Comments on: “Copyeditor” vs. “copy editor”

By: Terry Karney

Terry Karney — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 03:58:10 +0000

Hrmn… having edited copy (newspaper) I find it interesting that I never had any problem with either spelling, and probably pingeonholed it as a difference between those who worked on papers, and those who were working on non-newpaper/letter product.

By: Todd

Todd — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 15:12:42 +0000

As I’ve been finding out professionally — after making a switch from journalism to book editing/ production — there are many language/style distinctions that separate fields that produce copy ready to be printed, whether it’s “copyeditor,” which seems common to book publishing, or “copy editor,” which seems common to journalism, newspapers in particular, or whether to use or not to use serial commas. I wonder why such distinctions have been made. Such distinctions must have a long history.

By: Marianne

Marianne — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:04:06 +0000

I’m studying copyediting right now. (And I love when you talk about this stuff in your blog. I recommended it to the whole class.)(/shameless buttering-up) I found this issue from the very start, when the textbooks said “copyeditor” is acceptable, but the instructors always use “copy editor.” It made me wonder if I truly had a choice, and if I might appear mistaken when I use “copyeditor.” I prefer it. It has a cleaner look. I tend to be stubborn about things like this, if I believe in them, so your comments about what this says to a potential client were helpful and gave me things to think about.

Thanks.

(The next battles are in support of the singular “they” and preservation of the serial comma.)

By: Joy

Joy — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 18:54:30 +0000

I make this (until now, purely mental) distinction: copy editor for somebody who works in journalism or advertising, copyeditor for somebody who copyedits books. A copy editor might work for a copy chief but a copyeditor would probably answer to a production editor or production manager.

Yes, I know that this isn’t how the two versions are defined in any dictionary, and I can’t say if any authority has made the exact same distinction, but on discussion lists, that’s the way the two versions tend to be used.

By: Deanna Hoak

Deanna Hoak — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 10:07:01 +0000

Sure, Robert. But manuscripts are still never referred to that way.

By: Robert Legault

Robert Legault — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 03:19:21 +0000

Well, I must state my own preference for two words. What you and I edit is indeed “copy,”in sense 4a: “matter to be set especially for printing.” But of course, getting two copy[ ]editors to agree on style isn’t so easy.

I do prefer “airlock”as one word, though…

By: Kake

Kake — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:45:09 +0000

Oh, thank you for this. I wrote an article earlier this year, and they changed my job description from "copyeditor" to "copy editor" in the author bio. I'm still a bit bemused by that. (And also about their decision to change my perfectly-good gender-neutral pronouns to gender-specific ones.)

By: Kim

Kim — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:44:51 +0000

When I first had my business cards printed up, I specified copyeditor and whoever printed the cards "corrected" it to copy editor. I wanted to send them back and tell them to fix it, but I needed the cards in a hurry so I accepted them anyway. :^/ I've since had them re-printed with copyeditor spelled the way I wanted it!

By: Archangel Beth

Archangel Beth — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:43:56 +0000

I wonder if they don’t like pairing the vowel of edit with the sometimes-vowel of copy, when smooshing together words?

…only logic I can see, anyway.