Thank you for your comment! In Chicago style, commas and periods go inside the double quotation marks at the end of sentences: cmosshoptalk.com/2020/10/20/commas-and-periods-with-quotation-marks/. However, having the period outside the quotation mark is common in British English!

​@@QuotidianWriter Hello. Thanks for replying to my comment, Diane. :) Okay, it looks like you're right; I stand corrected. :) However, the blog you linked to mentions that it's *almost* always done that way. Quote: "According to The Chicago Manual of Style, commas and periods are almost always placed before a closing quotation mark, “like this,” rather than after, “like this”. This traditional style has persisted even though it’s no longer universally followed outside of the United States and isn’t entirely logical." There are a few examples of putting the " *before* the period/full stop. I like that the blog post states that it isn't entirely logical. And I agree. It's not logical at all. In your example, I would write it like this: She had mentioned something about "taking her time". I'd say that the period belongs to the sentence and not the quoted phrase. If the same sentence was a piece of dialogue, I would write it like this: "She had mentioned something about "taking her time"." It's funny to me that the practice regarding this has gone back and forth a few times since 1904. It's also strange to me, that commas and periods are the only forms of punctuation that would go before the " in your example. I.e., it would be: Had she mentioned something about "taking her time"? I also find it funny that the reason for putting the period after the " is because of *how it looks*. If you ask me, I'd say that it's about time that the "rule" regarding putting the period after the " should only apply to quotes and dialogues that are opened with a ". I go by the "rule" that you should only end a sentence with a ", if you begin it with one. That's logical to me. Therefore, I'll just keep on writing it in the British English way, even though I write in American English. :)

@@TassieDk I always love encountering fellow grammar nerds! :) I totally get where you're coming from, and I've met several American writers who prefer the approach you described. At the end of the day, it's really a style choice and not a grammatical one. Either way is correct on a technical level, and consistency is far more important. I hope you'll continue standing up for what you believe in as a grammarian! ;)

@@QuotidianWriterMe too. It’s nice to know that there are people who care about grammar as much as I do. I’m a bit nit-picky, but I think it’s only a good thing. It’s especially useful to have that level of attention to detail, if/when you plan to write and publish novels on your own. 😊 (General you and not you specifically, Diane.) Thanks for your reply. I think you’re right that consistency is key. And it’s nice to know that there are others beside me who prefer the alternative approach. 😄 I’ll keep on standing up for what I believe in. Grammar is a precious matter to me in English as well as in Danish. Side note: I think it’s funny that one of the great examples of why a comma before direct address is important is the same in Danish. There’s a big difference between “let’s eat, children” and “let’s eat children”. In Danish, these would be “lad os spise, børn” and “lad os spise børn”. 😂