dragonfly editorial

Archive for the ‘Proofreading’ Category

A punctuation poll–or much ado about small symbols

Posted by: Margaret Walker, Technical & Proposal Editor, January 10th, 2012

thumbnail1My appreciation for punctuation began when I discovered the poetry of e.e. cummings. His spare, unconventional use of these symbols and other writing conventions made me see the marks in a whole new way. They were elegant, strong—as powerful as a polysyllabic word in his hands. Out of context, their controlling purpose found freedom of expression.

As I morphed from poet to editor, my fascination with punctuation came full circle. I learned to wield its power for function to accentuate form… handled deftly, punctuation works almost invisibly, allowing a reader to drift into a story and forget that its transformative world was created entirely of abstract symbols on paper.

I recently thought my fellow Dragonfly editors might feel a similar kinship to punctuation. I asked a simple question: What’s your favorite punctuation mark, and why?* Here’s what I got.

Samantha Enslen:

My favorite punctuation mark is the comma. I use it too frequently, even when it’s not grammatically correct. Two years of texting have conditioned me to pen constructions such as these:

Going to grocery, need anything?

Me go Chipotle, what you want?

Me home 3pm, where kids?

I see now that my casual writing style has been reduced to Tarzan-level. Me want text. Me no care ‘bout proper grammar. As a copyeditor, it’s hard for me to admit this, but it’s true.

Amy Paradysz:

I love em dashes—my thoughts are full of digressions.

Jess Haberman:

Em dash. It’s so controlling! It likes to interrupt and make you wait. It’s the punctuation mark with balls—just not literally.

Ellen Henrie:

My initial reaction was the em dash. I like the graphic quality of it—it opens up a space and allows a thought to drop in, adding a layer or emphasis. It also comes in handy for transcribing, when speakers get to wandering around in what they want to say. Then I said, “Wait a minute—what about the period?” That lowly little dot that is like a fist**… hmmm… No, I admire the period, but it’s not my favorite. I feel sorry for the comma—the most used and abused of all marks. The poor thing gets sprinkled in thither and yon or else left out with no respect to the proprieties. Then there’s the semicolon; no, it’s too complicated. The parenthesis? (Things set in parentheses often seem distracting.) Ellipsis? The dreamy cousin of punctuation marks… yes, I have a certain fondness for this one. But I’ll stick with the em dash as my favorite—at least for today.

Diana Ceres:

Ellipses all the way… Love me some mystery… Email smiley is a close second. :) Exclamation marks skid into third with me. I love how exciting and celebratory they are!!

Clair Allen:

The semicolon is the most versatile of punctuation marks and ranks at the top of the list. It is like a traffic cop. It neatly separates important sentence segments, which is absolutely necessary to the proper understanding of complex sentences. The semicolon facilitates and permits the serial comma to do its job. Without the semicolon in more meaty sentences, the poor serial comma would be absolutely adrift, lost—leading to all sorts of confusion. The semicolon is so powerful; it can easily replace a sentence-ending period whenever it wants (like it did in this sentence). Perhaps the only thing to add is that the semicolon continues to patiently wait for the greater respect due it by writers of all stripes.

Magi Walker (that’s me):

I confess, I am dazzled by the flare of an exclamation mark—and who can resist the deliciously onomatopoetic interrobang?! But the apostrophe wins my heart as punctuation’s unsung hero. It’s a beautiful word: apostrophe. It is the lofty cousin of the common comma and the multi-faceted twin of the single quotation mark. An apostrophe holds a place in line. It stands in for others, silently doing their job. It fuses two into one, slicing syllables without sacrificing sense. It implies a manner of speaking and lends a conversational tone. It softens the blow of the nots in this life. And it announces a belonging.

* Of course, if we have our punctuation pets, we have our pet peeves, too. I’ll uncover the annoying side of punctuation in a future post.

** Punctuation Kung Fu was created in Suffolk, England, to teach the mechanics of sentence structure to kids. It pairs fighting moves (such as the Full Stop Fist Punch) and sounds (HA!) with the rules of applying punctuation symbols.

Margaret Walker edits, writes, and reads—and thrives on the evolution of language.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Creativity, Proofreading, Punctuation | 2 comments »

Passionate about punctuation

Posted by: Amy Paradysz, Senior Editor, December 20th, 2011

pencils1Think that regular people don’t care about punctuation?

Think again.

A friend from high school recently posted this on Facebook:

Lauren’s grammar homework:

Choose the correct way to rewrite the end of this sentence: “A string quartet has two violins a viola and a cello.”

a. two violins, a viola, and a cello.
b. two violins, a viola, and, a cello.
c. two, violins a, viola and a, cello.
d. no change is needed.

Maybe I’ve spent too much time with my AP Style Book, but none of these are correct!!!

Thus began a heated debate over commas, with 81 comments posted by a variety of people over less than two hours—and more comments to come.

The original post was by a career newspaper journalist. Journalists use Associated Press (AP) style and are firm in the belief that the serial comma is superfluous and must be expunged.

I was once a newspaper reporter and editor, so I remember my distaste for that “extra” comma.

But then I started editing for an assessment test publishing company. Educational publishers favor the serial comma.

And then I started editing proposals for tech companies that have corporate style guides based on Government Printing Office (GPO) style, which calls for serial commas.

And then for five years I was immersed in book publishing. Book publishers have corporate style guides based on Chicago Manual of Style (CMS), which also calls for serial commas.

Today, for nearly everything that goes through Dragonfly Editorial, we use serial commas. That’s because most of our clients use styles based on GPO (for tech editing) or the AMA Manual of Style (for medical editing). Both dictate use of the serial comma.

After five years of deleting those commas and 10 years of putting them back in, the serial comma and I have become friends. I appreciate its ability to clarify where one item in a list ends and another begins—which can be difficult to discern in the technical material that we edit.

But whether I like the serial comma or not isn’t important. What is important is knowing what the client wants.

In the latest edition of The Copyeditor’s Handbook, author Amy Einsohn touches on the debate:

The other issue concerns the so-called serial comma, which is the comma before the and or or that precedes the last item in a list. Chicago, WIT, APA, and CSE all either require or strongly recommend the serial comma, but most newspapers and magazines use the serial comma only when needed to avoid ambiguity. Ask your editorial coordinator about house policy.

And so, we can agree to disagree. And any time I go back to newspaper or magazine writing, I better be ready to check my “extra” commas at the door.

Dragonfly Editorial project manager Amy Paradysz thanks her Facebook friends for reminding her that details do indeed matter to people who are not editors—even if we disagree on the specifics.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Copyediting, Proofreading, Punctuation | 2 comments »

The high cost of cheap copyediting

Posted by: Samantha Enslen, president and senior editor, May 2nd, 2008

Oh, dear.

Princeton University Press is recalling all copies of one of its spring titles after discovering more than 90 spelling and grammar errors in the 245-page work. The book, Cop in the Hood: My Year Policing Baltimore’s Eastern District, by Peter Moskos, was published May 1 in an initial press run of 4,000 copies.

Believe it or not, the press is pulling all copies of the book, correcting and reprinting it, and redistributing it to stores. Any ideas on what that’s going to cost?

According the Peter Dougherty, the press’s director, the manuscript “had been given to an inexperienced copy editor who failed to do the job properly.” He claims to be “flabbergasted and embarrassed.”

Hmm.

For years, the world’s most prestigious publishers have been getting away with paying peanuts to their freelance copyeditors and proofreaders, with pay rates languishing in the teens or low twenties at best. Is it any surprise, then, that the “inexperienced copy editor” who took this job missed a host of errors? Most senior editors — who have the experience needed to do this type of work — just won’t work anymore for what the publishers are paying.

Furthermore, this *scandal* suggests another, equally serious gap in Princeton U’s editorial process.

Most manuscripts go through at least three passes before going to press — a developmental edit, a copyedit, and a proofread. It’s not unreasonable for a few errors to be missed during copyediting, especially on a complex or error-ridden manuscript. But those mistakes are customarily found and fixed during proofreading.

Is Princeton U also trying to save money buy cutting proofreading out of the process? If so, the results of the cost-cutting speak for themselves.

Posted in Editorial process, Proofreading, Publishing | Comments Off

What do our clients think?

Press Releases

view archives

Latest Comments

  • Samantha: Great concept … I love the idea of creating a new life...
  • Tracy Salcedo-Chourre: I love the ellipses. It either makes you look...
  • Greg H: What a truly fabulous blog post! Who would imagine those simple,...