I showed something I’d written to Marian Lizzi, my editor at Penguin. She advised me not to quote someone: “It sounds like you’re sneering at them,” she said. She was right — it did sound that way, although I didn’t want it to. Unfortunately, there was no alternative punctuation that conveyed neutrality or respect. It was sneer or nothing.
So here’s my proposal: Let the number of apostrophes indicate degree of respect for the speaker. Like this:
1. Single quotes = disrespect. Example: ‘Has a good chance of working’? You can’t be serious.
2. Double quotes (normal American usage) = neutral. Example: “We’re running out of working waterfront,” said Jim Barstow.
3. Triple quotes = respect. Example: According to a recent research report, “‘40% of the subjects failed to seek help.’”
4. Quadruple quotes = great respect. Example: According to Jane Brody, cataract surgery “”can be life-changing.””
But then…
What about the English (the British and their inverted commas)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark
It would be one more confusing thing — like “boot” and “biscuit”.
Or “chalk and cheese.” Or would that be ‘chalk and cheese”? Note the punctuation inside and outside the quotation marks, also confusing differences between American and British English…and other English-speaking countries.