The Impotence of Proofreading

While I’m on a kinetic typography kick, I thought I might share an amusing video that demonstrates the difficulty of proofreading one’s own work, even with spell check.  The narrator’s voice is annoying, but his message is clear.

 

One suggestion: Use  “text to speech” software to read your documents back to you.  Hearing another “person” reading one’s prose is a humbling experience.  Try it; you’ll be amazed at how many errors—especially missing words and sentence fragments—you will catch as the voice reads to you. The best software is manufactured by Ivona, whose voices actually take appropriate pauses and use inflections. (See: http://www.ivona.com/en/).  Both Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat products have text-to-speech capabilities, though both use mechanical voices. For free on-line text to speech, use Google Translate (http://translate.google.com/) or From Text to Speech (http://www.fromtexttospeech.com/) or Smart Link (http://www.text-to-speech.imtranslator.net/).

Another suggestion: Hire a proofreader.  I have found Ivy League Proofreaders to be a good value.  Check out: www.ivyleagueproofreaders.com.

 

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

To blog of legalese

“The time has come,” the lawyer said,
“To blog of legalese:
Of headings—and quotes—and citations—
Of orders and decrees—
And why law prose is frightfully dull—
And whether the brief will please.”

In 35 years, progress?

“There are two things wrong with almost all legal writing. One is its style. The other is its content. That, I think about covers the ground.” Fred Rodell, Goodbye to Law Reviews, 23 Va. L. Rev. 38, 38 (1936–1937) “Legal writing by federal judges and the lawyers who appear before them is today generally serviceable, in the sense of being pretty clearly written, pretty careful, businesslike, grammatical.” Richard A. Posner, Legal Writing Today, 8 Scribes J. Leg. Writing 35, 35 (2001–2002) (emphasis in original).