> But consistent with what? With just yourself (that might be OK). Yep, that's what I meant. Within a (set of) text(s). Each newspaper has its set of rules to

> But consistent with what? With just yourself (that might be OK). Yep, that's what I meant. Within a (set of) text(s). Each newspaper has its set of rules to follow to ensure consistency, so if you need consistency across an organization you can do this. English newspapers do that too. > The Académie provides a standard that you can be consistent with. ...And that people don't consistently follow, because this standard does not reflect the reality of how the language is spoken or written. Almost by definition. Anyway, we are still waiting for their dictionary, which first edition should have been released maybe a century ago. They have one important task and they can't manage to finish it. Not a big issue though (except for the money thrown out of the window), if you need a dictionary that actually works you have the Robert or Wiktionary. But we need documentation for the French language and that's why the Observatoire de la langue française exists (http://observatoire.francophonie.org/l-observatoire-de-la-langue-francaise/ http://observatoire.francophonie.org/l-observatoire-de-la-la...). Anyway, each individual is going to speak the language with their own quirks and particularities. Consistency across everybody is unreachable. But that's fine. For Covid, the Académie has ironically been a source of inconsistency. Before their intervention, everybody had been saying "le covid". All was well. Now, usage is uncertain here.