Tricky Words Only Push Us To Be Better Editors

I came across an article entitled "English is Too Hard to Read for Children," by Anushka Asthana in The Observer (Sunday, 8 June 2008). In her article she said that the English spelling system is "unspeakably, absolutely awful." That is because of a conclusion in a research that found children facing around 800 words by age 11 which hinder their reading because of the way these words were spelled. These words challenge kids just because they contain letter combinations. Such examples would be monkey, asparagus, spinach, caterpillar, and handkerchief. 

Literary researcher Masha Bell thinks that there were words in the list that could be made simple by dropping certain letters.  An example would be dropping the letter i in friend and u in shoulder. The tricky spellings make English particularly difficult for children with dyslexia and those from disadvantaged homes who are less likely to be read to by their own parents.

This reminds me that in editing, we have to custom-fit our writings to the audience we're writing to. It wold be wishful thinking to say that we can edit in whatever way we want. There are still correct sentence structures to follow; proper writng formats to bear in mind; and several other guidelines to look into every time we work on an article.

When it comes to spellings, editors like myself have to be alert when scrutinizing bodies of copy. Somehow this is a test on how well I know my vocabulary by heart; words that I've learned while growing up; and words that I'm still learning along the way.

If only editing could be as simple as taking a letter out from a word but still, that would be wishful thinking, and absolutely too far from becoming a reality.

Pictures Help Tell The News

When people hold their newspapers, they notice the big headlines and the pictures. These are the things that draw their attention. If the pictures look interesting, they will read the captions which are the short pieces of text or descriptions beside or below the picture.

If I don't have enough time to read the newspapers, I normlly glance through the pages and if I find the pictures very interesting or intriguing, I would stop briefly and just read the accompanying text.  If I find time to read the papers later on the day, I would go back to those pictures again and read the stories beside it.

It's interesting to think how photos or even graphics on newspapers and magazines help 'sell' the news stories to the readers. Photos and graphics have become marketing 'tools' to help promote a news story, and sell the publication- at least in my own opinion. I would know an attention-grabbing photo with a very good caption when I see one. Photos in general should be able to tell you the news. Although photos cannot do it alone, it cannot give readers all the answers to the story like Who? What? Where? When? Why? and How?  In this case, captions should be able to make it clear to the readers what's happening in the picture or who is in it.

If you're able to see today's paper, is there any picture that caught your attention? And, did you ever bother to read the caption? I thought then that looking at pictures (including graphics) and the corresponding captions serve as a good exercise to anyone interested in copy editing. We undoubtedly use our common sense when we look at pictures and see if the caption helps explain what's being told in the picture. If you were in-charge of putting photos and captions in a print or online publication, you will surely need to have an eye on this stuff but for everyday readers of the Winnipeg Free Press for instance, readers don't necessarily have to build up on that skill; their quick response to look at the picture and read its corresponding caption is enough to tell you that you have succeeded in getting their attention.