RE. Proofreader vs. TE/ TW (long)

Subject: RE. Proofreader vs. TE/ TW (long)
From: Yves Jeaurond <yves_jeaurond -at- CBC -dot- CA>
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 15:17:00 EDT

Gina Hertel:

Hi. You ask: < What is the difference between a technical editor and a
proofreader? >
Do check out the "Chicago Manual of Style" (CMS) sections 3.9-3.39 for a good
synopsis of what a proofreader does. These sound like high-school essay

Abilities of TWs, TEs and PRs are not the issue. Their skill sets are similar,
It's at what point of the document's preparation that they decide to get
involved that counts. The process does have to have <grin> a beginning (author),
a middle (editor, typesetter, printer, proofreader) and an end (editor,
printer, marketing, delivery).

<personnal note/soap box> If it's any help, what first got me going on all this
was Mortimer Adler's "How to Read a Book"--the first edition (1955?), before
Charles Van Doren edited it. The notion that you should understand before you
agree/disagree with an author made quite a mark. Then Socrates' knowledge /
belief distinction (via Plato's Gorgias) and Hume's "Inquiry Concerning Human
Understanding"--which forces one to read in a "contractual" mode, i.e., as if
the manual/work/document was a contract between reader & author. And the
Bible's rewrites (various authors AND various editors--see for example Bloom's
amusing & instructive "The Book of J")... all this leads to appreciation to
something recent like William F. Buckley's "Buckley: the Right Word" (Random
House, 1997) or Wired's "Wired Style--Style guide for English in the digital
age", Postman's "Technopoly" (St. Martin's?, 1990) etc., etc., etc. HTH.

Yves J.
yves_jeaurond -at- cbc -dot- ca

Previous by Author: Grammar, Important? See Fowler...
Next by Author: Re: Proofreader vs. TE/ TW
Previous by Thread: FW: LWR SIG-> Proofreading Everything Under the Sun-- A TWs resp ?
Next by Thread: Re: the proofreading thread--another two cents

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads