Blog

If you’re an editorial professional, or you need the help of one, this is a blog worth reading! It’s packed full of useful insights and handy hints, and anyone who wants to know more about ‘making words count’ will not want to miss these posts.

The ups and downs of working from home

Post by Carolyn Fox

Before I get started, I should probably explain that I say working ‘from home’ because that’s the phrase to which we are all accustomed. Strictly though, I think that applies to the increasing number of employees who work a day or two a week at home instead of the office, rather than someone like me who is self-employed – I work ‘at home’. And, of course, we mustn’t forget people who work ‘in the home’, as I did when I gave up my full-time job as a solicitor to care for my children … But, semantics aside, let’s get to the point.

Whenever I tell anyone that I work from home I’m usually asked two questions:1. Don’t you get distracted/find it difficult to concentrate?2. Don’t you get lonely? (Particularly pertinent as I’m now officially an ‘empty-nester’ – my youngest son has just gone off to university!)

The answer to number one is easy: there is nothing like a looming deadline to concentrate the mind! I know that if I miss a return date my client is not going to employ me again. Experience tells me that reliability is one of the qualities that clients value most in a freelancer so, if I want that all-important repeat business, I must get the job back on time.

Do I get lonely? Yes, of course one can feel a little isolated at times, but there are ways round this. As a freelancer, it’s up to me when I do my work and so a few times a week I will make sure I go out for a walk or have coffee with a friend, either at lunchtime or perhaps first thing in the morning. And because I don’t have to spend hours commuting, I have time in the evenings to pursue my other interests.

Also not to be forgotten are professional contacts – not least our Glasgow SfEP local group. It’s amazing how quickly our monthly meetings come around! It’s a real tonic to meet other people in the same line of work and to have the opportunity to discuss issues we’ve encountered in the weeks between meetings. In short, I choose who to spend my time with (and when) rather than becoming embroiled in office politics.

Freelancing is not for everyone: you have to be self-motivated and self-sufficient, but I for one would not swap it with my old life in the office.

Want to give freelancing a go? Have a look at the SfEP guide Starting Out: Setting up a small business available at http://www.sfep.org.uk/resources/guides/#SO.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Carolyn is an advanced professional member of the SfEP and specialises in law. A number of years ago she left her job as a solicitor in the south of England for working at home in the beautiful East Lothian countryside and has never looked back. Find out more about Carolyn here: www.carolynfox.co.uk.

To e-read or not to e-read?

Post by Jill Broom

… That is the question. Well, at least, it’s a question that’s come up a lot recently during my conversations with fellow book lovers.

A few years back, there was a flurry of excitement when it seemed everybody I knew, including me, got their first e-reader. Wasn’t it great how we could take it anywhere? It was cheaper (not great news for my chosen profession). It might be better for the environment (jury’s still out on this one). And – hooray – when we all eventually get arthritis, we’ll still be able to read without having to negotiate a cumbersome tome …

Yes, this did actually cross my mind. And, yes, I’m only in my 30s.

However, after all that initial gushing, we seem to have got over our devotion and more and more of us are delving back into a paperback or – shock-horror (and even more devil-may-care) a hardback. There are actually only a few folk that I know nowadays who rely completely on their e-readers. We all tend to move happily between the two forms.

Why do we still like print?

Well, there are a whole load of reasons for this. And good ones for your health too …

In an era when our online usage has skyrocketed, a good old-fashioned book gives us the opportunity to disconnect and switch off from the white noise, and it allows us to rest our eyes properly. There’s even some evidence to suggest that reading in print supports better comprehension and retention of the subject matter. And this brings me on to something else I noticed.

For me, there will never be anything like the smell of a new book … Secret shame: I don’t always go into a bookshop to buy; sometimes I just pop in for the aroma.

The scent of all those books is an instant comfort to me, and it’s this sensory impact that got me thinking about the other ways I use my senses when reading.

A ‘sense’-ible assessment?

I recently proofread a textbook written for teenagers that contained helpful tips about HOW to learn. Everyone is, of course, different – some are auditory learners, some visual learners and some simply learn from doing – kinaesthetic learners. Having never really thought about it before, it was while working on this book that I realised that I am, primarily, a visual learner.

This means that I’m good at visualising where on a page I might have seen a particular name, reference, fact, or part of the story. And this helps me remember it. Not exactly a photographic memory, but handy all the same.

Coupled with the ability to recall where roughly in the book I saw something by the thickness of the pages already read and those still to go (i.e. by touch) – I find e-readers are not my particular friend if I want to go back and check something.

The personal preference factor

So it seems I’m better off reading a hard copy, particularly if I’m reading something big and meaty. Or when I’m having a tired spell and reread the same three pages over and over again each night before falling asleep onto my e-reader, inadvertently pressing the touch screen, flying forward hundreds of pages and losing my ‘location’.

Just me? Maybe.

But that’s the point. I think it’s always going to be different strokes for different folks. And what suits them one day might not the next. So, it would be reasonable to conclude that both options are very much here to stay … and that we editorial types should always keep our options open.

If you need an editor to look over your e- OR print book, take a look at our Directory now.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Jill is a copywriter, proofreader and copy-editor, but her biggest job is being mum to three small children, which has helped her to sharpen one of her key writing and editorial skills … adaptability!

Why your business needs a proofreader

Post by Denise Cowle

The idea of somebody changing so much as a comma of your text may seem unthinkable. However, your familiarity with your work means that sometimes you see what you want to, rather than what is there. That’s how we can all miss obvious errors in our own work – we’re just too close to it. A ‘fresh eye’ is the best way to overcome this. A proofreader is sufficiently detached from your writing to spot mistakes and inconsistencies that distract the reader.

Not everyone is confident with spelling and grammar, but you shouldn’t rely on spelling and grammar checkers. Did you mean to say stationary or stationery? Compliment or complement? Automated spell checks can identify if a word has been spelled correctly, but not whether it was the correct word to use in the first place.

You may feel that it’s enough to have a colleague or friend who looks over your content. Are they always available when you need them? Are you confident in their ability to assess and improve your spelling, grammar, punctuation, layout, consistency and overall message?

Here are four reasons to consider using a professional:

Knowing that your copy will be professionally proofread allows you to write the way you think, saving you time and allowing a professional to smooth your words into a clear message.
You won’t have to ask friends and colleagues to take time out from their work to deal with yours – there’s only so much goodwill you can rely on, and eventually it just might run out.
It will give you credibility. Can someone trust what you’re saying when your written work is inconsistent and contains errors? A poorly proofed report, brochure or website (or one that has not been proofed at all) will reflect badly on you and your company. Regardless of what you are saying, the reader will be distracted by errors and may even equate sloppy writing with sloppiness in other areas of your business. Professional proofreading eliminates errors to give your writing – and therefore your business – a professional and credible feel.
Aim higher than ‘good enough’. Use a proofreader to polish your work, ensuring that you leave readers with a clear, error-free message.

Find a local, qualified proofreader in our Directory. Why would you settle for anything less?

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Denise is an advanced professional member of the SfEP. She lives in Glasgow and her clients range from local individuals to global organisations. She was a chartered physiotherapist for 25 years but has moved on from manipulating joints to manipulating text. Check her out at www.denisecowleeditorial.com, or follow her on Twitter @dinnydaethat.

How to avoid ‘author query rage’

Post by Stephen Cashmore

There is plenty of advice in the textbooks and elsewhere about how to deal with queries you have for the author. Most of it is common sense:

Don’t write, ‘Dear author. This sentence is gobbledygook. Please supply something that is comprehensible,’ no matter how tempted you might be to do so.
Do write, ‘Dear author. I don’t quite follow [insert sentence here]. Can you clarify it for me?’

Oh yes, a copy-editor or proofreader’s shoulders need to be broad. (That’s not in the job description, is it?)

What else do the textbooks say?

Give an alternative where you can. Don’t just say, ‘I’m not sure that “serendipity” is quite the right word here,’ but add, ‘What about “luck”?’ More common sense, and often tedious to put into practice, but authors will thank you for anything that saves them some work.

Make sure they know where to look. ‘Dear author. I don’t think you can start this sentence with “Therefore” as there is no causality implied,’ might just get you the response, ‘Where is this?’ Much better to put a detailed reference in the query [‘Dear author: p6 l5’] or make inline queries in the document itself, depending on your preferred style.

You’ve heard all this before, and even if you haven’t seen it set out explicitly, you’d have the common sense to do all these things anyway, wouldn’t you?

But one piece of advice I don’t often see in print is to make sure that the query is actually a query, and that it is as closed as possible:

‘Dear author. Should there be a sentence in between “… Armageddon.” and “The next day…”?’ Answer: ‘Yes.’
‘Dear author. Is the Bloggs (forthcoming) reference still forthcoming?’ Answer: ‘No, it was published last year.’
Or even, ‘Dear author. Shall we use “serendipity” or “luck” here?’ Answer: ‘OK.’ Urgh.

There’s nothing worse than having to go back to clarify one of your own queries. Even if you are actually conveying more of a decision than a query, make sure the author can make a simple response:

‘Dear author. I notice you capitalise Gamma more often than not, so I propose to standardise on Gamma rather than gamma. OK?’

Adding that simple ‘OK?’ can save you a lot of grief.

So next time you write out your author queries, by all means follow the textbook advice, but also make sure that your author knows exactly what is being asked and has a simple way to respond. If you don’t, you might find yourself subject to an intense bout of author query rage, for which there is no simple cure.

OK?

For a list of easy-to-work-with editors and proofreaders, head to our Directory now.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Stephen Cashmore is an advanced member of the SfEP who lives in Ayr on the west coast of Scotland. He is an ex-teacher, ex-accountant, ex-bridge player and ex-auditor, but threw all that over to become an editor after taking early retirement. Check out cashmoreeditorial.com

Editors – not just a bunch of pedants?

Post by Ron Smith

When I started proofreading and copy-editing for a living in January 2011, I was searching for order in language. So, if Hart’s Rules said it should be done in a certain way, that’s what I conveyed to, and in my very early days, perhaps even imposed on, some of my customers.

Hart’s is undoubtedly a first-class guide, but it is not the God of language and, indeed, there is no body in overall control of language – a concept argued in a recent BBC Radio 4 programme, ‘The Pedant’ (an episode in the Word of Mouth series).

Instead, general usage is what the language is.

Standards are slipping!

I used to be firmly in the camp of ‘Standards are slipping’ and, according to the above programme, I was in good company since Defoe and Swift, I learned, also held that view.

Much of my work is on documents produced by students, many of whom are postgraduates. I still have difficulty understanding how anyone can complete a university education and still not know the difference between ‘there’ and ‘their’ or ‘were’ and ‘where’, yet I come across this frequently.

So although the message from this programme is that standards of literacy have never been higher in this country, this is not a premise that I can wholeheartedly agree with. Having said that, my attitude towards, and treatment of, variations in language usage have altered over the years.

Old habits

In the past, I would:

always change ‘data is’ to ‘data are’
insist on the presence of ‘on the one hand’ before allowing ‘on the other hand’
make any leading capitalisation lower case if there was no grammatical justification for it
insert ‘that’, as a subordinating conjunction, at every opportunity
bar stranded prepositions (‘with’, near the end of the previous paragraph, is an example).

Current practice

Regarding the above:

It is perfectly acceptable to use ‘data is’, providing it is used consistently.
‘On the other hand’ can be used without preceding it with ‘on the one hand’.
Leading capitalisation is a matter of style and, where necessary, I remark on it but do not change it.
Providing sense is maintained without the word ‘that’, I accept its omission.
There is no grammatical rule against the use of a preposition at the end of a sentence.

Pedantic rules

Before listening to this programme, I was not aware that many of the pedantic rules of language had resulted from people like Thomas Sheridan, in the 1780s, telling anyone who would listen that they were not talking elegantly or politely enough (loaded words in the 18th century). This was during the Industrial Revolution, when huge numbers of people were moving from the countryside into towns, trying to make sense and order out of the seismic changes in their lifestyle. Consequently, I can well understand how adopting such new rules was seen as part of people’s path to bettering themselves.

Language is constantly changing

Every year, the OED adds words to its dictionary and in 2014 alone that number passed 1000. Proofreaders and copy-editors are well aware that the language is constantly changing and seek to allow writers freedom of expression, while ensuring that the end product makes sense and is suited to its intended audience.

Sense, consistency and audience

Providing sense and consistency are maintained, and the writing suits the audience (another point made in the programme), I am now much more likely to accept variations in usage. Where any variation does not meet these three criteria, I will either correct any mistakes or make suitable suggestions on style, but now I will leave well alone, if at all possible.

How we can help

So all writers should rest assured that we proofreaders and copy-editors are not there to pounce gleefully on your possible stylistic infelicities but to make your document, on which you have probably spent considerable time and effort, fit to put before the specific audience you are aiming at.

To ensure your writing is fit for purpose, head to our Directory now.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Ron is a proofreader and copy-editor with a love of words, radio, travelling and sport, especially football (both kinds) and baseball – all of which keep him busy, as does his joint (with his wife) part-time job of looking after their new grandson.

What’s so good about THIS blog?

post by GEN

As slaves to ‘the deadline’, we editor-types know that time is precious. And, as a result, most of us don’t have time to peruse all the editorial blogs we’d like. So we’re using this inaugural post to tell you why our blog is worth taking the time to read. Here goes …

Who writes the posts?

Members of the Glasgow Editors’ Network take it in turn to write these little gems of wisdom. This means you’ll find information and experience from an array of editorial professionals who work with a variety of clients, including authors, publishers, large companies, charities and SMEs.

Who will find this blog useful?

Lots of people! (Because we blog about a whole host of stuff that’s good to know.) But, specifically, our posts are designed to be interesting and informative for:

Editorial professionals – our members are generous with their knowledge and regularly share their on-the-job experiences (& some nice handy tips) to help others in their work.
Those wishing to use the services of an editorial professional – this blog is also for individuals, businesses and organisations looking to improve the quality of their online and paper publications – and, consequently, the reputation of their brand. (You’ll even glean little titbits worth knowing – the ‘whys’ and ‘hows’ – before employing one!)

So, go on. Take five minutes and dive in. You never know what you might find out about Glasgow’s editors and what we can do for you.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Glasgow Editors’ Network – GEN – is a group of independent professional editors and proofreaders with a wide range of skills and extensive experience.