropriate and correct when you’re not sure where a quote begins or ends, according to industry authorities, using quotation marks appropriately clarifies the meaning and aids in readability of the transcript.
Scopist Tip: Always follow the court reporter’s preference consistently.
Debate #2: Quoting Thoughts or Wishes
Should you quote unspoken thoughts or wishes? Industry authorities disagree:
- Morson (1997): Generally, do not use quotation marks for unspoken thoughts; capitalize the first word instead.
- Wakeman Wells (2011): If the thoughts are the exact words the person would use in conversation, they can be quoted.
Practical Advice: Pick a method and remain consistent.
Debate #3: Quoting Misread or Faulty Documents
What happens when documents are read incorrectly into the record or the original document contains errors?
- Morson (1997): Quote the document exactly as it appears, including errors.
- Armstrong (1996): Some reporters replicate errors; others correct spellings.
Expert Perspective
Jim Barker (2014) explains:
“When a reporter quotes a speaker who is reading from a document, the reporter is not quoting the words in the document; the reporter is quoting the speaker’s words. Reporters are not responsible for verifying the accuracy of quotations offered by a speaker. Quotation marks indicate ‘this is what the speaker said.’”
Many reporters also include disclaimers for misreads or provide a note at the beginning of the transcript clarifying that the transcript reflects the words as spoken.
Basic Rules for Proper Quotation Usage
- Documents Read into the Record:
- Use quotation marks.
- Use single quotation marks for quotes within quotes.
- For multi-paragraph quotes, close quotation marks only at the end of the final paragraph.
- Direct Quotes:
- Use commas to separate the quote from the attribution.
- Example: She said, “If I had a penny for every time I’ve heard that excuse.”
- Indirect Quotes:
- Do not use quotation marks when the words are NOT what was said face to face.
- Example: She said that I could meet her on Tuesday.
- Titles:
- Example: The document is titled “Minutes of Meeting.”
- Defined or Discussed Words:
- Example: How would you define “occasionally”?
Punctuation Rules with Quotation Marks (American English)
- Period: Inside the quotation mark.
- Comma: Inside the quotation mark.
- Semicolon: Outside the quotation mark.
- Question Mark: Inside if part of the quote; outside if part of the sentence.
- Bonus: Quotation marks do not indicate tone in legal transcripts.
Example:
A. She said it was “done.”
- The court reporter cannot interpret tone—quotation marks only indicate what was said.
Commonly Confused Terms
- Paraphrase: Not exactly quoting a document or what was said, but loosely summing up in your own words.
- Direct Quote: The term often used in the court reporting industry, though, more accurately, we should use “direct discourse,” as Wakeman Wells does. Quotation marks would be used here when the person is recounting what they said or would have said if they were face to face. Often lead-in words such as “she said” are used. The quote is set off with a comma.
- Indirect Quote: Or “indirect discourse” is used when the person is recounting what was said from the listener’s point of view, often changing the pronoun form and verb tense.
Key Takeaways
- Quotation marks are about clarity and context, not about the truthfulness of the statement.
- Follow the court reporter’s preference consistently.
- Understanding debates around quoting conversations, thoughts, and documents strengthens editorial knowledge.
- Choose a style (“cap and comma” or quotation marks) and apply it consistently.
- Keep punctuation rules and distinctions between direct, indirect, and paraphrased quotes in mind.
To End the Great Debate
The “Great Quote Debate” shows that punctuation is never just about rules—it’s about responsibility, clarity, and professional judgment. Whether quoting a witness, an internal thought, or a misread document, the goal is to produce a transcript that is accurate, readable, and faithful to the record.
For deeper training, Scoping International’s the Complete Scoping Course includes a comprehensive module on quotation marks with real-world examples, ensuring you’re fully equipped to handle every quoting scenario confidently.
