Providing English Services for Scientists
Visit Us on Facebook:
  • Home
  • English
    • Our Services
    • Pricing and Payment
    • About Us
  • Français
    • Nos Services
    • Tarifs et Règlement
    • A Propos de Nous
  • Español
    • Nuestros Servicios
    • Precios y Formas de Pago
    • Acerca de Nosotros
  • Italiano
    • I Nostri Servizi
    • Prezzi e Pagamento
    • Chi siamo
  • Deutsch
    • Unsere Dienstleistungen
    • Preise und Bezahlung
    • Über uns
  • 中文
    • 我們的服務
    • 價格
    • 關於我
  • Client Comments
  • Speaking Science Blog

But I already had my manuscript edited by a native speaker...

10/22/2012

0 Comments

 
Many researchers come to us because English editing has been included in the list of changes requested before their papers can be published. However, this is frustrating for many, and understandably so, because they had their manuscripts reviewed for English errors prior to initial submission!

It is important to recognize that there are large differences in the quality of service that editors provide. Since research funding is often scarce, it can be tempting to go with an editor who will only charge 60-80 euros for a 20+ page manuscript. However, the editing will probably be light and focus exclusively on glaring errors, such as incorrect verb tenses, obvious idiom problems, and spelling mistakes. This type of editing will clean up the manuscript to a certain extent. However, it will do nothing to deal with the types of issues that most often provoke reviewers to ask for English editing: those pertaining to sentence structure and fluidity. 

For example, take the following sentence, which came to us in an "edited" manuscript:

“Because of their abundance in most terrestrial habitats, their foraging decisions may have important consequences at the ecosystem level.”

At first glance, it seems correct - there are no problems with subject/verb agreement, incorrect verb tenses, or improper preposition use. However, if you look more closely, the sentence is actually rather confusing. It appears to be saying that “their foraging decisions” - the grammatical subject of the sentence - are abundant in the environment and thus have important consequences for ecosystems, which makes no sense.

Now consider our alternative:

“Because ants are abundant in most terrestrial habitats, their foraging decisions may have important consequences at the ecosystem level.”

A small but important change suddenly makes the meaning clear – the ants are the ones that are abundant, and it is their foraging decisions that are of consequence. These types of more complicated, yet crucial, grammatical issues often get ignored by those doing quick, cheap editing. In fact, we have recently spent a lot of time on this blog discussing similar issues (see our series on "Reader Expectations") because addressing this kind of problem is extremely important, but often overlooked, in helping readers (and reviewers!) follow your thoughts.

As a consequence, while we may charge as little as 60 euros if the editing is light and the manuscript short, we will not accept a job only to do it halfway; some manuscripts clearly need more thorough editing. It is for this reason that we offer price estimates only after having looked at a text. Additionally, if a manuscript has already been submitted, we like to look at reviewers’ comments to see examples of the types of corrections they are requesting. Knowing exactly what kinds of problems need to be addressed helps us, and ultimately our authors, to improve the language of the text as much as possible.  It's self-serving for us to say so, but it really is true:  investing a little more in your editing budget upfront will help you save time and money in the long run!

0 Comments

Grammar Guide #6:  The Great Oxford Comma Debate

10/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Among grammarians, few topics cause more debate than the Oxford comma.  Disagreements about its use have been known to incite feuds rivaling those of the Hatfields and the McCoys, the Ghibellines and the Guelphs, or the houses of York and Lancaster - okay, okay, I kid.  However, this simple comma has the power to raise tempers and ignite passionate debate more than any other grammatical topic I can think of.  When news broke last year that the Oxford University Style Guide was abandoning its own comma, thousands (millions?) of its devoted fans took to social media outlets in lamentation, collectively breathing a sigh of relief when the report turned out to be false.  Just what is this particular item of punctuation used for, and why do people care about it so much?

The first part of the question is easy to answer.  The Oxford comma, also known as the serial comma, is the final comma used in a series or list, together with "and" or "or".  Therefore, a sentence with a correctly used Oxford comma would be:
"We studied the drug's effect on the subjects' appetites, sleep patterns, and length of life."  The same sentence without the Oxford comma would be "We studied the drug's effect on the subjects' appetites, sleep patterns and length of life."

Here you're starting to think, "Okay, but what's the big deal?  Both of those sentences mean exactly the same thing!"  In this case, you're right - both of these sentences would be interpreted by most reasonable readers to mean the same thing.  However, consider the following examples:
"We quantified the expression of the two new genes, Maj10, and Mak20."
"We quantified the expression of the two new genes, Maj10 and Mak20."

In the first example, the commas are used to identify individual items in a list, and the reader can see that we've quantified the expression of four genes:  two new genes (presumably identified previously in the text), plus Maj10 and Mak20.  However, it's not clear in the second example if "the two new genes, Maj10 and Mak20" makes up a list of four different genes, or whether the comma is used simply to set off additional information that describes the noun before it ("genes").  If the latter is true, we have only two genes, named Maj10 and Mak20.  See the problem?  If we chose not to use the Oxford comma in our writing, sentence #2 could describe either situation.  Some readers may infer that we studied four genes, while other readers, expecting to see an Oxford comma in this situation, will infer that we studied only two genes.  By contrast, sentence #1 is clearly a list of four genes. 

Now that we know what it is, then, let's deal with the second half of the question:  why does it cause such emotionally charged debates?  For the sake of full disclosure, I should reveal that I am a proud member of Team Oxford Comma, for two reasons.  First, because Mr. Stanich taught me to use it when I was 11, and when I asked him "Why?", he said "Because".  Old habits die hard.  The real reason, however, is that it eliminates confusion.  If I use the Oxford comma correctly and consistently, my readers will have no difficulty in interpreting sentence #1 as a list of four genes and sentence #2 as an identification of two genes.  They will reason, rightly so, that if I'd meant #2 to be a list of four genes, I would have put an Oxford comma in it.  Instead, if I use the Oxford comma haphazardly, or not at all, sentence #2 will, at best, sidetrack my readers with unnecessary head-scratching, and, at worst, lead them down the exact opposite path from what I intended.

Most writers who advocate minimal usage of the Oxford comma are journalists, following AP style guidelines.  When you think about it, this makes sense - writing for a newspaper requires packing as much information as possible into limited physical space, and taking out individual punctuation marks could make a difference.  In academic publishing, however, the benefit (space for 10-15 extra characters) doesn't come close to outweighing the cost (imprecision and potential reader confusion).  If you're trying to communicate a complex, involved research project to unknown readers, why handicap yourself?  Team Oxford Comma for the gold!
0 Comments

    About This Blog

    A place for ideas, thoughts, and discussions running around Providing English Services for Scientists HQ

    Archives

    August 2013
    April 2013
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012

    Categories

    All
    Advice
    Analysis
    English As A Foreign Language
    Etymology
    Grammar
    Style
    Writing

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
Photo used under Creative Commons from Xtremo