Indexing is so often about following the rules, but today I want to write about breaking the rules. Specifically, the alphabetical sort that is often the basis for organizing entries. 

Force-sorting is when an entry is deliberated taken out of alphabetical order and placed elsewhere in the index. This can happen to either main entries or subheadings. Usually the change is subtle, and there should be a reasonable explanation for the move that the reader can understand and that improves the index. 

Force-sorting should also be used sparingly, in my opinion. The convention of alphabetical sort does serve an important purpose, as a way of training users and meeting their expectations for where an entry should fall. So we don’t want to catch readers by surprise and make them confused. Ideally, the force-sorting will be done in a way that they will not even notice, and they will instead enjoy the smoother user experience.

Now, you could say, why not just manipulate the wording or even, possibly, the spelling, of the entry to naturally get the preferred sort? Would that not be better than violating the sort? In some circumstances, perhaps. But I still want the entries to read naturally, and sometimes manipulating word order can lead to awkward constructions that could cause the user to stumble. Of the two, I think force-sorting can sometimes be the lesser of two evils, and if done well, the reader should not even notice.

There are a few situations in which I either commonly force-sort or have seen it done, which I will briefly discuss below. If there are any situations that you use, and which I do not mention, please let me know. I would like to learn.

Logical Order

Sometimes I will have a series of entries that are in correct alphabetical order, but could, in my opinion, make a little more sense if reordered. Say, for example, I have the following main entries:

• dog collars
• dog food
• dogs
• dog walking 

which I then change to,

• dogs
• dog collars
• dog food
• dog walking

This allows the most general entry to rise to the top, while the more specific, and related, entries come after. I see this as a way to say to the reader, “Start here with dogs, and then if you want other dog-related stuff, read further.” The first entry could, of course, be a singular dog, which would also sort first, but I think some entries just work better in their plural form, so I am willing to force-sort to get the same effect.

Introductory Subheadings

Another example of force-sorting for a more logical order is one I mentioned in my reflection last week on subheadings. This is to index introductory material about a subject under a subheading like “about,” “approach to,” “introduction,” or “overview,” and force-sort the subheading to the top of the entry. This gives the reader a clear starting point, and I think it makes more sense to put “introduction” at the beginning, rather than buried somewhere in the middle. 

Names

Names can use a lot of force-sorting to get right, as not all names follow the current western conventions. Two main situations come to mind.

I am often asked to force-sort Chinese names, which I think makes a lot of sense. Essentially, this is applying word-by-word sort to the Chinese names while the rest of the index follows letter-by-letter sort. The reason for this is to make sure that all names with the same surname are grouped together instead of interspersed between other entries. This also keeps everyone named Chen separated from those named Cheng, for example. Why not use word-by-word sort for the whole index? I don’t have a great answer, and I did have one client suggest I just use word-by-word. Most of my clients, though, request force-sorting. Perhaps the perception is that Chinese names are an exception to the rule, while readers will still expect the rest of the index to follow letter-by-letter. 

The other scenario with names, which Enid Zafran discussed in her workshop at the ISC/SCI conference, is for names of kings, popes, and others with appellations. In some history books, these lists of names can get quite extensive, and so Enid suggests imposing the order of saints, royalty and popes, and then nobility and other people of lower rank. This provides a measure of grouping throughout the list, and consistency throughout the index. In the following example, you will also notice that I add an element of chronological order to the two popes. 

• John the Baptist
• John of Shanghai and San Francisco
• John (king of England)
• John XI (pope)
• John Paul I (pope)
• John of Gaunt

Works of Authors or Artists

In some cases, a person—whether that be a scholar, poet, fiction writer, artist, or film maker—may have several works discussed. If it is just one or maybe two works, I probably will not force-sort, but if there are several discussed, it can be helpful to gather these at the end of the entry for the reader to easily scan. If there are several subheadings in the entry, this is done by creating a subheading called “works,” for example, and force-sorting it to the end, if it does not naturally fall there. Each work then becomes a sub-subheading.

Ignoring Articles

I am not sure if this really counts as force-sorting, as it is already the convention to ignore the articles A, An, and The that appear at the beginning of titles of works or places. But if, like me, you prefer to word the entry as A Tale of Two Cities, as opposed to inverting or leaving out the article, the entry will need force-sorting to place correctly. 

Biographies

The last situation I want to mention is in biographies, which I was reminded of by Kendra Millis in her talk on indexing biographies at the recent ISC/SCI conference. As Kendra pointed out, in some indexes the subheadings for the main subject are in either chronological order or page order, rather than alphabetical order. Since the entry for the main subject is often enormous and subentries can easily become buried, these alternative sorts can be attempts to make the main entry easier to navigate. These alternative sorts also require, of course, force-sorting. Personally, I would first try other approaches to bring order to the main entry in a biography, but I mention it here as a possibility and as a force-sorting example.

I hope this discussion and these examples have been helpful. Let me know if you have any other scenarios in which you break the rules. I’m all for both following the rules and breaking the rules, so long as it helps the index and the reader.