Hi Jörg,

Though, generally, the von, as well as a few others, are nobility particles in 
Germany, but not necessarily always 
noblility particles, but at times signify the place where a persons ancestor 
came from!

Now, in the case Goethe you are right that he was ennobled. Therefore the von 
is not truly part of his name.
He should be listed as you rightly mentioned under Goethe and not "von Goethe“.

It is impossible for a bibliographic system to handle this, so there is no 
switch for it! 

So, it is up to the author of a text to set up his entries properly, by putting 
the von in the right part of the name field.

> Am 27.01.2015 um 19:20 schrieb Jörg Weger <joerg73....@googlemail.com>:
> The default way to diplay (inverted) names with “von” and “van” is “von 
> Goethe” and “van Halen” in in-text references and “von Goethe, Johann 
> Wolfgang” and “van Halen, Edward”. The problem with this is that while AFAIK 
> the Dutch “van Halen” means that one of his ancestors came ”from” a 
> place/city called “Halen” in German names the “von” is always a sign of 
> nobility. Even long before monarchy and nobility was abolished in Germany by 
> the revolution of 1919 you would not have talked about “von Goethe” but 
> simply “Goethe”–so in a reference it would be “(Goethe 1774)” and “Goethe, 
> Johann Wolfgang von” in the publications list, but still “(van Halen 1984)” 
> and “van Halen, Edward”. It would be nice if you could switch between two 
> modes while invoking the citation. I have not yet discovered where this order 
> is defined.

If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net

Reply via email to