Ellipsis
series of dots that indicate omission
The ellipsis (, plural ellipses; from Ancient Greek: ἔλλειψις, élleipsis, lit. 'leave out'), rendered ..., also known as suspension points, dots, periods of ellipsis, or ellipsis points, or, colloquially, dot, dot, dot is a punctuation mark consisting of a series of three dots. An ellipsis can be used in many ways, such as for intentional omission of text or numbers, to imply a concept without using words, or to mark a pause in speech. Style guides differ on how to render an ellipsis both digitally and in print. In some cases, an ellipsis may have two, four or more dots, spaced dots, or some incorporation with other punctuation.
Style
Opinions differ on how to render an ellipsis in printed material and are to some extent based on the technology used for rendering. According to The Chicago Manual of Style, it should consist of three periods, each separated from its neighbor by a non-breaking space: . . .. According to the AP Stylebook, the periods should be rendered with no space between them: .... A third option – available in electronic text – is to use the precomposed character U+2026 … HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS.
When text is omitted following a sentence, a period (full stop) terminates the sentence, and a subsequent ellipsis indicates one or more omitted sentences before continuing a longer quotation. Business Insider magazine suggests this style and it is also used in many academic journals.
The public source identifies “Ellipsis” as series of dots that indicate omission. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Ellipsis, series and dots.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Ellipsis”, the useful work is to connect “series of dots that indicate omission” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 28, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q32518. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2026.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Ellipsis”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Ellipsis primary sources, Ellipsis archive and Ellipsis research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Ellipsis”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Ellipsis” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.