Feature

Angels and Copy Editors Defend Us!

by Ann Fothergill-Brown

Of the several definitions given for discretion in Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 10th edition, perhaps the most telling from an editorial perspective is: "cautious reserve in speech." In copy editing, exercise of editorial discretion — the "ability to make responsible decisions" (another of the definitions) — depends greatly on using a cautious reserve in amending what a good author has placed on the page.

Tinkering with the author's words simply because "I would not write them that way" is not discretion, but interference. Preserving the author's authentic voice is as important as enhancing its presentation so as to maintain the authority of the words.

Of what, then, does the enhancing consist? And how does editorial discretion fit in?

Stated simply, copy editing looks to correct errors and "infelicities" in three areas: punctuation, grammar, and style. Nothing undermines an author's authority so fast as poor language mechanics, misspellings, shoddy grammar, and a badly constructed text.

Punctuation

Discretion is rarely an issue in punctuation decisions. Convention dictates how punctuation is to be used, and punctuation convention is remarkably consistent in the English language. Everyone knows, for example, that a period has just two functions: marking abbreviations and ending declarative sentences. If, as in modern usage, some abbreviations omit the period, the style guide for the particular publication will specify the rule to be followed.

More leeway is found in the use of the comma. Many commas are discretionary, as in the case of the serial comma or the comma following a short introductory adverbial phrase. Again, the publication's style guide will often dictate the preferred usage, which should be consistently applied.

If the guide leaves any situations to editorial judgement, the first consideration must always be: "Will omitting this comma cause the sentence to be misread?" If the answer to that question is "No," you then need to determine whether more or fewer commas are preferable in the context of the material. Personally, I prefer more commas to fewer, as I want to give the reader the clearest guideposts to phrasing. If my author disagrees, I may argue for the additional clarity I see in the commas' use, but I will cede to the author's wishes when strict mechanics are not at issue.

In a few cases, punctuation — especially commas — can drastically alter meaning in a sentence. If the words seem at odds with the way that the punctuation is used, the "cautious reserve" of a query to the author is preferable to making assumptions about meaning. For example, a that clause set off by commas might require either the substitution of a which, or the deletion of the commas. A query can determine whether the clause is meant to be restrictive.

Grammar

Basic errors of grammatical construction are never allowed to stand. For example, subject and verb must agree in number. Conventions exist for handling multiple subjects that differ in number, and these conventions should be observed.

Similarly, subjective and objective forms of pronouns must be appropriately used, and certain misplaced modifiers (also known as "dangling participles") must be noted and corrected.

On the other hand, some "rules" of construction can be flexibly applied. For example, every sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb.

Really?

Sentence fragments are, of course, acceptable and effective in context. They are a part of the author's "voice" that hypercorrection would destroy. But fragments should be used sparingly, and must be understandable in context. Here, the editor's "ability to make responsible decisions" should allow colourful, understandable turns of phrase to stand, while infelicities can be changed without resorting to queries. The editor is functioning as a surrogate reader and must act, but only to correct barriers to comprehension.

Many similar "rules" require thoughtful application. While some instances of "preposition at end," "split infinitive," "misplaced adverb" should rightfully be corrected, other instances can and should be left to stand. As long as meanings are clear and infelicities avoided, the author should be allowed to express thoughts in his or her own way.

Style

Style is where editorial discretion is most exercised and probably where it is most contended by authors. Yet editing for style is one of the most vital things a copy editor can do for a client. A good copy editor can save an author much embarrassment over incorrect terminology, poor turns of phrase, and offensive stereotyping.

Changes that can quickly tighten a manuscript and that do not need querying include the following:

• Elimination of unnecessary expletives ("There are five possible outcomes ..." becomes "Five outcomes are possible ...");
• Substitution of active or action verbs for passive or "to be" + adjective formations ("The program is targeted to those with incomes below ..." becomes "The program targets those with incomes below ...");
• Correction of idiom or mixed metaphor ("Sink or cut bait" becomes either "Sink or swim," or "Fish or cut bait");
• Removal of redundancies ("We awoke at 5 a.m. that morning" becomes either "We awoke at 5 that morning" or "We awoke at 5 a.m.");
• Elimination of clichés ("Avoid him like the plague" becomes "Avoid him"): and
• Correction of obviously misused words ("He sited chapter and verse" becomes "He cited chapter and verse").

Other changes should be suggested as appropriate, but should be flagged for the author's attention. For example, always suggest a concise one-word replacement for a longer phrase, where the change can streamline the sentence without significantly changing the author's voice. ("He played in a large number of concerts before ..." might become "He played in numerous(**?**) concerts before ...").

Always ask about words that look wrong to you, but take care not to assume that you know more than the author. For your own sake, always phrase your queries gently. I vividly remember seeing an author strongly chastised for not knowing the difference between "affect" and "effect" in using the phrase "His affective prose was ...". The chastiser was clearly unaware of the meaning of "affective" ("expressing emotion"), and succeeded only in looking foolish and rude.

On the other hand, a well-written query can elicit a correction and the gratitude of the author. "Author: I noticed that you used 'monozygotic' in this passage about genetic disease. 'Monozygotic' means 'one zygote,' but I think that you mean to talk about paired copies of a genetic flaw. Any clarification would be appreciated." This author altered the word to "homozygotic" ("like zygote") and was pleased to see the error caught. But even when the author's original wording is correct, your confusion — as expressed in the query — can lead to other changes in the text so that subsequent readers are not similarly led astray.

One area in which to be both particularly vigilant and sensitive is that of cultural assumptions and stereotypes. To preserve the author's public reputation, editors have an important obligation to challenge inappropriate statements grounded in sexual, ethnic, age, and other biases. Conversely, they have to be vitally aware of context, and how context may validate writing that would otherwise be wrong or offensive. For example, more than twelve years ago, I successfully fought — through four rounds — to change "drug studies in man" to "drug studies in humans" in a series of documents in a healthcare field. I considered (and still consider) it important to use gender-neutral language. Nonetheless, I would find it strange to fail to retain and use non-neutral terms in historical contexts. To me, Susan Sarandon is an actor, but Lillie Langtry was, and will always be, an actress.

In non-fiction, always question an author who makes unsubstantiated statements that impute characteristics or beliefs, positive or negative, to a group. Watch for cultural assumptions that can creep unnoticed into the most well-meaning texts. On the other hand, be aware of audience. Some terms of reference that are derogatory in a broad context have been appropriated by certain cultural communities for use within those communities. The word "queer," for example, has been adopted as a positive self-referent by some parts of the homosexual community, but only when used within that community.

In fiction, don't be in a hurry to sanitize the text. Bias may be integral to character, setting, and plot. But do question cultural assumptions and characterizations that fail to flow from the fiction's structural needs. An author may be unconsciously incorporating personal cultural bias into the work.

The Writer-Editor Partnership

My sense of the writer-editor partnership is that it is one of equals, in which the writer has dear and important ideas to communicate, and the editor has distance and expertise to prevent communication failure owing to lapses in expression.

At times, all active editors despair at the frequency with which the role feels adversarial rather than partnering. This situation will never entirely change because language is an art, not a science, and opinions — sometimes strong — will differ about whether to use a particular comma, word, or turn of phrase. Moreover, an author who has a firmly developed view of editors as tamperers is as unlikely a candidate for a good partnership as an editor who pedantically enforces a personal code of "proper usage."

What I hope you discovered here is an approach that grants the importance of common rules and conventions, but that tries to take into account uniqueness of voice, flexibility in the "rules," and the importance of context and audience. This balancing act is ever a source of creative tension, but highly worthy of the application of a discerning mind and heart.

Ann Fothergill-Brown currently freelances as a technical and general editor under the name Sampler Services.