Recently I read through a book to make notes for a professional voice actor who would be reading it for an audiobook production. Luckily, she turned out to be a genius at reading my mind and dodging most of the little landmines I had overlooked. The experience was eye-opening; I’m sure I could do a better job now and prevent some of the problems I heard on the recording.
Continue reading "Preparing an Audiobook for a Narrator Who Isn’t You" »
|
|
A few months ago in a conference session, a group of novelists digressed into good-natured complaints about being copyedited. One writer drew a lot of laughs saying, “I mean, I got A’s in English! I know where the freaking commas go!”* Others nodded in recognition and comradery.
I bit my tongue. I really wanted to say—as gently as possible—I’m sorry dear, but you freaking don’t.
Continue reading "Sure, You Got A’s in English—But Do You Know Where Commas Go?" »
|
|
In editing formal prose, we fix nonstandard English without hesitation. But in editing creative works, we often need to throw out the stylebook so a narrator or character in a novel or play can abuse grammar to good effect. The guideline is “believability”: would a character naturally use such a phrase, or would they speak more formally?
Continue reading "“Hazel and I’s puppy”? When Fiction Meets Bad Grammar" »
|
|
In novels and stories and other creative works, words spoken by a character are normally set off from the narrative with quotation marks, and the speaker is identified in the run of text by tags like “she said.” This is not only Chicago style—it’s an old convention that continues to dominate literature today. To help readers keep track of who’s speaking without the constant repetition of tags, it’s also traditional to start a new paragraph when the speaker changes.
Here’s an example from Ji-li Jiang’s memoir, Red Scarf Girl (New York: Harper Trophy, 1997):
Continue reading "When Characters Speak: Formatting Dialogue" »
|
|
Although I officially retired from my work at the Chicago Manual in December, I couldn’t say no to an opportunity to continue hanging around the CMOS Online Shop Talk blog when Russell Harper—the new editor—invited me to share a new corner of the blog with him called Fiction+. There we’ll focus on how to cope when Chicago style rules don’t quite seem to fit the creative context of a novel, story, poem, or play.
Russell kicked things off last week with a post on comma splices; today I interview Janet Burroway, author of the classic textbook Writing Fiction, a staple in creative writing classes that has just been issued in a new 10th edition.
If you’re interested in creative writing or editing, be sure to check out Fiction+. You can sign up for alerts if you want to be sure to catch new posts, and I’ll continue to give you a heads-up here.
______
Photo: Woman Writing, by August Macke (1887–1914), courtesy Wikimedia Commons
|
|
I’m watching the clock today: in exactly one hour, seven minutes, and twenty-three seconds, I’ll be retired from my job at the University of Chicago Press.
As you know by now, my longtime colleague Russell Harper will become editor of the “Chicago Style Q&A” at CMOS Online and editor of the CMOS Shop Talk blog. (In about one hour, six minutes, and 15 seconds.)
Russell is the perfect person to take the wheel. He’s tech-minded and curious and meticulous and kind. His patience is legendary. He’s also a creative writer and amateur photographer. Here’s an interview with Russell from 2010, the year CMOS 16 was published. It’s one of my favorite interviews ever.
As for me, it’s been an honor to edit University of Chicago Press books and confer with colleagues on the team of The Chicago Manual of Style. Traveling and speaking on behalf of CMOS has led to countless friendships and opportunities. Reading emails to the Q&A inspired me to write The Subversive Copy Editor and to begin blogging. I am filled with gratitude, both to the Press and to our readers.
And the Q&A mail? I will miss it! I love mail. It has so much . . . personality. And possibility. Nothing could replace the privilege of listening to the personal and professional concerns of writers and editors through their letters to The Chicago Manual of Style over the years.
But I don’t want to overdo the farewell. I’ll be around, just up the road a bit. And Russell has already invited me to write for Shop Talk now and then. I look forward to more writing and travel. See you out there!
______
Top image: Purple, courtesy Tolucreations
|
|
I love Microsoft Word shortcuts, and I post them from time to time when I stumble across a new one. But how’s a body supposed to discover all the features of this gigantic application when so many of them aren’t even visible on the ribbon? Now and then I go online and browse around.
Half these tricks were new to me, even though most of them aren’t new to Word. I can’t decide which one I love best! Maybe number 10, although it’s galling that it’s been right there in plain sight all this time and I could have been using it.
Vote for your favorite in the comments—or share a good one of your own. And if you’ve known about these forever, go ahead and boast. Just please don’t make fun of me.
Continue reading "10 New Favorite MS Word Tricks for Editors" »
|
|
Do you ever find at the end of workday that even though you know darned well you weren’t slacking for even ten minutes, somehow you didn’t make any progress in editing your manuscript?
Or do you ever try to explain to someone why even though you put in forty or fifty hours a week, your editing time is way, way less?
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog:
This morning I was looking at a writer’s website and once again wondered about an anomaly I see all the time in author bios. You know what I mean: those short blurbs that appear on book jackets, at online bookstores and fan sites, on guest posts, conference programs, and other hangouts where writers need to be identified.
It’s traditional in a bio for a third-person narrator to describe your work and qualifications.
(Continue)
Photo: Missy and Harley, by Shirlz.
|
|
I’m blogging today at Editor’s Corner, at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog:
How does a professional copyeditor know when it’s time to retire? Freelancers especially may be tempted to sail on past the age at which in-house editors are encouraged to put down the red pencil. But in either case, how long is too long? Here are some questions to consider.
Photo: Jean Le Tavernier, via Wikimedia Commons.
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog:
For the purposes of this post, let’s presume
If you agree, consider three sharing practices that will reduce the amount of careless shouting online. Good copyeditors have the skills to implement these steps almost effortlessly.
Photo: Hand Ball Faces World Population, courtesy Geralt 9301.
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog:
As a reader of the email that comes to The Chicago Manual of Style, I regularly find myself explaining the purpose of the illustrations (figures and tables) to puzzled users. Two recent queries:
Q1. I was trying to determine if it was acceptable . . .
Photo courtesy of Creative Commons
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog:
CMOS 17 is almost here—and at the University of Chicago Press, that’s a really big deal. Every seven to ten years the team here revs up for an overhaul of The Chicago Manual of Style, and two to three years after that, the new edition appears.
We don’t start from scratch. Russell David Harper, the principal reviser of 17th editions of the Manual, started making notes for the 17th the minute . . .
Photo: Columbia Space Shuttle, courtesy of NASA.
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog:
Like all professional copyeditors, I try to keep up with news in my field, which means browsing the posts and articles of editors, grammarians, linguists, and lexicographers online. I do this through RSS feed subscriptions—Feedly is my reader of choice—and by bookmarking posts of interest into an “unread” folder, which I . . .
Photo courtesy of Clker-Free-Vector-Images.
|
|
[Updated 5.30.2023]
Because I’m often asked for advice on how to submit a children’s book to a publisher or agent, I’ve accumulated a set of suggestions for writers who have a manuscript and aren’t sure how to proceed. Before you send off your work to a publisher, perhaps something in the advice below will help you take it up a notch or two in quality.
—Join SCBWI (Society for Children’s Book Writers and Illustrators). It’s made up of writers at all stages of accomplishment, and its website has tons of resources, including lists of book critiquers whom you can pay to evaluate or edit your book. If there is an SCBWI group in your town, you can meet with other writers who may give you the benefit of their experience. Check the national organization’s site to find your state and regional organizations and local cell.
—Read all the books you can that are similar to what you want to write, especially the more recent award-winning ones. Children’s books have changed in amazing ways since we were kids, to include diverse characters, sophisticated humor, and edgy situations. In young-adult books almost no topic is off the table. And almost every genre is now a candidate for back-of-the-book discussion questions, resources for related reading, and sometimes even notes and bibliographies. There are also books on writing craft, such as Cheryl B. Klein’s The Magic Words: Writing Great Books for Children and Young Adults, and books on marketing your work, like Jane Friedman’s The Business of Being a Writer. Your librarian can help you find the books you need.
—Avoid these common pitfalls:
Of course, all conventions may be ignored for reasons of genius! But beginners are usually better off observing the rules until they understand how to break them brilliantly.
—Look at the annually published Children’s Writer’s and Illustrator’s Market, which you can find in most libraries and bookstores. It will tell you everything you need to know about sending your work to publishers. It tells which publishers accept unsolicited manuscripts (as opposed to work sent via an agent), what kinds of books each publisher is interested in acquiring, and whether a publisher works with first-time authors.
—Find and read reviews of kids’ books. The best review journals include Horn Book, School Library Journal, Booklist, Publishers Weekly, and Kirkus Reviews. Subscriptions are expensive, so try the library. Professional reviews are also posted for many books at Goodreads and Amazon. Reviews will tell you what’s new and valued, and they can give you ideas for self-critiquing.
—Explore online. There are many closed Facebook groups such as KidLit411 and Sub It Club where children’s book writers share hopes and tips. Here are a few excellent blogs and websites. All of them lead to many other sites:
—Consider self-publishing. At user-friendly platforms like Draft2Digital and Amazon’s KDP you can publish print-on-demand or electronic books with little or no financial investment, depending on your technical skills. The days of taking out a second mortgage to fill your garage with copies that might never sell are (thankfully!) over.
Do you have experience in submitting your work to publishers that might benefit others? If so, please share in the comments below.
Photo: Lydia Liu, Children’s Books
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog:
One of the primal joys in life is to do good work. When the suit fits, the accounts balance, or the pie crust is flakey, someone takes pride in it.
In editing, it feels good to make corrections, tidy things up, and serve the reader. It feels good to put knowledge into practice. And—admit it—it feels good to spot an error! . . . Problems arise when
Photo: Deliberate Mistake, courtesy of Neil Turner.
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog!
Some lessons are harder to learn than others. Unfortunately for new copyeditors, sometimes the only way to recognize bad habits is to get slammed a few times by writers pushing back or by supervisors writing stet all over the copy.
So let me save you some grief and humiliation! Here are three bad habits I identified the hard way as a young editor . . .
Photo: Ooops!, courtesy of Sten Dueland.
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog!
We’ve all read those bossy directives from advice mongers: “Do rock a ripped T with a bright floral skirt.” “Don’t chew gum during an interview.” “Do practice blending eyeshadow with your brush.” “Don’t yank electrical cords from the wall.” Aside from being either fatuous and trendy or obvious and unhelpful, such lists actually pose some editorial dangers . . .
Photo: Don’t, by Todd Slagter.
|
|
I’m blogging today at The Chicago Manual of Style Shop Talk blog!
Recently a reader wrote to us questioning some of the alphabetizing recommendations in The Chicago Manual of Style:
“In all computer-based systems that are in current use, the ASCII sort order is used. Any sort order that violates the ASCII order cannot be maintained except through repeated manual adjustments. Solutions such as sorting St. as if it were Saint violate this order and thus cannot be correctly manipulated in MS Word, for example. What is your thinking on this issue?”
Photo: Selmer van Alten, Iceland phonebook is sorted on first names.
|
|
For years, it seems, it’s been impossible to find a language-related post or article online without a stickler making trouble in the comments section. Even on political, social, and retail sites, outraged commenters love to point out a misplaced apostrophe as a way to challenge the writer’s intelligence, education, or morality.
I’ve never believed that typos are that revealing. Anyone can be distracted or in a hurry. No one catches every single error. One study on human error rates concludes that “the best performance possible in well managed workplaces using normal quality management methods [has] failure rates of 5 to 10 in every hundred opportunities.”1 (Read that again: “the best performance possible”!)
And are we not human? Why shouldn’t we err?
At the University of Chicago Press a whole staff of editors makes a living finding typos and grammar goofs in academic book and journal article manuscripts, and no one thinks those writers are ignorant or corrupt.
It’s simply wrong to assume that anyone who types your when they mean you’re doesn’t know the difference. And in any case, is it right to point it out in a rude, public manner?
I’ll confess to taking a little evil pleasure when a grammar shamer commits a typo, falling victim to Muphrey’s Law [sic]: “If you write anything criticizing editing or proofreading, there will be a fault of some kind in what you have written.”
What’s your take?
_____
1. David J. Smith, Reliability, Maintainability and Risk, 7th ed. (Elsevier, 2005), app. 6. DOI: 10.1016/B978-075066694-7/50031-4.
Photo: Esther Lee, Freemont Troll, Seattle
This post originally appeared at The Chicago Manual of Style Online Shop Talk blog on July 19, 2016, © University of Chicago.
|
|
