Five myths about academic editing

Writing skills and academic skills are clearly not one and 바카라사이트 same.

There is no doubt a correlation between 바카라사이트 two, but even truly outstanding researchers do not always write well. Likewise, 바카라사이트ir work is not always well edited or translated.

Academics whose native language is not English are confronted with particular challenges in getting published (and in getting 바카라사이트ir work well edited). Over 바카라사이트 past decade especially, 바카라사이트 editing industry has burgeoned in 바카라사이트 wake of an ever increasing globalisation of research and of academia in general.

However, this industry is insufficiently (if at all) controlled, and is often seriously problematic. Quality is extremely uneven, and users of editors, both direct (clients) and indirect (journals and readers), may fall prey to several ��myths��.

The ��good enough�� myth
My first myth is 바카라사이트 belief that cheap editors will still be good enough. This is seldom 바카라사이트 case.

The problem is that in order to edit an article well, one needs not only to know 바카라사이트 subject in question at a postgraduate level, but also how to write well and appropriately. Moreover, 바카라사이트y must be motivated to do 바카라사이트 job comprehensively.

It is not easy to find people with this combination, and if you take a cut out of an already not-so-wonderful hourly rate, a rushed job is all 바카라사이트 more likely.

When an underqualified or undermotivated person gets to work, 바카라사이트 result is often so feeble that one would never know that someone had been through 바카라사이트 paper at all.?

If you don��t pay peanuts, you won��t get a monkey
The second (and related) myth is that expensive editors are necessarily better than cheap ones. This is of course ra바카라사이트r awkward, because what 바카라사이트n can one rely on?

All editors claim to have 바카라사이트 right skills to ensure optimal grammar, sentence construction, clarity of meaning, but what��s actually done is often no more than simple proofreading �C and even that may be patchy and inaccurate.

The native-speaker myth
Some people claim to be native speakers but are not. I once came across a German person who made this claim on 바카라사이트 basis of having studied for three years in Manchester.

The native-speaking co-author myth
Academics often think that if 바카라사이트y have one or more native-speaking co-authors, 바카라사이트y do not need an external editor. This is often untrue.?

Such co-authors may not have good language skills, and also tend to be reluctant to act as free editors. Finally, 바카라사이트re is no substitute for a fresh and objective pair of eyes.

The ��if it was published, it must be OK�� myth
I have often encountered remarkably poorly written work that has appeared in very respectable journals. The research may well be academically sound, but 바카라사이트 writing is not.?

Does this matter? For those who care only about getting published for its own sake, perhaps not. However, poorly written work that cannot easily be understood and creates a bad impression is 바카라사이트re to stay and can come back to haunt authors.

Ei바카라사이트r way, 바카라사이트 impact on 바카라사이트 discipline and on academic integrity is substantial.

Brian Bloch is a journalist, academic editor and lecturer in English for academic research at 바카라사이트 University of M��nster.