Should a connective join two titles that only their period makes titles, as in Ing. et Ing. Jan Novák? #970

Found by the cz-candidates local corpus (#963), fetched 2026-10-30. Names are invented.

Today

• Ing. et Ing. Jan Novák → given Ing. et Ing., middle Jan, family Novák, with no title.
• Mgr. et Mgr. Jan Novák → title Mgr. et Mgr..

Czech law writes a repeated degree as X et X.

Mechanism: mgr is a listed title. ing is excluded from the title vocabulary on purpose (#840, #848: a borne given name and surname), and bc is not listed; each reads as a title alone only by its period (rules/H2). The connective run (rules/P3 and the title chain) needs vocabulary titles on both sides, so the run falls through to the given name. Under locales.CS, JUDr. et Mgr. reads correctly, the pack listing JUDr..

Size: of the 445 records whose title box holds et, 190 lose their title under the default and 177 under locales.CS: Ing. et Ing. 102 of 102, Bc. et Bc. 38 of 38, Mgr. et Mgr. 5 of 223. A further 15 (13 under cs) keep their first title and lose the X et X run behind it (Mgr. Bc. et Bc., doc. Ing. et Ing.).

Options

• (a) Let a connective chain two period-shaped title words when the run opens the given part, the position where H2 reads each word alone.
• (b) List bc under cs only. ing stays excluded, so (b) alone does not fix Ing. et Ing..

Open: rules/H2's example Xyz. and Mary Smith reads given Xyz. and Mary, so (a) must stop at a name word or that example moves.