Tag Archives: Editing

Writing on the job – a simple guide by Martha Coven

3 Replies

When a book on writing follows its own advice, and is short, simple and easy to read, it’s worth reading. Martha B. Coven has written a book on writing in the workplace titled Writing on the Job: Best practices for communicating in the digital age.

I particularly liked the chapter on editing. It starts “Edit everything. Even a one-paragraph email”. Couldn’t agree more. Martha provides some interesting advice on how much time to spend on editing your own work and recommends “a good rule of thumb is to spend two-thirds of your time writing, and one-third editing”.

She also advises that, in the digital age, screens can make everything look tidy and professional. Editing requires a careful, slower read than quickly scrolling on a screen. Her number 1 tip to overcome this problem is what I also recommend for long documents: print a hard copy, and read that.

I also support “Think like a critic. Become your own worst critic.”

Grammar is clearly important, but Martha recognises that “much of what we call grammar is a matter of stylistic preference”. For instance, she is in favour of using “they” to refer to one person. In general, I agree and I edit to ensure clear communication.

I found Writing on the Job in my local library, but check your favourite book supplier. It is published by Princeton University Press, 2022.

See my other reviews of books related to editing:

Is a subversive copy editor right for you?

Edit is a four-letter word

New Style Manual now online

The Australian Editing Handbook, 3rd edition

To work with an accredited editor who strives for clear communication, please contact me at rhdaniels@bigpond.com

The visibility and value of editing

2 Replies

Two items this week highlight the value of editing. First, an academic client contacted me to say she had been awarded a highly competitive ARC Discovery Project grant for 2023. She was very grateful for the help I provided in editing her grant application in economics. While not all high quality applications can be successful, job and grant applications are some of the best examples of the value of editing and return on investment.

As I noted in my recent blog on cultural safety in editing here, this is the second time in recent months that an ARC Discovery Project application I have edited has been successful. The two projects were in very different fields.

Second, Alice Grundy from the Australian National University wrote in The Conversation on 28 November 2022 on the visibility of editors here. It is obvious and true that it is very hard to appreciate the value of editing if it is never mentioned or credited. In my many years as a reader, I have noticed that in the preliminary pages of a book, the book cover designer is often named, but not the people who worked on editing the book and shaping it into the final product. It is not always possible to credit editors, and some editors may prefer not be credited on some work, but we can do better.

Several aspects of editing contribute to it being under-recognised and under-valued: it is mostly done by women, it is creative work, it can be done alone and at home, it is invisible, and it is piece work. Better recognition of editors is central to better pay and conditions for editing, and to increase the diversity of editors and published material.

I have been working on this issue for several years. At the members forum following the AGM of the Institute of Professional Editors in November 2022, I spoke briefly about the work of the Pay and Conditions Standing Committee to increase pay rates in the Book Industry Award for employee editors in the publishing industry. This builds on my other volunteer work for the Institute of Professional Editors including indicative costs of academic editing here.

See my related previous blogs:

To work with an accredited editor who provides value to clients, please contact me at rhdaniels@bigpond.com

Consistency is core for editors and readers

Leave a reply

There are many definitions of editing. At its heart, editing is about clear communication and making it easy for the reader. An important way to achieve that is through consistency. Consistency is part of making it easy for the reader by avoiding distractions.

Consistency applies to all aspects of a document from the micro to the macro scale. It includes decisions about the basics of spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalisation, hyphenation, abbreviations and acronyms, numbers, symbols and common terms. It can refer to sentence and paragraph length and structure which affect the general reading level of a document. It can also refer to the look of a document, from formatting and the heading hierarchy to tables and figures. For documents with sources, consistent use of references both in the text and in the reference list is important and can contribute to the credibility of research work.

Editors and writers make choices about style all the time to meet the needs of their audience and the message. Editing is about decision making, and editors make and implement decisions efficiently and accurately. While there is not always right and wrong in editing, it is important to be consistent within a document.

To ensure consistency and clear communication, there are style manuals and tools for different audiences and purposes. The Australian government’s Style Manual, now available online, has been complemented by other manuals such as the online Australian manual of style. There are guides for the many different styles of referencing, some with minor variations in punctuation. Not everyone will agree there is one accepted right decision. However, using a style guide or style sheet can help ensure consistency throughout a document and over time.

See my blogs on related aspects of consistency:

To work with an accredited editor who strives for consistency and quality, please contact me at rhdaniels@bigpond.com

Editors are always asking “Does that seem right?”

Leave a reply

After a data privacy breach by a major Australian telecomms company in September 2022, current and former customers need to be even more vigilant about emails, phone calls and other communications to prevent identity fraud and other scams.

With increasing digital communications, spam and scams are always evolving. In day to day life, we all need to be aware and ask “does that seem right?”.

I have written two previous blogs on the issue of spam and editing:

In whatever field they edit, editors constantly ask themselves when reading and editing work – “does it sound right?” or “does that seem right?” Editors may be uncertain about a fact, a detail, apparent inconsistencies, or even tone. If they are not sure, editors can check a range of other sources, or raise a query with the author. Even when checking sources, editors also need to be aware of the credibility of sources, and keep asking “does that seem right?”.

Editors are finely attuned to nuances and inconsistencies, and are able to question and check diverse elements. It doesn’t mean editors are foolproof, but they are very detail oriented and analytical. At the same time, they have a focus on the big picture and whether every element in a work comes together to make sense to readers.

To improve your digital safety, approach all communications like an editor, and ask yourself “does that seem right?”.

To work with an accredited editor who asks the right questions on academic and research work, please contact me at rhdaniels@bigpond.com

Cultural safety in editing for culturally diverse perspectives

1 Reply

Recent professional experiences have encouraged me to reflect on cultural safety in editing.

  • I was very pleased to hear an early editing client is part of a recently awarded ARC Discovery project, based on his PhD research on Warratyi Rock Shelter in South Australia. A strength of the original research and the new project was the involvement of the Adnyamathanha people, and cultural exchange of knowledge.
  • I edited a multi-authored piece where Aboriginal authors had different ways of describing their heritage. Usually editors try to ensure consistency, but it was more important to use the authors’ descriptions of themselves.
  • I edited a journal article on folkloric heritage-based livelihoods in another country by an author from that country. In Australia, the term folklore would probably not be used in that context, but it was an accepted term to describe indigenous culture in the country of the paper and author.
  • I watched a Zoom talk for Editors NSW by Dr Mark Lock, a descendant of the Ngiyampaa people, on cultural safety in editing to support culturally diverse perspectives. Mark’s talk was mostly from the health research and academic research perspective. He noted there is no professional body for researchers, which might provide useful guidance on issues such as working with or referring to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and culture. Mark also presented at the online IPEd conference in June 2021.
  • I attended the launch of an app on Dharawal Language and Culture by Ray Ingrey from Gujaga Foundation which provides information on the language of the Dharawal people of southern Sydney. I am working my way through the dictionary, and looking out for the upcoming certificate courses.

These recent experiences continue my interest in learning more about Aboriginal culture and how to support culturally diverse perspectives, both personally and professionally, building on the Diploma in Aboriginal Studies I completed in 2008.

Nandawadi (bye/see you later).

To work with an accredited editor, please contact me at rhdaniels@bigpond.com

The right scope for editing – the whole thesis or chapter by chapter?

Leave a reply

Editors receive many inquiries about the timing and cost of editing. See my previous blog on the right time for editing. For thesis editing, one decision is whether to have the whole thesis edited at once or to have individual chapters edited one at a time.

Whole thesis editing

Whole thesis editing works well when the submission deadline is imminent, the research has been finalised and all the chapters have been assembled into one file. The editor starts at the beginning and edits to ensure consistency and clarity throughout the document. Usually only one round of editing is possible in the timeframe.

Chapter by chapter editing

Chapter by chapter editing works better in the earlier stages when a student may need more guidance on structure and formatting. An editor can provide a style sheet for the student to follow for the rest of the thesis and identify issues for the student to be aware of throughout the other chapters of the thesis. These issues may include document formatting, reference styles or table and figure formats, as well as consistency issues of spelling and references to key concepts. Chapter 1 is usually very short with a standard structure, so is not the most useful for standalone editing. A literature review chapter is a better guide for the rest of the thesis. Chapter editing allows the student to learn and incorporate changes in later chapters.

A thesis in the publication format may also require chapter by chapter editing, as chapters are written individually as articles. Even in this format, the preliminary pages and the overall assembly of chapters into a thesis usually need editing.

Chapter editing is also an option when submission is imminent but limited time or budget is not sufficient to cover whole thesis editing.

Efficiency

Whole thesis editing is usually more time and therefore cost efficient for a given word count because the editor focuses on the whole document, makes decisions and implements them. There is usually repetition of text and therefore of editing changes. Editing a chapter at a time is usually more expensive overall, due to the startup and familiarisation effort each time. IPEd’s indicative costs of academic editing here and discussed in my recent blog reflect this. The 5,000 words at the end of a 100,000 word thesis can be edited faster than the 5,000 words at the beginning. The further apart in time the chapters are edited, the less efficient the process is and more rounds of editing may be required. However, this may provide a better learning experience.

Students must decide based on their own circumstances and discussions with an editor what editing scope is right.

To work with an accredited editor for your academic editing work, please contact me at rhdaniels@bigpond.com

Hyphens – use or avoid?

Leave a reply

Following up my February blog on editing being about making decisions, one difficult decision in achieving consistency is when to use hyphens or not. I spend a lot of editing time considering hyphens.

After finally reading bestseller Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation by Lynne Truss recently, it confirmed my ideas on hyphenation. Over time, my increasing personal preference is to avoid them and use either one combined word or two separate words, and only hyphenate where absolutely essential to clarify the meaning.

As always in editing, it is important to be consistent throughout a document. There are several approaches to consistency in decisisions about hyphens.

  • Choose one dictionary and follow its recommendations, although it may not contain every combination.
  • Aim for internal consistency within a document, with either a minimalist or maximalist approach.
  • Be aware of a writer’s preferences or an institutional style guide, if any, for hyphenation.

Writers and organisations often have their own preference, ranging from minimalists with no hyphens at all, to maximalists hyphenating all compound words and descriptive phrases. Editors should check carefully before making major changes to hyphenation throughout a long document such as adding or deleting hyphens. A style sheet can ensure consistency and make editing decisions easier.

My previous blog here outlines some helpful uses of hyphens:

  • Clarify meaning such as re-sign (sign again) versus resign (leave a job).
  • Clarify meaning in compound words such as disease-free.
  • Prevent misreading of words starting with prefixes such as anti, ex and re followed by vowels such as re-enter, but even this use is declining.

A traditional use of hyphens in descriptive phrases such as ‘in the long-term view’ or ‘in a 3-month period’ is not usually needed to clarify meaning and avoid confusion, but it can depend on the specific context.

For advice on editing, please contact me on rhdaniels@bigpond.com

Structure tip: Move from the general to the specific

Leave a reply

With complex material to present in a long research document, it can be difficult to get the structure right, particularly in the introduction.

A good technique to organise material is to move from the general to the specific. This tip works for the whole document and for the introduction and for other sections.

In the introduction or first section, write enough to introduce the broad topic and put your work in context. Then go into detail. Diving straight into the detail may lose some readers. Similarly, too much general background that is well known to readers may leave them wondering if there is anything new and whether it is worth reading on.

Establish the purpose of your writing, what you are contributing, and why it is worth readers continuing to read on. Be aware of technical terms or jargon in the introduction. Are these terms helpful or offputting? How well known are they?

Reverse this structure technique at the other end of the document. When discussing results or drawing conclusions, move from the specific back to the general. Summarise your work, then broaden it out to generalisations. There may be limitations and caveats to note when moving from the specific back to the general.

More tips for structure:

  • Consider the audience and their level of familiarity with the material when deciding where to start in the general context.
  • Use the title, headings and subheadings to set the scene and prepare the reader for the content in the whole work and each section, and the context.
  • Use a top-down approach to structure by developing the headings first, then the subheadings and use content in dot points under each heading as a guide for your writing.

See related blogs:

For advice on editing and writing, please contact me on rhdaniels@bigpond.com

Editing as decision-making: making thousands of decisions quickly and accurately

2 Replies

Editing is about making thousands of decisions about text – at the level of the character, word, sentence, paragraph and document – often all at the same time.

Editing decisions can be about spelling, punctuation, grammar, tone, word choice, expression, accuracy, clarity, format and presentation, and much more. Editors don’t just look at the word in front of them, but also have to be aware of and remember the rest of the document.

Editing is also about making decisions about numbers, claims and facts – does that sound right or does it need checking by the editor or client?

Every one of an editor’s thousands of decisions must be translated into action. In some cases, the editor implements a decision with just one keystroke, perhaps adding or deleting a character. In other cases, the editor may highlight a choice for the writer to make, or simply draw attention to something that may need further checking or thought. Editors often type comments such as “Do you mean X or do you mean Y?”

Some editing decisions are about right and wrong, and some are about improvements. Accurate and quick decision-making takes skill, experience and judgement. Professional editors who edit all the time can make editing decisions efficiently.

This explains why professional editors will always want to see a piece of work before quoting to understand the level of decision-making involved, and therefore the effort and time required.

See related blogs:

For advice on editing and decision-making, please contact me on rhdaniels@bigpond.com

Editing responses to reviewers of papers

1 Reply

It is very competitive to get research published in top journals, but publication is vital to academic careers. As well as ensuring papers meet the journal’s requirements for both content and format in the initial submission, the review process is also important for authors.

Journals send submissions to reviewers with expertise in the field, and the reviewers comment on how to improve the quality and publishability of the paper. The review process can take time, as journals receive many submissions and many reviewers work voluntarily. There may be several rounds of review over months and often years.

Some tips to consider when resubmitting a paper and responding to reviewers:

  • Be polite and respectful. Politeness goes a long way, especially if disagreeing with a reviewer’s comment.
  • Make clear what has changed in the revised paper.
  • If you disagree with a comment, make clear what has NOT changed, and why not.
  • Paste in any revised text from the revised paper to the response to make it easy for the journal editor to see the changes.
  • Include references to page or line numbers of revised text in the revised paper.
  • Be clear whether referring to the original or a revised version of the paper.
  • Less is more: explain the reasons for your response succinctly.

It can be frustrating for authors to receive reviewer comments which suggest taking the paper in a different direction or with a different emphasis or which require extensive re-analysis or even new data. Reviewers may also not agree with each other and may make conflicting suggestions. Authors do not have to agree with all comments, but do need to justify and explain their decisions.

If a reviewer has commented on the language or the need for editing in a paper, authors should ensure the response to the reviewers is also well written and edited.

As well as editing papers for initial submission, academic editors can also edit response letters to the journal editor and reviewers. Editors can check whether all the comments have been appropriately addressed and check the response has an appropriate tone. This can save time in the review process and enhance the likelihood of publication.

See my related blogs on writing papers:

See my related blog on feedback:

For advice on editing, please contact me on rhdaniels@bigpond.com