Learning how to explain what the grammatical errors are in a piece of work is important, but the first piece of the puzzle for a budding editor is learning how to listen.
Listen to what? The author? Yes, of course, as the work is their vision, not the editor’s. And after all, the cardinal rule of editing is, ‘Thou shalt not remake a piece of writing in thine own writing style’.
Having said that, before you tackle listening to authors, you need to develop your ‘editor’s ear’.
What’s that? It’s that vague feeling of disquiet you feel when you read something that isn’t ‘quite right’. Grammar can be taught, but this almost instinctual ‘ear’ for words is what makes the best editors so good at what they do.
The great thing is that this sensitivity can be developed in both authors and editors (and really, as a writer, you need to develop this skill) and the best way to do it is by reading widely.
You’ll be amazed at how much you pick up by osmosis. You’ll start noticing when authors string together sentences with commas rather than semi-colons or splitting them with a full stop/period. Doing so gives a passage a rather jumbled, breathy feel.
You’ll notice when an author has overused a thesaurus because the words don’t ‘ring’ true. This isn’t to say that you shouldn’t seek to use unusual words or pairings, but don’t be a ‘try hard’. Also, please be aware of your ‘go to phrases’ and sentence patterns. As you’re reading a paragraph, you may start to notice that the author starts a lot of sentences with ‘But’ or ‘However’. As a reader, we want to be surprised and kept interested and thus these types of patterns tend to produce stagnant writing.
Of course many people blissfully go through life not knowing, or seemingly not caring, if a comma is missing, or if a dependent clause has been incorrectly punctuated. Perhaps there’s a lesson in there for editors. If it doesn’t obscure communication, and reads OK, then perhaps you should just leave it.
My belief is that our first goal should be to ensure that a piece of writing is communicating. Then we can sort out the mechanics. Of course the interesting dilemma is that often when the mechanics (punctuation, etc.) aren’t correct, they’re obscuring communication and THAT’S when we get a bit tetchy.
Should we fight to the death because of a misplaced modifier? Maybe, but mainly because it tends to create obscure, and sometimes laughable, results, such as:
The patient was referred to a psychologist with severe emotional problems.
- instead of -
The patient with severe emotional problems was referred to a psychologist.
The girl was dancing with a boy in a red dress.
- instead of -
The girl in a red dress was dancing with a boy.
- or -
The boy was dancing with a girl in a red dress.
(
Handbook for Writers and Editors, McKenzie, p. 114)
Should we care if the writer has written a sentence that lasts for four pages? Probably … because it could be admissible in a court of law as the first case of boring a reader to death!
The bottom line is that first and foremost, editors should be concerned with ensuring that the writer connects with their readers and retains their attention. If we’re doing that, everything else is relative, subordinate and beside the exclamation point.
For these reasons, I strongly believe that the first step to becoming a good editor is learning to listen to your editor’s ear. Having said that, if you find that you’re tone deaf—as is often the case when we’re listening to our own material—you might want to get some independent, professional auditory/editorial help.
To contact me, feel free to click
here and fill in the quick and easy form.
Posts
