How to remove widows and orphans in microsoft word

In theory, those of us involved in this discussion are old enough to remember when we first heard the term, but weРІР‚в„ўre also old enough to imagine we heard it many years earlier than we actually heard it.Р”Р‡urther, looking at examples of fine printing from before 1970, pages may be devoid of widows but there seems to have been no effort to eliminate orphans, suggesting that nobody gave the notion much thought before the advent of computerized page makeup.

(The latest edition of Gregg, locking the barn door after the horse is gone, has reversed course and made the correction.)Р”В«ut the more interesting question that arose is this: When did the term orphan first enter typesetting argot? A few of us have been looking, and so far, weРІР‚в„ўve found widow defined in references from before 1980, but weРІР‚в„ўve found no references to orphan that old. As a result, a lot more people have the definitions wrong way round than have them in the traditional order. This led to Microsoft getting the definitions backwards in Microsoft Word. However, the Gregg Reference Manual, which has been the standard secretarial handbook for decades, got the definitions reversed. This is the general consensus among old-time compositors. An orphan is the opposite-the first line of a paragraph stranded at the bottom of the page. The original meaning of widow (in the typesetting context) is the last line of a paragraph carried over to the top of a page. This raises a couple of questions, and in the course of the discussion, we resolved one of them. One of the criteria publishers often include in their specifications is РІР‚Сљno widows or orphans.РІР‚Сњ The more criteria they specify, the more labor is required and the higher the price (no secret there). Publishers get to make choices when they are buying typesetting. I got into an interesting discussion the other day about a nicety of composition.

How to remove widows and orphans in microsoft word