Proofreading: adding the finishing touches
As a seasoned facilitator of MET workshops on grammar and punctuation, Thomas O’Boyle has a deep understanding of the intricacies of the English language, making him ideally suited to lead an interactive session on proofreading. His session at METM25 provided a thorough overview of the fundamentals that any language professional would find beneficial to revisit. I happen to share Tom’s subject specialty and his approach to text editing – specifically, working on medical research articles of 3000 to 5000 words without automated editing tools – and was curious to learn more about his take on proofreading.
The session offered a useful summary of what proofreading entails today, following on neatly from Joy Burrough-Boenisch’s presentation looking back at the history of proofreading. Tom clearly distinguished proofreading from editing, explaining that while editing works at the core level with author interaction, proofreading operates at the surface level as the final step in the publishing process. He outlined the three stages of proofreading: correction, collation (consolidating changes from various sources) and verification (a final read with finishing touches).
Tom covered the essential elements proofreaders must check: typos, capitalization, punctuation, repetition and a range of grammar issues (subject-verb agreement, pronoun reference, parallel structure, etc.). He emphasized common pitfalls such as homophones (there/their, its/it’s, stationary/stationery) and inconsistencies. Beyond the text itself, he addressed layout and formatting considerations – character and line spacing, alignment and indentation, numbering accuracy, and cross-checking the table of contents against the actual contents of a longer text.
His practical advice was sound: find a conducive setting, read slowly and attentively using tools like blockers or rulers, take breaks for a fresh perspective, switch between printout and screen, and learn from mistakes. The audience contributed valuable tips, including having the computer read text aloud, changing font type or size to create “fresh eyes”, conducting multiple proofreads focused on different aspects of the text (typos, punctuation, layout, headings), and incorporating back-to-front reading.
Tom included two brief demonstrations. In one, he distributed a text about English lexicography filled with long, convoluted technical terms and asked us to find the three mistakes it contained. Predictably, the errors weren’t in the complex terms (“sesquipedalian”, “floccinaucinihilipilification” and “supererogatory” are some examples), but in simple supporting words like “induse” (induce), “pray” (prey) and “inexhaustable” (inexhaustible) – a reminder that it’s easy to overlook basic mistakes when distracted by complexity.
The second demonstration showed scrambled words with only the first and last letters in correct positions. We wree siurprsed to fnid we cuold raed and udnretsand the txet efrfotleslsy, ilulstaritng how eaisly our biarns can sikp oevr errors wehn raideng qciukly. Tihs renfoirecd the nede for dilebarete, solw raideng driung poorfraideng.
As a passionate proofreader who likes to get every last comma in exactly the right place, I left the session slightly disappointed. Tom’s abstract promised an interactive session where we would “put our proofreader pens to paper”, so I had expected hands-on tasks and group activities – opportunities to work alongside fellow proofreading enthusiasts and build connections with colleagues whose skills might prove valuable for future collaborations.
That being said, Tom delivered solid content and effectively reiterated everything an accomplished proofreader needs to know, complete with engaging examples. His clear explanations and entertaining presentation style captivated us all, and the Q&A at the end gave us a welcome opportunity for interaction.
This METM25 presentation was chronicled by Marije de Jager.
Featured photo by METM25 photographer Julian Mayers. Slide reproduced with presenter’s permission.