We were sitting around the table last night catching up.\u00a0 That was when my father-in-law hit on something close to the heart of every editor.\u00a0 Apparently, he and his wife were thinking back across their 85 years reflecting on terms we no longer use.\u00a0 The word that got the two of them going yesterday was \u201creindeer.\u201d<\/p>\n
First, there was the big question of how to\u00a0spell reindeer.\u00a0 Was it raindeer?\u00a0 I said it was reigndeer (I could have sworn that\u2019s the way it was spelled), or was it reindeer (the correct spelling)?\u00a0 This of course, moved everyone and anyone who is slightly associated or connected to words, to start really thinking…\u00a0 Then there was the thought – just what did reindeer do anyway?\u00a0 And who used them?<\/p>\n
During the process of preparing books for publication, we often come across writers having issues with homophones or homonyms.\u00a0 It is truly enough to drive an editor crazy.\u00a0 Especially when the editor\u2019s co-editor is absolutely certain of the spelling of a particular word being correct.\u00a0 Such was the case about three weeks ago.<\/p>\n
One of our writers wrote a book in which he used word \u201cgun sight\u201d often throughout the manuscript.\u00a0 One of the co-editors adamantly argued the correct spelling was \u201cgun site.\u201d\u00a0 The co-editor then meticulously went through the manuscript changing all the \u201cgun sights\u201d to \u201cgun sites.\u201d<\/p>\n
Somehow, it did not seem correct to the other co-editor, the one who had extensive experience with actual gun sights in the attack jets he flew while in the Navy.\u00a0 \u201cI was sure we always used the word \u2018gun sights\u2019 to refer to \u2018gun sights.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNo, it just doesn\u2019t look right,\u201d the first co-editor said.<\/p>\n
Taking her word for it, the second co-editor said, \u201cOkay.\u00a0 But are you sure?\u201d\u00a0 She said yes, but it did not look right to him.\u00a0 So, the incongruity spurred him into action and he went to the dictionary.<\/p>\n
The amazing thing about words is that they can hide in plain sight in the middle of a manuscript and look perfectly normal while being entirely wrong.\u00a0 For instance, take the last sentence and look at it this way: The amazing thing about words is that they can hide in plane site in the middle of a manuscript and look perfectly normal while being entirely wrong.\u00a0 If you are reading fast, the mistake will slip by unnoticed.<\/p>\n
It takes a different kind of mind to read through and proof a manuscript.\u00a0 Not only does the mind have to see the mistakes, it has to identify the correct mistakes – which can really be a job!<\/p>\n
Of course, it should start first with the writer, who must take great pains to make certain to spell and use all words correctly.\u00a0 Then the writer needs to give the manuscript enough time \u201cto fall out of his head,\u201d in order to give the work a good, fresh edit.\u00a0 Then, if the writer can afford it, he or she would probably benefit from a professional editing job, something that does not come cheap at $2 to $4 a page.<\/p>\n
\u00a0Well, it is time for this blog to come to an end.\u00a0 In all sense of fairness, the second co-editor has called on the first co-editor to proof the work.\u00a0 She immediately started to look up the word \u201chomonym,\u201d which the first co-editor said he already did, but she continued anyway…\u00a0 It is always good to make sure it is correct.<\/p>\n
Now it is time to take our gun sites out and hunt some raindeer.\u00a0 And if we can\u2019t find raindeer, maybe we\u2019ll come across some reigndeer.<\/p>\n
Be careful with your spelling.<\/p>\n
-30-<\/p>\n
\u00a92010 J. Clark<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" We were sitting around the table last night catching up.\u00a0 That was when my father-in-law hit on something close to the heart of every editor.\u00a0 Apparently, he and his wife were thinking back across their 85 years reflecting on terms … Continue reading