Proof reading

[Moonraker]

Very, very true, Phil. Terry says "I think you will find the author is responsible for his/her work in this respect", and indeed it is he/she who should have the very last look at the proofs before they are passed for press.

My first job back in 1970 was to edit recruitment literature for the Civil Service and once the printer had set the type he would send us galley proofs - long sheets of papers comprising about two pages of print. We would cut these up and cow-gum them to grid pages, then read them over to check for printer's errors and to eliminate visual awkwardness, such as "rivers" (vertical "flows" of white down several lines on the page where there was a "ladder" of word-spacing) and "widows" and "orphans" - the first line of a paragraph isolated at the bottom of the page and the last line of a paragraph on its own at the top of a page. (I can't remember which is which.) We even tried to prevent a line starting with a digit.

We did this by slightly re-writing the text, for example inserting a few extra words or adjusting horizontal spacing.

We sent the proofs back to the printer, who would then follow our instructions and arrange his type into page format and send us page proofs, which we would check to make sure all was well and that no further mistakes had been made.

Galley proofs were already becoming a bit of a luxury and when I had a book published, also in 1970, it went straight to page proofs. Sadly the printer misunderstood my attempts to put a grave accent over an "e" in my typescript and as a proof amendment, and the "e" appeared as an "i" in the printed book.

Next week I shall tell you about my time as William Caxton's apprentice.

Moonraker

[Pete1052]

... once the printer had set the type he would send us galley proofs - long sheets of papers comprising about two pages of print.

That's the transition from hot type to electronic typesetting, a change which printers' and typesetters' labor unions in the U.S. tried to resist for three decades. Galley proofs are rarely seen these days.

I don't know what it is about looking at text on computer monitors that makes it so much more difficult to find errors than on printed copy--try though I do, more errors slip through when I proofread on a computer screen than on paper. My self-editing process is to print the document and mark it up in the evening with a highlighter. I know what errors the highlighting call attention to even though it would be mysterious to others.

I've been through the drill with writers whose English is a second language. In the medical consulting I used to do many of the Ph.D.s were foreign-born and not good writers. Many of them thought they could hand me a disk of a 50-page document at the end of the day and I could bring it back to work the next morning ready to be printed and delivered to the customer.

In professions where the CV means everything it stands to reason that a Ph.D. full-time employee earns around $75,000 a year and a part-time editor gets about $20,000. I suppose the brain-drain of highly educated people from the developing world (such as Outer Space, India) to the U.S. and Europe helps our economies, but it doesn't stop me from getting exasperated at times. Mick and I have commiserated about the occupational woes of being an editor ...

[SiegeGunner]

Many of them thought they could hand me a disk of a 50-page document at uitting time and I could bring it back to work the net morning ready to be printed and delivered to theme customer.

[Pete1052]

$%^*& you, Mick! See the above regarding computer monitors.

[Rockdoc]

David, whether it was an undergraduate or postgraduate thesis I avoided trying to rewrite a student's words as much as possible. Yes, I would make suggestions where there were flaws that affected the readers' comprehension but I feel quite strongly that their style of writing should be preserved - otherwise it quickly becomes the editor's words and they can lose interest if they've feel they've been put down. The concept of "face" in Middle and far East students is a minefield, IME. I preferred to show where they were overly terse or verbose or repetitious - cut and paste makes that too easy - so that the thesis was improved without taking the authorship away.

Keith

[Dragon]

I didn't say that my spouse's postgraduate supervisors proofed theses; I said they took an active interest. In other words, they made it clear that accurate English mattered. Where a student was struggling, they would take random sections and go through those in detail with the aim that the student could be alerted to his or her typical mistakes.

My father-in-law moderates chemistry doctorates as an external moderator and he describes exactly the problem you mention. Some students are simply utterly incapable of communicating lucidly about chemistry and shouldn't have been allowed to reach the stage of submission without some sort of intervention. They may be brilliant chemists but if they can't explain what they mean, the thesis is as near as useless as a reference.

I know nothing about chemistry or science. I'm totally dim that way. If a scientist friend can explain something so I can understand it, he must be talented and fully in control of his subject matter. I think that if they muddle me with jargon and confusing detail, they're perhaps not as good as they'd like me to think they are.

I proof myself with printouts and scribble. I too find text looks completely different on paper.

Gwyn

[Peter Doyle]

Interesting debate; it is easy to bemoan the standard of written English by students. Really, it's not that bad (an opinion based on 20 years teaching in universities).

With regard to books, the process really depends upon the publisher. Most publishing houses of any repute will have editors and proof readers for the books they publish. However, mistakes will always get through, and in some cases editors can introduce them while trying to simplify or even amplify text - it's happened to me. The same can occur with proof readers.

Cheers

Peter

[truthergw]

With all due respect, Peter. The situation we have today is largely rooted in universities and tertiary education establishments. The fact that students satisfy your expectations may reflect your expectation level rather than their attainment level.

[SiegeGunner]

With regard to books, the process really depends upon the publisher. Most publishing houses of any repute will have editors and proof readers for the books they publish. However, mistakes will always get through, and in some cases editors can introduce them while trying to simplify or even amplify text - it's happened to me. The same can occur with proof readers.

A good point, Peter - which is why when I edit, sub-edit and proofread (all in one) material for publication, I send an annotated file back to the author/originator and ask for agreement or comments before the file goes back to the designer for amendment. Great War books are a particular minefield, especially those that quote numbers of different contemporary sources verbatim and are therefore likely to contain archaic/idiosyncratic/downright mistaken spellings, inconsistent punctuation, and Lord knows what else (which have to be retained, not corrected or 'harmonised'). Finalising a specialist publication has to be a collaboration between people who are all working together towards the common goal of making it as good as it possibly can be. And even then there will almost certainly still be some mistakes ...

[Dragon]

I really don't want to come across as a stickler who expect near-perfection in other people's writing, but if a higher education student has insecure literary skills, she is seriously disadvantaged. Evidence from the Royal Literary Fund in 2006* showed that universities are reluctant to own the problem, but if writing is not taught, students flounder. Some won't have written an essay or a piece of continuous prose for years. If a student is struggling to understand what is required in a piece of writing, and doesn't know how to put her thoughts into academically appropriate English, it affects her confidence; if she isn't comfortable with how to read the required texts, she becomes demoralised. She won't know how to explore material and manipulate ideas if someone doesn't show her how. Some schools are excellent in teaching this, but some teenagers and some adult entry students will find this completely mystifying.

Put simply, you can't function properly as a student if your language skills are insecure. If you can't structure your line of thought and express it coherently, you will fail to achieve your potential. I think many of us will know bright students who dropped out because they just felt that they were in the wrong place: that they couldn't cope and were stupid.

The RLF recommended a writing development policy and writing programme in all HE establishments. Obviously student need ranges from remedial help to advice on how to develop already advanced literacy skills. The list of partner institutions in this concept includes Russell Group universities and the newer universities. The document also includes suggestions for schools.

The young woman to whom I referred was miserable and stressed because she didn't know what she was supposed to be doing, and she didn't know how to write it. She had been told to include a literature review, yet no-one explained what a literature review is. I explained it to her. She didn't know how to structure her dissertation and when she emailed extracts to her tutor, the tutor just said, 'Fine,' if she replied at all. She didn't know how it ought to be written (and she really did include text language). I thought then that a couple of hours of one-to-one help would have made all the difference to her happiness as well as her final classification.

Gwyn

Writing Matters, Royal Literary Fund, 2006.

[Dragon]

And even then there will almost certainly still be some mistakes ...

Some introduced by the well-meaning clerical person whose English teacher in 1962 told her that you should never... [split an infinitive / start a sentence with a preposition / use the future conditional / etc]

I know someone whose text was thus interfered with in a way which completely inverted the meaning of the sentence. The secretarial person just happened to spot the 'mistake' and tweaked the text. I know this because I was asked to adjudicate!

Gwyn

[John_Hartley]

Folks

When my book comes out (October, seeing as you ask) please enjoy the read. I've done my best with the punctuation and grammar but make no promises that it'll pass muster and hope that any errors won't detract too much.

John

[Steven Broomfield]

I really don't want to come across as a stickler who expect near-perfection in other people's writing,

Gwyn

But why shouldn't you? If a work is to be published, I would say it is essential it is published in a format which is understandable and not open to misinterpretation. I believe we've had these discussions before on the Forum - as a recent example of spoken English (on Radio 4, no less), I heard a news reader state that "A couple have been found guilty of starving their child to death in court today".

Spoken or written, that is utter nonsense: it makes no sense - the couple cannot possibly have starved their child to death in court. They were found guilty in court of starving their child is a totally different thing.

When we add poor punctuation and misuse of words to the mix in a written piece, I would say that good proof reading is essential.

In my first job after leaving school I was employed by the local rag in Cambridge as a copy runner - taking bits of paper wound the building, essentially. In the place was a little room, attached to the hot metal shop, where the proof-readers lived. There was a team of them (probably half a dozen), and we had to deliver to, and collect from, them the proofs of all stories. The amount of red biro they got through must have been phenomenal, but the result was that the paper had very few typos, and very few avoidable mistakes in their pages.

Now they probably have a spell checker.

The Tottygraph these days amazes me: for example, I have seen in the same article the words adviser and advisor used.

Sorry, but I think any published work should have standards - it's not merely pedantry but common sense. If it can't be understood by the reader it isn't worth publishing.

[Dragon]

I meant that if you're seen as a perfectionist, people won't feel comfortable sending you letters or emails! Its Its' It's a bit like entertaining someone whose whos' who's got a reputation as a most marvellous cook, or inviting a domestic super-goddess to your own scruffy squat.

John - the sample of your book that I read was great! You made it accessible to someone (me) who really isn't into detailed accounts of strategies and battle tactics; and I don't have the background, either. You made possible to engage with the men's experiences.

Gwyn

Edited 16 April , 2010 by Dragon

[SiegeGunner]

The Tottygraph these days amazes me: for example, I have seen in the same article the words adviser and advisor used.

This example allows me to illustrate my earlier point about 'correct' variations in published material. A trade association runs a scheme that awards a certificate entitled "Accredited Trade Advisor". Properly proofread material from other organisations whose style guide uses the spelling 'Adviser' therefore refers to "A trade adviser who has qualified as an 'Accredited Trade Advisor' ".

The trick is to know the difference between correct and right ...

[SiegeGunner]

someone (me) who really isn't in to detailed accounts of strategies and battle tactics;

[Dragon]

touchè tôuché touche toûche Ok.

I agree with your single word proofreading, by the way.

Gwyn

[SiegeGunner]

The secretarial person just happened to spot the 'mistake' and tweaked the text.

Yes, I've had a job sabotaged by that person too. But on the other side of the coin, I've also been saved an extremely expensive reprint of 20,000 glossy brochure covers by a phone call from a humble press operator with sharp eyes in his head and too much intelligence to just 'print what I'm given'.

[Dragon]

Your press operator asked first! Well done that person.

[Dave G]

In my first job after leaving school I was employed by the local rag in Cambridge as a copy runner - taking bits of paper wound the building, essentially. In the place was a little room, attached to the hot metal shop, where the proof-readers lived. There was a team of them (probably half a dozen), and we had to deliver to, and collect from, them the proofs of all stories. The amount of red biro they got through must have been phenomenal, but the result was that the paper had very few typos, and very few avoidable mistakes in their pages.

I, too, was a proof reader during the era of hard copy and red pens. During my senior year of high school I worked part time for the Santa Fe New Mexican, the small (and only) daily newspaper of Santa Fe, New Mexico. I was not a particularly linguistically gifted student, but the experience did leave its mark on me. In this internet age, my proof-reading experience of nearly 40 years ago seems quite antiquated and I feel like a bolt-action rifle in an armory full of automatic weapons. To quote the always quotable Basil Fawlty: "Zoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! That was quick, do I get another? Sorry, Mate."

Dave

[SiegeGunner]

When my book comes out (October, seeing as you ask) please enjoy the read. I've done my best with the punctuation and grammar but make no promises that it'll pass muster and hope that any errors won't detract too much.

No worries whatever there, John - I've just re-read the first (draft) chapter you sent me, to refresh my memory, and it's a sheer delight to read. Roll on October !

[SiegeGunner]

Your press operator asked first! Well done that person.

a humble press operator with sharp eyes in his head

'Well done that man', Gwyn - not 'person'. The clue's in the word 'his' ...

[CarylW]

I agree that books or articles containing poorly written text and bad punctuation are annoying and they must be bad for me to spot them!

My punctuation, spelling and grammar isn't what it should be, I'm sure.

A friend of mine, now sadly deceased, was a prolific author of children's/young adults novels featuring tales of animals in the country and other subjects and her spelling and punctuation were appalling. I had a job deciphering letters and e-mails from her. How they coped at her publishing house I've no idea. They must have had proofreaders working double time!

It actually makes me rather nervous at times to post on here knowing that there are so many pedants, teachers and academics about

It's a while since I was in school, even though I do have an English O'Level (surprising since I bunked off school a lot in my final two years!) and had to write lucid written reports for the whole of my career (oh and the occasional essay when they dragged us back into the classroom for updating)

I have noticed people occasionally having their posts and spelling corrected by the pedants here and wonder how it makes them feel, totally humiliated I reckon

For those who find poor spelling, or other textual mistakes annoying on here and jump in to correct or even poke fun (not suggesting that anyone posting in this thread has or would) it might be worth keeping in mind that the poster might have literacy problems through no fault of their own, could be partially sighted or have other disabilities such as a stroke, dyslexia or even problems using a keyboard if they are new to computers

Caryl

[Pete1052]

... and meanwhile back at the oasis the Arabs were eating their dates.

[SiegeGunner]

I never correct for the sake of it, except when deliberately 'counting coup' on someone I know can take it. But it is sometimes necessary to correct errors that are, for example, preventing someone from finding material on a subject because they are spelling it incorrectly.

... and meanwhile back at the oasis the Arabs were eating their dates.

Only works in American, Pete ...