[bksvol-discuss] Re: my two cents worth so far on proofreadingRE: Re: questions please and thank you delete if don't like how I write.
- From: "EVAN REESE" <mentat3@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:43:23 -0500
Hi Kim,
I still use a spell check, even if I have read the book word for word. People
vary as to when they do this. Some do it before reading, some after. I do the
spell check after I've read the book. That way, I can skip quickly through
words that are correct that the spell checker doesn't know and find any errors
I missed in reading through the book. There are always a few. Sometimes, since
I tend to scan stuff I like to read--except books I scan for Lissi, which also
get a total read through and spell check by her--I think that I get wrapped up
in the story and scannoes get past me sometimes.
Whether you do the spell check before or after you read the book is up to you,
of course, but I think you should do it. I'm sure any book, including yours, is
of higher quality than almost any unread-through scan would be, but I think it
is still a good practice to spell check it.
Evan
----- Original Message -----
From: Kim Friedman
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:54 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] my two cents worth so far on proofreadingRE: Re:
questions please and thank you delete if don't like how I write.
Hi, Lynn, Gwen, and anybody else who reads this, I know I don't have a lot of
experience, but one thing I didn't do on my last bookwas use the spell-checker.
I don't know why that was, but I thought I'd listen to the text and follow
along using my BrailleNote. One thing I decided to do was be cautious in what I
did. What I decided to do was take note of names, words, etc. and if I saw a
word spelled the same way more than once and if I could conclude that the
spelling was what was supposed to be there, I wouldn't mess with it. This is
especially true when you're reading science fiction or fantasy literature.
Proper names, names for things, plants, etc. were bound to be out of the common
way and the computer wouldn't know about that. I think there's where it helps
for the proofreader to write the submitter to verify if the surmise is correct.
Maybe my way is slower, but I think I prefer to read every word of a text and
communicate with a submitter to make sure that what I'm reading is what is
supposed to be in the text. Regards, a cautious Kim Friedman.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lynn I
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:49 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: questions please and thank you delete if don't
like how I write.
Hi Gwen!
In answer to your first question, initially people could scan and proofread
their own books. However, I think the policy of having someone else proofread
is a good one. I sometimes tend to be a contextual reader. I believe having
someone else proofread allows for an opportunity to catch things I did not.
*smile*
My only negative experience with this policy has been when a proofreader
relied on spell check and changed spellings of proper names and some terms that
were intended to be spelled as they were.
Blessings.
Lynnsky
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gwen tweedy
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:47 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] questions please and thank you delete if don't like
how I write.
I'm wondering if there are people who have no trouble submitting books their
books are always excepted no matter what.
Why couldn't they be allowed to scan and proof their own books if they so
desired?
Question 2:
Why can't a scanner at least be allowed to clear their book lists so they
can start over with no books pending?
Thanks
Gwen
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.707 / Virus Database: 270.14.68/2507 - Release Date: 11/16/09
13:53:00
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4615 (20091117) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4616 (20091117) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
Other related posts:
