We’re in the midst of a heavy proposal week, juggling multiple editing projects for one of our favorite clients. Yesterday, we somehow managed to edit the wrong version of a document — one that was several days old. By the time our client realized the mistake, it was after business hours. On the positive side, we found the right file and spent the evening editing it. On the negative side, our client had to wait several extra hours to get the material.

In response to our apology the next day, here’s what our client wrote:

Thank you for taking care of the edit even though it was double work. We are all so busy dealing with so many files, it is easy to make a mistake.

Later, she wrote this:

I really appreciate the support we receive from you and your team. I know it isn’t easy to manage a team and projects as smoothly as you do. You make it seem effortless.

What a response! I’m amazed that she could find such kind words for us in the face of our goof-up. Dear client, your wonderful attitude motivates us to work harder for you every day!

This post is for all you copyeditors out there who handle mainly scientific and technical material. That’s what I do … except when I’m editing books of ghost stories.

Ye whose stylesheets usually contain terms such as BitLocker drive encryption and Inter-site Topology Generation, look thee now with pleasure on highlights from my most recent words list.

• bloodlust
• deathbed, deathwatch
• God; the Devil; but a devil, a demon
• goose bumps
• gravedigger; gravestone; graveyard; but grave marker; grave site
• Maker (as in I’m going to meet my Maker, i.e., God)
• will-o’-the-wisp

Now that’s a spooky stylesheet!

Oh, for frack’s sake. The Washington Post reports that Rachael Ray’s catchword EVOO – that’s short for extra-virgin olive oil, for those of you not yet in the know — is to be included in the 2007 edition of the Oxford American College Dictionary.

How many times do I have to say this, people? Save this shite for the Oxford Dictionary of Slang!

Well, the good folks at Oxford University Press have unveiled The New Oxford American Dictionary’s Word of the Year for 2006. And it ain’t anything cute or even elegant.

It’s carbon neutral. I am yawning just typing it. Head to Oxford if you want the definition.

Their reasoning for choosing such a dud? Oxford’s Erin McKean, editor of the OAD, writes:

We know that people love fun, flashy words like truthiness … but we are always looking for a word that is both reflective of the events and concerns of the past year and also forward-looking: a word that we think will only become more used and more useful as time goes on.

OK … I guess.

Merriam-Webster has recently unveiled a set of new words that will be included in the 2006 update of Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition. Among them are technocreations such as mouse potato and ringtone; terms that originated in advertising, such as supersize; and already-dated slang terms such as drama queen.

Do I really need this junk in my dictionary? Isn’t it easy enough to absorb the meaning of these terms just by watching Cingular commercials and old episodes of Will & Grace?

Personally, I only use the dictionary to look up words like chaulmoogra, muntin, or weltanschauung. I can figure out unibrow for myself.

What do you think?