Proofreaders are often confused by the term ‘read against copy’, so in this article I will try to explain what the term means.
There are two ways a proofreader can be asked to work: either reading against copy or doing a direct (blind) reading.
When asked to read against copy, the proofreader will receive the author’s original typescript (or a copy of it) with the editor’s corrections marked on it, and a set of proofs produced by the typographer. The proofreader then compares the proofs with the edited typescript, checking both, word for word, line for line, to ensure that the author’s text (along with editorial emendations) has been faithfully reproduced, with no errors introduced at the proofing stage. typographic composition.
When doing a direct or blind reading, the proofreader will receive only proofs and not the typewritten original. In this case, the proofreader cannot know if the typed original has been reproduced correctly along with the editor’s corrections. His role is simply to check the content of the tests, flagging any obvious errors in spelling, punctuation, etc., that he can find.
When reading against copy, most proofreaders scan a few words of the original typescript and then verify that they appear correctly on the proofs, with editorial corrections properly implemented. Where there is a difference (if, for example, an apostrophe has been omitted), the corrector indicates this with the corresponding mark.
For each correction, a mark must be made in the text itself and another in the margin. This is done to ensure that when the typographer comes to incorporate proofreader corrections, they do not inadvertently skip over any of them.
Errors made by the typesetter should be highlighted with a colored pen, errors of the author/editor of style with another. This is not about apportioning blame, but about deciding who should pay for the amendments. The standard color coding system is shown below:
Red: used to show errors that the typographer has introduced in the text.
Blue: This is used to show errors made by the author and not caught by the copyeditor, and errors made by the copyeditor itself.
(NOTE: some publishers prefer black ink to blue – you will be informed of this when you start working for them).
Green: This color is reserved for consultations or corrections by the typographer himself.
The cost of ‘red’ corrections will be borne by the typographer, while the cost of ‘blue’ corrections will be borne by the publisher (or, in severe cases, the author). With a direct reading, of course, you will not know who is responsible for the errors. In this case, it will mark all corrections in a single color (usually red).
As a freelance proofreader, you are likely to be offered more direct readings than copy readings. This is because modified typescript is usually returned to the copyeditor for proofing. The role of proofreader is seen more as a back-up: a fresh pair of eyes that can spot obvious mistakes than an editor jaded with familiarity. Although the corrected typescript could also be copied and sent to the proofreader, in practice this is often found by editors to be too complicated. This may not be ideal, but it explains why proofreaders are more likely to be asked to do a straight read rather than a copy read.