=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EDline Vol. 2, no. 25 (22 June 1997) Editorial mailing list Published by the Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Contents: [1] Editorial Q & A---Previous queries [2qq] Grumble of the week [2rr] Geographical names [Was: Democratic Republic of Congo] [2ss] Resource for maths editing [2uu] Tautology [2xx] Environment-friendly? Q & A---New queries [2zz] _Elements of Editing_ [2ab] Who said that? [2ac] Upper or lower case? [Was: Statistical format] Business matters---New query [4r] Foreign clients [5] Bookmarks [6] Just for fun [7] Administration =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ---[1] Editorial ----------------------------------------------------- Two points to ponder this week. First, we have received a proposal from Gabriela Tenner for a new section, entitled "How I became an editor etc.", the idea being to get closer to the definition/description of being an editor. I think this is an excellent idea, particularly since we are now a multinational group, and the title "copy-editor" evidently covers a variety of job descriptions in different countries. I therefore invite contributions on this subject for future issues, and I should warn you all that if you don't put fingers to keyboard, I will regale you with *my* life story next week. [Or mine!---Iain Brown] The second point is an administrative one. Lionel Browne wrote: > Now that this mailing list is getting to look increasingly like > COPYEDITING-L, has anyone else noticed how much easier it is to > reply/post to that (automated) list than to this one? With my > mailing software (Turnpike v.3.03), to reply to EDline I have > to cut and paste the address, and then cut and paste the title; > a reply to COPYEDITING-L (and choice of reply by email or post > to the list) is one mouse click away. Am I missing a trick > somewhere? As editor, I'm in the privileged position of being able to slip my replies into the issue as I'm compiling it, so it hadn't occurred to me that some of you might be experiencing difficulties. Does anyone have any comments (and preferably solutions!) to this question? I might add that one of the beauties of this *not* being an automated list is that if you send your message to any one of the Electric Editors, or to our central email address (ElectricEds@bigfoot.com), we will generally manage to figure it out. Jane Kerr Moderator ---[2] Q & A --------------------------------------------------------- ** [2qq] Grumble of the week Date: Tue, 17 June 1997 From: Anne Waddingham, Waddingham@compuserve.com According to the _Admiralty Manual of Seamanship_ (1932, HMSO), ships can have "stern way", "head way" or be "under way". However, only anchors can be weighed - the process of lifting the anchor is "weighing anchor". The anchor will be "aweigh" once it's free of the sea bottom. Incidentally once the anchor is up to its stowage position, the order "avast heaving" will be given - a vast heaving what, I wonder? +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2rr] Geographical names [Was: Democratic Republic of Congo] Date: Thurs, 19 June 1997 From: Josephine Bacon, 100270.3224@compuserve.com Please ask Christine Firth to thank Professor Mackerras for his lucid explanation of the Chinese romanization of placenames problem. I always thought it was an impertinence for them to impose their version of their pronounciation on us and I still do, but at least there is some logic to it. I see no reason why the French should not refer to London as "Londres" and Dover as "Douvres", it is their language, and we ought to be able to call Beijing Peking even if by Chinese standards it is "wrong". The problem is a very serious one for the transliteration of non-English place names. I have just been editing a book on Islam, originally translated from the French. I have decided to change Koran to Qu'ran, because that is how the word tends to be spelled nowadays in English. It is very hard to pronounce but it gives an idea of the etymology behind the word (q-r-a = to read). Both Arabic and Hebrew contain letters for which there is no Roman alphabet equivalent and Chinese has intonations which are quite incapable of transliteration into Roman script. Has anyone found a way of transliterating the intonations of oriental languages? Incidentally, the international phonetic alphabet is a pain, partly because so many of the letters are "pie characters" and so require a special font and partly because no one knows what sounds they represent anyway! I remember seeing the upside down e in my French school textbook and wondering why on earth these complex characters were put into schoolbooks, when no one would understand them, least of all the teachers! +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2ss] Resource for maths editing Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: Geoff Palmer, gdp@cix.compulink.co.uk I strongly suspect that those in the best position to write useful manuals for maths editing are actually far too busy doing hands-on editing - on a freelance basis of course - and cannot spare the time (or risk the cashflow crisis) to prepare information for others. I also suspect that we are a dwindling band of specialists, who need to watch our backs, since publishers are increasingly relying on LaTeX or similar printout supplied by authors. In recent times, maths editing on book projects seems to have polarised. At one extreme, examination of LaTeX products has become a proof-reading rather than a copy editing exercise. At the other extreme, there is a fair amount of "naive" maths in circulation, prepared lovingly by authors who have a less than perfect grasp of the conventions of maths notation, and subcontracted rather nervously by publishers who are anxious to limit their copy editing budgets. These "naive" projects become unmanageable for the publishers, and are "loss leaders" for the copy editors. In my opinion, the problem is as follows. When STM publishers first began to make extensive use of freelancers, they were able to rely upon a generation of in-house managers or coordinators who had, in their time, gained hands-on experience within the commercial publishing company environment. This had included visits to typesetters, and familiarisation with typesetting technology. However, that generation has now largely stepped aside, leaving in their place well intentioned but less experienced replacements, some of whom are "administrators" rather than "editors". A second problem is the continuing stratification of some publishing companies. First, commissioning editors remain reluctant to accumulate copy- editorial expenses before a project is formally "handed over". This prevents us in the freelance community from making any early contribution to the preparation of the typescript. Second, some editorial departments continue to insist that the project should be prepared in such a way as to be suitable for any typesetter; i.e. all characters, inferiors, superiors and so on have to be marked individually, rather than accepting visible fonts on hard copy and obvious positioning. This burdens the publisher with unnecessary costs, and is the stage at which the "naive" books become millstones. Finally, when the book reaches the production department, it seems inevitable to me that it will be sent to one of a small number of tried and trusted typesetters, the majority of whom could cope perfectly well with global instructions instead of finely detailed marking. With regard to a printed resource for maths editing, we cannot expect very much from commercial publishers. The publisher's incentive is to minimise cost and maximise revenue, and that mitigates against putting up cash advances to have complex manuals written. In any event, with an eye on the future, the publisher possibly hopes that the problem can be avoided altogether, as the LaTeX alternative (or a similar template solution) becomes more commonplace. If there is indeed a genuine lack of any useful resource, perhaps it is time for a consortium to provide funding. In the longer term, if the skill to prepare and typeset maths is lost from the publishing and typesetting community, and reverts to the academic domain (wherein LaTeX mostly resides), then our abilities and reputations as editors and publishers will be permanently diminished. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2uu] Tautology Date: Thurs, 19 June 1997 From: Steve Browning, steve@hiv-project.org.uk Simon de Pinna wrote: > I am one of those people who find it irritating that > commentators persist in saying 'the HIV virus' when they should > use the name of the disease it causes, ie 'the AIDS virus' ... Well those of us who work in the HIV field would certainly not agree! While we're certainly not happy with 'the HIV virus', 'the AIDS virus' will drive us into apoplexy. AIDS is a syndrome whose limits have been variously defined: the simple fact is that there is no simple relationship between HIV infection and the development of AIDS. Telling someone who has been infected that they have the 'AIDS virus' is still to imply a death sentence. HIV infection may lead to various outcomes, of which AIDS is only one. Many people have of course been infected for a very long time without developing AIDS. Social, public health and psychological reasons all impose a need for separating HIV from AIDS. Now I hope I've explained myself there... ---------------------- Date: Thurs, 19 June 1997 From: Jane Kerr, bywater@zetnet.co.uk Well, yes, but even "experts" seem to use these various terms in a sloppy way. It would seem that the terms HIV and AIDS are becoming synonymous, even in the minds of people who should know better, despite the massive public information/education efforts that have been made. For instance, I'm currently editing a book on communicable diseases in which the author describes the case-to-fatality ratio for "the more frequently occurring diseases ... including HIV, legionellosis, meningococcal infections and neonatal HSV". Presumably in this case the term should be AIDS rather than HIV? As far as I'm aware, HSV isn't a disease either, and "neonatal HSV" should be changed, either to "neonatal HSV infections" or to the name(s) of the specific condition(s) causing the neonatal fatalities. ---------------------- Date: Thurs, 19 June 1997 From: Steve Browning, steve@hiv-project.org.uk I agree that too many people use both terms too sloppily, as a major forthcoming publication that I'm in charge of will clearly emphasise. But where you wondered whether they should say "AIDS" rather than "HIV", I think HIV is better. There are many relatively minor (and some major) conditions that are often associated with HIV infection but that do not constitute AIDS. I now work in prevention but previously worked in treatment information, where I became very aware that "AIDS" is in fact a loose and not always helpful term. But it obviously sticks in the mind of all HIV-positive people, many of whom seem increasingly unlikely to become ill enough to have "AIDS". But they're still subject to all sorts of exclusion that really isn't necessary, and the whole epidemic of HIV infection becomes harder to control. I'm not making my case very clearly here, but the basic point is that it's usually more useful to talk about "HIV-related illness", a term that covers the whole range of things and helps to emphasise the wide variations in individual prognoses. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2xx] Environment-friendly? Date: Sun, 15 June 1997 From: Mandy MacDonald, 100754.3643@compuserve.com Barbara Shapland asks whether others have seen 'environmentally-friendly' for 'environment-friendly'. Yes, I've seen 'environmentally friendly' (but without the hyphen); but on reflection I think 'environment- friendly' would be better, on analogy with woman-friendly, user-friendly, etc. ---------------------- Date: Sun, 15 June 1997 From: Lane Lester, llester@athens.net > In a text which discusses 'experiences of new, > environment-friendly heat pump working fluids' I would be > inclined to change this to 'environmentally-friendly...', but > I can't find any other references to check this. The only similar term I know about is "user-friendly," which means "friendly to the user." Since the meaning in the above text is "friendly to the environment," I would say that the original text is correct. ---------------------- Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: Lionel Browne, Lionel_Browne@sand-con.demon.co.uk I hadn't thought about this one before, but now that I have, 'environment-friendly' gets my vote for describing something (in this case a heat pump working fluid) that is not harmful to the environment. * If it is 'environmentally friendly', surely this means that it is being friendly in an environmental way - which doesn't make much sense. * Does that mean that a user-friendly video recorder is one that isn't harmful to the user...? ---------------------- Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: Sharon Boddy, sboddy@ftn.net I wrote a regular environment column for three years and used both phrases. Either phrase is correct and can be used; environment-friendly is preferable (primarily because all those ly's can make for a bit of tongue twisting). ---------------------- Date: Sun, 22 June 1997 From: Jane Kerr, bywater@zetnet.co.uk I think both terms, environment- or environmentally-friendly, are smokescreen terms, or euphemisms, which con the hard-of-thinking into believing that the products so described are actually *beneficial* to the environment, when in most cases the best that can be said is that they do less harm than any of the alternatives that are available. A better term would be "environmentally-responsible", and you can argue over whether or not it should have a hyphen, if you like. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2zz] _Elements of Editing_ Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: Gabriela Tenner, getenner@mail.retina.ar Have any of you read "The elements of editing", by Arthur Plotnik, Collier Books, 1982? Any comments? +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2ab] Who said that? Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: Iain Brown, i_browne@compuserve.com There is a famous quote that runs something along the lines of "Everyone has a book in them just waiting to be written". Who actually said this? Was it Mark Twain? And what was actually said? Like Chinese whispers, the original is bound to have become corrupted. I'd be very grateful for any pointers, as I need to include it in a review. Not one of the usual quotation tomes cites it, so I call upon the combined EDline resources. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2ac] Upper or lower case? [Was: Statistical format] Date: Tue, 17 June 1997 From: Michael Robertson, 73064.3431@compuserve.com Lyn Imeson wrote: > I've recently come across 'cartesian' and 'euclidean', isn't > this taking things a bit too far? Am I being old-fashioned by > changing these to 'Cartesian' and 'Euclidean'? I think it is a British/American difference--in American medical style 'Fallopian' and 'Eustachian' etc. are lower-cased, and this is the style in Webster's Tenth for these. However, Webster's Tenth inconsistently still gives caps. on 'Cartesian' and on 'Euclidean algorithm' but lower-cases 'euclidean' itself, 'euclidean geometry', and 'euclidean space'. The Chicago Manual of Style 14th ed. section 7.49 rules in favor of lowercasing words derived from proper names, but admits that opinions vary on this. Among the 'down style' examples given are diesel engine, herculean, pasteurize ... and 'scotch whisky'. ---[4] Business matters --------------------------------------------- ** [4r] Foreign clients Date: Sun, 15 June 1997 From: Judyth Merlmelstein, Judyth_Mermelstein@babylon.montreal.qc.ca A fellow-editor (and Mediation person for the local branch of the Editors' Association of Canada) has asked me whether I've learned anything about how people can protect themselves when doing work for unknown clients in foreign parts. I didn't have any really good answers for her --beyond the usual stuff about looking them up in appropriate business directories if one can and trying to write a good contract. This is undoubtedly something worth knowing, so I'd appreciate it if anyone who has done business with unknowns at a distance -- and anyone who has thought about the matter, written a contract to cover these situations, or has information about this from other sources -- would e-mail me privately on the subject, indicating whether their remarks are "not for attribution" if necessary. I promise I'll compile the results and post them to the list. [BTW, "on" still sounds wrong to me but I'm seeing it around a lot -- comments welcomed.] ---[5] Bookmarks ---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 June 1997 From: Lionel Browne, Lionel_Browne@sand-con.demon.co.uk Freelance Editorial Association, PO Box 380835, Cambridge, MA 02238-0835, USA: < http://www.tiac.net/users/freelanc/index.htm > I'm not sure if this has been bookmarked before, but it looks intertesting and relevant. To quote from the FEA's Web site: The Freelance Editorial Association is a nationwide nonprofit organization, run by volunteers, that works to promote the interests of editorial freelancers. Dues support a variety of projects and events. The Association provides advocacy, community, and information for freelance editorial professionals. The benefits of membership add up to opportunities to break out of professional isolation and join with colleagues to improve working conditions in the freelance editorial profession. Among other things, the FEA's Web site includes the full text of its Code of Practice. Maybe the SFEP should follow suit? ---[6] Just for fun -------------------------------------------------- _Faux pas_ of the week Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: Gemma Hooper, jcghooper@compuserve.com From The Spectator of June 14: 'But in the first edition [of _Emma_], of 1816, Mrs Elton calls her husband _cara sposo_, thus getting the gender of the adjective wrong too. But who's mistake was that? Is Jane Austen deliberately making Mrs Elton one shade more ignorant? Or was it the printers, or Jane Austen's own mistake? I'd be perfectly happpy to accept it as a mere orthographic slip.' from an article by Christopher Howse. (Strange that the word he should have used is an anagram of his surname.) ------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 June 1997 From: Mandy MacDonald, 100754.3643@compuserve.com I don't know [if] this counts as an example of what I'm beginning to think of as Reversing Motorcycle Syndrome, since it occurred on radio (though I suppose someone must have written the script): a soprano was described by a programme presented on Radio 3 the other week as 'abseiling up and down the cadenzas'. Can you abseil up? ------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: C. Shuttleworth, ChristineShuttleworth@compuserve.com I just had to tell you all about this. I quote from the column "Mind your language" by the well-named Dot Wordsworth in The Spectator, 7 June 1997 (I'm still catching up with my reading after coming back from holiday): "The kindly and learned librarian of the London Library, Mr Alan Bell, was for some reason leafing through a jewellery catalogue from the fashionable Wempe of Bond Street recently when this caught his eye, on page 40: [there follows a photograph, which I wish you could see, of a gold object with the following inscription spelt out in diamonds: 'Thank's'.] It is a money clip in 18-carat gold with 52 diamonds. The price is £2,175. It is difficult to know whom to laugh at more, the makers, or the sucker who paid extra for the diamonds in the otiose apostrophe." -------------------- Date: Tue, 17 June 1997 From: Michael Robertson, 73064.3431@compuserve.com The following heading appeared in some medical proofreading I was recently doing: Bulimia nervosa: theories of eatiology I kid you not. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ "Worst analogies ever written in a high school essay", no. 6 From the attic came an unearthly howl. The whole scene had an eerie, surreal quality, like when you're on vacation in another city and "Jeopardy" comes on at 7 p.m. instead of 7:30. [Source: well ...] ------------------- Re: Worst analogies Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: Erin Trostle, erin.trostle@smtpgwy.mla.org Mandy MacDonald wondered about the expression "went down like a lead balloon." She noted that a lead balloon goes down well but does not go up successfully. I think that the more common expresssion is "went over like a lead balloon." +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ To he from I Date: Tue, 17 June 1997 From: Eddie Kent, eddie.kent@mcr1.poptel.org.uk [Forwarded from Jeremy Humpries] Here's a funny story. If you were a couch potato you would know that on Countdown Richard Whiteley has been heard to say 'Goodbye from Carol and I' now and then. There's a Countdown forum on the C4 page, so I posted a mild request that the producer ask him to stop it. I got a whole load of vituperators coming back at me, describing me in anatomically explicit terms, telling me 'from Carol and I' is right, and 'from Carol and me' is wrong, telling me that I was a youngster let down by the comprehensive system, and what a pity I didn't get educated under Labour in the 1970s, when they taught grammar properly, etc... I responded, very mildly again, explaining how nouns and pronouns governed by a preposition take the oblique case, giving various authorities, including Robert Burchfield, who was/is head of the OED, which rules on Countdown. They came back at me worse than before. It's weird. None of them can spell. None of them can write a sentence. None of them ever read a book, apparently. Why do they watch Countdown? Anyway, although they are nutters I've challenged them to find me a reference supporting their side. Watch this sp. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Date: Mon, 16 June 1997 From: Joy McMellen, J_McKellen@compuserve.com BROKE/(B)ROCK/BAROQUE - let's keep the alliteration Yes, it doesn't really rhyme with _broke_, but let's allow poetic licence plwaw ------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 June 1997 From: Lane Lester, llester@athens.net Simon Cauchi wrote: > And what can we do to stamp out the erroneous pronunciation? > "Baroque" rhymes with ROCK, not BROKE. Oh, dear, say it isn't so! Of course, I live in one of the more rebellious colonies, but I've never heard it pronounced any other way than the "erroneous" one. In fact, the NBC Pronunciation Dictionary gives it "buh ROHK." ------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 June 1997 From: Jane Kerr, bywater@zetnet.co.uk Accommodating (and elderly) Chambers allows both pronunciations; dogmatic Oxford insists on the one rhyming with ROCK. Say it however you like, Lane. ---[7] Administration ------------------------------------------------ EDline provides the opportunity for a weekly online discussion of matters editorial and editorial business. * POSTING MESSAGES TO THE LIST All messages to be posted to the list should be sent to Jane Kerr, at: bywater@zetnet.co.uk Include as the subject line, "EDline [topic]", where [topic] is the subject under discussion. Topics might include areas such as Grammar, Spelling, American English or Punctuation. Messages should be pertinent to the basic premise of the list; they may be withheld, or redirected if more pertinent to one of the other mailing lists. The spelling and grammar of messages will *not* be corrected, but some editing of length may be undertaken. Quoting from previous messages: quote as much as you need to make the context of your reply clear, but no more. * Administration All messages of a subscription or administrative nature should be directed to Iain Brown at: i_brown@compuserve.com with "EDline ADMIN" in the subject line. * To subscribe to Grapevine To subscribe to Grapevine, the discussion list concerned with matters computing, please e-mail Electric Editors at: ElectricEds@bigfoot.com with [Subscribe Grapevine] in the subject line. * To subscribe to LANGline To subscribe to LANGline, which discusses modern languages, translation and editing in non-English languages, please e-mail Electric Editors at: ElectricEds@bigfoot.com with [Subscribe LANGline] in the subject line. *Homepage and back issues: Visit the Electric Editors at: < http://www.ikingston.demon.co.uk/ee/home.htm > Back issues of all three mailing lists are available on the Mailing Lists archive page. --------- ** The views expressed in this mailing list are strictly those of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the moderators or of the Electric Editors. ** Articles (c) 1997, by individual contributors Design (c) 1996, 1997 Iain Brown =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= END OF EDline 2.25 Next issue: 29 June 1997 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=