by Bobbie Christmas
Q: I’ve been tasked with editing a magazine article that has quotes from several people. Some of the quotes use less-than-standard English. The article is in praise of these people, so I don’t want their quotes to make them look less than the great people that they apparently are.
Is it okay to correct some of the statements so they reflect more highly on the speaker, or am I breaking some kind of rule?
A: The answer depends on the style that the intended magazine follows. Some styles disallow changing a word from a quote. Chicago style, however, has less restraint, and it’s okay to change a quote slightly, providing it doesn’t change the speaker’s intent. Check with the intended periodical or the author of the article to determine the style you need to follow while you edit.
Q: Is The Chicago Manual of Style the standard for editing nonfiction book manuscripts? What do you say about the comments below made by two editors I’ve used?
Original line of text from the manuscript:
In the late 80’s, I was living in Dallas, Texas running a company that I had founded.
Here’s the ensuing discussion over it:
Editor 2: 80s (no apostrophe because there is no possession—and you might want to use 1980s to make it even clearer)
Editor 1: This is a question of style. Each publisher will have its own style. This is one style.
A: Most book publishers prefer Chicago Style, so it is safest to use it for any book-length manuscript, whether fiction or nonfiction. Let me address one point at a time.
Editor number one was wrong; the issues are not a matter of style, but of grammar, and grammar remains the same in any style.
Editor number two was correct: “In the late 80s,” without the apostrophe, complies with both grammar guidelines and Chicago style. Without the apostrophe “80s” is plural and refers to many years. With an apostrophe it would be possessive, meaning something that belonged to the 1980s. The editor is also correct that for clarity it’s better to write the full number: “In the late 1980s.”
If the author wanted to say something that belonged to that era, it would be written with an apostrophe, for example, “One 1980’s spokesperson said …”
After the name of a city, the state should be set off by commas, which is another issue of grammar. I’m surprised neither editor addressed that point. Correct: “In the late 1980s, I was living in Dallas, Texas, running a company that I had founded.
Ah, but the sentence still raises more issues about style. In Chicago style a comma is not needed after a short introductory phrase unless necessary for clarity. For that reason in Chicago style the sentence would read this way: In the late 1980s I was living in Dallas, Texas, running a company that I had founded.
Because good editing examines every word, and because tight writing is strong writing, I’d go a step further and delete the past perfect “had” as well as the superfluous “that.” For style issues as well as creative reasons, then, the final rendition would read this way: In the late 1980s I was living in Dallas, Texas, running a company I founded.
Q: Which is correct, writer’s conference or writers conference? Or maybe writers’ conference?
A: You touched on a point that disturbs me whenever I see it. I spot the term “writer’s conference” all the time, yet that form means a writer owns the conference. “Writers’ conference” would mean a group of writers own the conference. The correct form is “writers conference,” which means it is a conference for writers; writers don’t own it. You’ll notice that my own newsletter is called The Writers Network News for exactly that reason. It is a newsletter for writers.
Bobbie Christmas, book editor, author of Write In Style: Use Your Computer to Improve Your Writing, and owner of Zebra Communications, will answer your questions, too. Send them to Bobbie@zebraeditor.com. Read more Ask the Book Doctor questions and answers at www.zebraeditor.com.
