17 How to Edit Documents Like a Copy Editor

Once you believe a draft conveys the information you want your readers to understand, you can begin attacking it at the sentence level. After working hard to develop a manuscript, you understandably may be weary of it and eager to send it out for review. If possible, set the document aside and work on another project before trying to copy_edit it. If the due date is upon you, however, the following techniques may help you critically evaluate the document at the sentence level:

1. Don’t try to copy_edit a document all at once. Instead, alternate proofreading with other activities.
2. Three useful strategies can help you ignore the content of a message and concentrate on grammatical, mechanical, and formatting errors. First, try reading your document backwards. Second, place sheets of paper above and below each sentence in the document as you read through it. Third, place slashes between each sentence.
3. If you are using a personal computer, try printing the document with a different font, such as size 14 or size 16 instead of size 12.
4. Look for clusters of mistakes. When you find one error in paragraph seven, for example, carefully examine the surrounding sentences to see if you had a lapse of concentration when you wrote and copy_edited that section.
5. Look for errors you often make, such as errors in pronoun agreement or subject_verb agreement.

Now, just as you limited the number of substantive questions when revising your document, you should limit the editorial issues you consider when copy_editing. For example, rather than considering all eight of the following editorial concems when evaluating nearly final draft, you may want to read the manuscript with the first three strategies in mind, take a break, and then read it again while keeping another three copy_editing concerns in mind.

1. Avoid unnecessary jargon and awkward abstractions.

2. Use the first person.

3. Use the active rather than the passive voice.

4. Limit use of to be verbs.

5. Select an appropriate sentence length and sentence pattern.

6. Maintain a high verb_to_noun ratio and avoid nominallzations.

7. Edit strings of prepositional phrases.

8. Edit for economy.

9. Copy_edit for grammatical, mechanical, and formatting errors.
AVOID UNNECESSARY JARGONAND AWKWARD ABSTRACTIONS
Because academic journals cater to narrow audiences, their use of jargon is somewhat justified. Specialists, afterall, use jargon as a form of shorthand to enhance communication. Rather than belaboring seminal research or theories, experienced academics cite relevant scholars, studies, or philosophical movements to call to mind related assumptions and past research.
It is also true that some journals cater to narrow audiences that delight in playful word combinations and obscure jargon, so a prospective author needs to master this discourse before becoming a member of the club. For instance, an avid reader of literature who nonetheless lacks training in critical theory would find most essays published in PMLA, the journal of the Modern Language Association, to be impenetrable and undecipherable. As an example, try translating the following introduction to a recent essay in PMLA:

In SIZ Roland Barthes repeatedly articulates a tripartite structure as the basic grammar of the classic realist text. In outlining a homological relation between language and discourse, for example, he projects the sentence as the image of narrative order: it presents a subject to be developed, subordinate clauses that add complexity, and a conclusion that coincides with complete predication. On this framework, which he calls a question_delay_answer schema (4-86, 126-28), he improvises a remarkable sequence of variations. Thus a topographical model posits the quest as the regulatory trope: first a departure, next a “temporary wandering of the predicate,” and then the return that marks the end of the journey (187_88). In the biological model, an impregnation, which plants the seed of discourse, is followed by “a kind of pregnancy for its full term” and ultimately by the birth of new meaning (62). The dominant model, however__the one on which Barthes conducts his analysis of Balzac’s “Sarrasine”__is the hermeneutic one: the classic realist text begins by formulating an enigma, an “insufficient half truth, powerless to name itself,” a mystery caught up “in the initial void of its answer.”

In this excerpt, the author uses jargon and plays with language and metaphor to establish his credentials with the literary community. Those who lack years of training in critical theory may find the passage impenetrable. One wonders, “Can’t it be said more simply?”
Recent critics of higher education, such as Page Smith, have ridiculed academese while asserting that the tendency toward specialization and the rat race for original material are underrnining our responsibility to write clearly for broad, less educated audiences. All of the great stylists of our time Claire Kehrwald Cook, Joseph Williams, William Strunk and E. B. White__encourage authors to eschew jargon when possible. And some prominent academic editors, such as Robert Day, have challenged us to eliminate unnecessary jargon from our professional journals:

Much of today’s academic writing is turgid to the point of being incomprehensible to all except a small coterie. This is all right if the publication is designed for only that coterie. However, shouldn’t most scholarly publications be written for an audience of reasonable size, an audience including not only peers of the author but also specialists reading outside their own narrow discipline, students trying hard to master the material needed to join the coterie, and peers whose native language is other than English? (113)

Rather than priding themselves on simplifying the complex, many scholars seem to take great delight in complicating the simple. In a recent analysis of the gulf between academic and trade language, Chris Goodrich writes:

Fifty years ago, scholars and book editors shared the same general background and the same general view of the world; although neither objected if a book sold many copies and made the author famous, they wrote and published primarily to reach like_minded people. As times changed, however, so, dramatically, did the genteel academic/publisher compact. Conglomerates swallowed up individual publishers, who in turn became more and more oriented to the bottom line; academics became ever more specialized, careerist, and bound to the forms and language of their chosen disciplines. The publishing and academic paths, once parallel, diverged until they were separated by a yawning gulf. Editors began to regard academics as constitutionally incapable of writing well or addressing broad topics; scholars saw that trade publishing was suffering from what came to be known as the “blockbuster complex. “ ( 17)

Although most professors would be insulted by Page Smith’s and Charles Sykes’s misrepresentation of academic life,l we still need to address their reasonable criticisms of academese. Yes, J~rgon can provide an invaluable shorthand among specialists. It is, for example, unreasonable to expect science writers to communlcate clearly to nonscientists when they are reporting their research in academic journals. Even science magazines that attract broad audiences, such as Science and the New England Journal of Medicine, require some technical training. However, as Day and others have argued, we do have a responsibility to communicate Clearly to our students and others interested in how our disciplines are evolving. We need to recognize that the readability and grace of our prose diminish with the use of needless abstractions and essive jargon. Rather than solely addressing narrow audiences of insiders in professional journals, we should consider our responsibilities to less informed audiences. Further, much jargon__even among specialists is merely a smoke screen for fuzzy thinking.

USE THE FIRST PERSON
The American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines__ prelty much the style bible for most academic publications in the social and natural sciences__have been saying bluntly since 1973 that scientists should speak in the first person as “I” or “we” in their publications if they are telling their own conclusions or describing their own experimental procedures. And yet many scientists persist in telling their students and themselves that it is wrong to use the first person in academic writing. Even academics in the humanities tend to shy away from much use of the first person certainly using it much less than if they were writing a memo to the same colleagues about these same topics. Peter Elbow

“Do not use the first person” is perhaps the most pernicious recommendation that English teachers make. After all, how can we think without using our experience? Why must we drive a stake through our cerebral cortex before writing? How can we logically assume that we are more objective thinkers when we avoid the first person? As an example, what sort of persona do you infer from reading the following passage from an essay in Evaluation and Program Planning?

While some evaluation specialists disagree (Scriven, 1973) this writer believes that a well_planned evaluation effort begins with clearly established goals. Sometimes goals are established by the program staff along with the evaluator well in advance of the program and the planned evaluation. This is the “best case” scenario (Posavac & Carey, 1984). However, in the case of the Very Special Arts Evaluation, programs were already in operation in many locales and had been running for a long period of time. Therefore, it was not possible for the author to be involved in the goal establishment process. In fact, one of the first questions this evaluator posed to Very Special Arts focused on the goals and criteria that were to be the benchmark against which Very Special Arts programs were to be evaluated.

Can you see that the author’s prose could be more vigorous, less ped~ntic, if he used the first person, as suggested by the following revision?

While I would have preferred to establish goals for evaluating the Very Special Arts programs before their inception, I was unable to do so because the programs already had been operating for three years in ten cities. Nevertheless, I was able to develop effective evaluative criteria by meeting with personnel from each of the arts programs and discussing their goals.

Now, it is true that use of the first person can be obtrusive. In the bulk of writing that we do as academics, readers care more about the information and the ideas than about us as authors. (Right now, for example, I’m assuming that you don’t care that I’m rather tired after getting up with my child at 4:45 A.M. You are not concemed h.lt she may wake up if I risk making a pot of coffee. Yet when ting an opinion or offering an overview of the goals of a section or chapter, I may as well be straightforward and admit that these are my opinions or goals. After all, I can create confusion by avoiding the first person and hiding behind passive_voice sentences.)

USE THE ACTIVE RATHER THAN THE PASSIVE VOICE
Essentially, a verb is passive when its subject is acted upon by an outside agent rather than doing the action. You can identify the passive voice by finding a sentence that uses some form of the verb be (am, is, was, were, being, been) along with a past participle (a verb form often ending in _ed or _en). The preposition by usually follows the to be verb and the past participle, or it can be implied, ustrated below:
Passive: The data were confirmed.
Active: Three independent scholars confirmed the data.

Passive: I was made a better scholarly author by writing regularly.
Active: Writing regularly has made me a better scholarly author.

Passive: She was had by the con man.
Active: The con man had her.

Passive sentences tend to be wordy, dull, and confusing. They leave readers unsure of who or what is causing the action. Nine times out of ten, you should transform passive sentences into active ones. Surprisingly, however, the use of the passive voice is endemic in academic discourse, particularly in the methods sectioll of quantitative research reports. Notice how the following excerpt from an essay in Philosophical Magazine A becomes more vigorous and concise once it is transformed into the active voice:

Passive: In this paper the contrast of dislocations in icosahedral quasicrystals is discussed in the framework of the quasilattice model and on the basis of the kinematical theory of electron diffraction. Since, at present, little is known about the structure of quasicrystal dislocations, our treatment is restricted to the derivation of conditions under which the diffraction contrast vanishes and the dislocations become invisible. Some basic structural properties of quasilattices and quasilattice dislocations are first discussed.

Active: We discuss the contrast of dislocations in icosahedral quasicrystals in the framework of the quasilattice model and on the basis of the kinematical theory of electron diffraction. We restrict our treatment to the derivation of conditions under which the diffraction contrast vanishes and the dislocations become invisible because we know little about the structure of quasicrystal dislocations. First we discuss some basic structural properties of quasilattices andquasilattice dislocations.
While the passive voice strangles the life from most academic discourse, it does have some legitimate uses. For example, in a description of course requirements, you might want to say, Active class participation and an oral presentation of at least one research project will also be required, so that you emphasize active participation rather than yourself, as the active form would do__ that is, I will require active participation and one oralpresentation from you.

LIMIT USE OF TO BE VERBS
In our daily speech and rough drafts, we tend to rely heavily on the various forms of the verb to be. Beyond being boring because of its ovemse, the verb to be is unlike any other verb because it is inert__that is, it doesn’t show any action. For example, in the sentence “The researcher is a professor at Duke,” the verb is merely connects the subject with what grammarians call the subject complement. We could just as easily say “A professor at Duke is the researcher” without changing the meaning of the sentence.
It would be nearly impossible to draft documents without some linking verbs. Yet because you diminish the vigor of a manuscript by using is and are constructions, you should try to limit their frequency. Finally, note that theprogressive form of a linking verb, which involves using to be as an auxiliary verb with a participle, is not nearly as pernicious as the endemic is or are. The progressive form has the advantage of illustrating action as it progresses over time, thereby enabling us to shape concise sentences indicating that something is currently happening: The coauthors are disagreeing about the order in which their names should be listed when the book is published.
It is and there are constructions often lead to sluggish, passive sentences, so you should eliminate most of them from your documents. Sentences like It is clearly a fact that the so and so did not invent cold fusion can invariably be improved by eliminating the weak beginning.

Sample: While it is crucial for us to speak out on behalf of education, it is important that we do so in a manner consistent with statute and administrative rule.
Revision: We need to speak out on behalf of education while obseNing statute and administrative rules.

Sample: According to the certification theory, there is no intrinsic relation between creativity and IQ.
Revision: Certification theory posits no intrinsic relation between creativity and IQ.

You should not, however, attempt to eliminate all it is or there are constructions. You may, for example, want to occasionally use these constructions to establish an impersonal tone or to avoid repeating a subject at the beginning of the sentence.

SELECT AN APPROPRIATE SENTENCE LENGTH AND SENTENCE PATTERN
Long sentences are not necessarily ineffective or wordy, nor are short sentences necessarily concise. After all, a seventy_word sentence, properly constructed, can clarify relationships between ideas, while a series of five_word sentences can create a choppy style and fail to make logical connections between ideas. Rather than making all sentences a certain length, you can write gracefully by being aware of the demands different sentence patterns make on readers.

Place the Subject At or Near the Beginning of the Sentence
As a general rule, you can make your prose more readable by limiting the number of words that come between the beginning of a sentence and its subject. To make the beginning of a sentence emphatic, you should generally avoid cluttering it with unnecessary transitional words or phrases. A second problem with long introductory phrases and clauses is that they strain the reader’s short_term memory. Notice, for example, how you need to juggle all of the following conditions in your short_term memory until you come to the end of the sentence:

If you write every moming for at least fifteen minutes, if you set aside the urge to criticize early drafts and ideas, if you analyze the rhetorical situation for a document, if you ask critical questions of your drafts, if you share drafts with colleagues, then you will improve as a writer.

Fortunately, most sentences with long introductory clauses can be easily improved; one need only move the concluding words__that is, the independent clause to the beginning of the sentence, as in the following revision:

You will improve as a writer if you write every moming for at least fifteen minutes, if . . . ideas, if . . . document, if . . . drafts, if . . . colleagues.

When copy_editing sentences, you should not attempt to eliminate all of the introductory words, phrases, and clauses. A few introductory clauses can help establish a forceful rhythm, and you would put your readers to sleep if all of the sentences were shaped in the same way. Occasional transitional words or phrases can also aid readability. Therefore, however, on the other hand, as a result__these sorts of words, if used selectively and logically, can highlight how different ideas relate to each other. Nevertheless, such words and phrases cannot create logical connections by themselves. Just as a brick house would collapse if the builder used sand rather than mortar to construct it, so will meaning in a document if you do not provide a logical discussion.

Avoid Excessive Embedding between the Subject and Verb
Embedding appositives or modifiers between subjects and verbs can enliven what is traditionally considered the least emphatic part of a sentence, the middle. Notice, for example, how the appositive in the following example emphasizes the definition of sentence combining:

Research suggests that sentence combining, an instructional technique that provides students with practice, is effective in developing writers, elementary through college level.

If we wanted to give less emphasis to the definition of sentence combining, we could recast the sentence as follows:

Research with elementary_ through college_level writers suggests that practice combining sentences promotes syntactical fluency.

You should use this pattern sparingly, however. Embedding an appositive, a participle phrase, or a relative clause2 between the subject and the verb slows down the pace of reading because such constructions require readers to keep these references in their short_term memory until they reach the verb and understand how to apply them. As English speakers we need to link the subject of a sentence to its verb to understand a statement. As a result, we must hold in our short_term memory all of the defining and modifying words that come between the subject and verb. Not until we reach the verb do we understand what we are supposed to do with the appositive or modifying words.

MAINTAIN A HICH VERB_TO_NOUN RATIO AND AVOID NOMINALIZATIONS
You can invigorate your language by eliminating unnecessary nouns and choosing powerful verbs. When editing, consider changing Latinized—nouns those ending with ance, ing, ion, tion, or ment__ into verbs. For example, transform introduction into introduce; commitment into commit, feeling intofeel. Changing nouns into verbs can produce a more concise and vigorous passage, as illustrated below:

Sample: The assumption that creative ability has a relationship to intelligence warrants further examination.
Revision: We must examine how creative ability relates to intelligence.

Sample: This introduction is a rough conception of the assumptions about the decision_making process underlying the conception: Decisions about belief or action generally occur in the context of some problem and have some basis.
Revision: We can assume that decisions occur in response to problems.

EDIT STRINGS OF PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES
When used in moderation, prepositions are invaluable. Few sentences can be written without them. Essentially, prepositions work as connectors, linking the object of the preposition to a word that appears earlier in the sentence. Like linking verbs, however, prepositions do not convey action, nor do they subordinate one thought to another. Instead, they merely link chunks of meaning that readers must gather together in order to understand the sentence. When used excessively, prepositional phrases create a choppy, listlike style. Consider, for instance, the following sentence excerpted from the Journal of Research and Development in Education:
Sample: The major objective of this study was to determine the perceived effects of the union on monetary and on nonmonetary aspects of compensation over the period in which respondents to the survey had been union members.

Because it occurs in the conclusion of a five_page published essay, a careful editor would probably have eliminated this sentence altogether. Let’s face it: if the readers still haven’t got the point after five pages, there is little hope for them. Nevertheless, if the editor and author believed this statement was necessary, they could improve the sentence by reducing the number of prepositions:

Revision: This study examines how the union affects monetary and nonmonetary aspects of compensation.

To help identify and eliminate unnecessary prepositions, you may find it useful to put slashes between the various prepositional phrases and other basic sentence parts. Note, for example, how the slashes in the following sentence, which is excerpted from the Journal of Research and Development in Education, highlight the frequency of prepositional phrases.

/Furthermore, /in response/ /to the increased pressure/ /to publish/ /in academia/ /in the past decade//and the growing complexity//of the academic areas and research tools,/ one should expect/ /to find/ /increased emphasis/ /on cost_cutting techniques/by academic writers.//An increase//in cost//can probably be observed/by investigating/the changing trends/ /in the multiple authorship/ /of articles/ /over time./
EDIT FOR ECONOMY
No matter how much you appreciate the sounds of the words you have used, you should now try to cut the length of your document in half. By using the editing strategies already discussed. you have begun to chip away needless abstractions, unnecessary jargon, awkward passive constructions, weak verbs, tangled sentence patterns, unnecessary nouns, and strings of prepositional phrases. Yet by evaluating the content in light of your audience and the tone that you hope to establish, you can still find ways to eliminate unnecessary transitions, definitions, references, and examples. It may be useful at this point to recall that you add clarity and grace by presenting an idea simply. Cutting away at the unnecessary dead wood can eliminate the static that interferes with communication.
As an example of wordiness, consider the following excerpt from a recent issue of Medical Teacher. After an impenetrable abstract and two pages of academese that presumably introduce the topic, the coauthors of this article offered the first sense of their purpose for writing:

The purpose of this paper is to present the results of a faculty development project in which the domain of written communication was analysed and incorporated into a training curriculum for family medicine faculty members. Funded by the Division of Medicine, Health Resources Services Administration, and directed by investigators at the University of Minnesota (Department of Family Practice and Community Health) and the University of North Carolina (Office of Research and Development for Education in the Health Professions), this two and a half year contract called for the development of a model curriculum to prepare physicians for their faculty roles in five areas. Written communication was one of the areas included for tenure_track faculty members, along with research, teaching, administration, and professional academic skills. In its entirety this curriculum is suitable for the continuing medical education, faculty development, or fellowship level.
In order to prepare the written communication domain of this curriculum, an instructional analysis was performed on the content and context of written communication skills in academic medicine.

Presumably, this paragraph, which should appear much earlier in the article, is intended toclarify the purpose of the research. Instead of emphasizing the various funding agencies and universities that were involved, the authors should focus on the significance and scope of their research. I suspect, for instance, that most readers would appreciate the brevity and clarity of the following revision

The curriculum presented in this paper can help prepare family medicine physicians for faculty positions that require academic and administrative writing. This curriculum is also suitable for the continuing medical education and faculty development.

Financial supporters and home institutions can be acknowledged in a by_line or in a footnote. Because the current article does not deal with other aspects of their curriculum__research, teaching, administration, and professional academic skills__the authors should not mention these concerns (unless, of course, they want to refer readers to related articles or broaden the scope and length of their article).
The academese suffocating the authors’ meaning in the preceding excerpt from Medical Teacher, written, ironically, by faculty members who teach other faculty members to write, is by no means unusual. In my survey of available literature, I found innumerable passages that could have worked equally well to make the above point.
In your search for economy and precision, you should delete unnecessary repetitions. Of course, you are understandably anxious to report everything necessary to help explain your opinion or argue persuasively. Yet by deleting redundant adjectives, repeated phrases, and synonyms, your writing will gain clarity and persuasiveness. Whenever possible, try to replace abstract words with concrete words words that represent actual physical things like “chair” and “house”__and sensory words__words that appeal to people ‘ s five senses. This does not mean, however, that you need to go into monotonous detail about facts or concepts that your readers are likely to know. It does mean that you should critically evaluate every word you use, asking, “Will my reader(s) understand me here? Do I need to define these terms and concepts? What abstract words can I replace with details and specifics?”

An Exercise in Editing for Economy
To give you some practice at editing for economy, four excerpts from academic journals appear below, followed by my revisions. First try making your own revision, and then compare your text to mine.

Sample: In the middle 1970s, as some faculty members began to face a shrinking job market, the focus of faculty bargaining began the shift toward personnel matters, with faculty members expressing growing concern aboutjob security, advancement and tenure policies.
Revision: The shrinking job market of the 1970s in some disciplines moved the focus of faculty bargaining to job security, advancement, and tenure policies.

Sample: As growing numbers of infertile heterosexual and gay and lesbian couples, along with single individuals, seek to parent through techniques that facilitate conception or permit the use of a genetic and/or gestational donor, and the boundaries of the “scientifically possible” enlarge, we are confronted with a host of increasingly urgent questions.
Revision: We are confronted with a host of increasingly urgent questions as the boundaries of the “scientifically possible” enlarge: growing numbers of single individuals and infertile heterosexual, gay, and lesbian couples are seeking to parent through techniques that facilitate conception orpermit the use of a genetic and/or gestational donor.

Sample: The returns to academic publishing have been studied in recent articles by Katz (1973), Tuckman and Leahey (1975), and Tullock (1973). The returns on publishing are shown to range from psychic rewards such as increased reputation and status, to monetary and professional rewards such as salary increases, promotion and tenure, expanded career opportunities, and increased mobility. In m measuring monetary and professional rewards, the cited authors have found evidence of diminishing marginal returns on academic publishing. Conversely, there are costs associated with academic writing. The monetary costs of academic publishing are to a large extent absorbed by the writer’s university. The costs incurred by the writer are mainly personal. These costs can be measured in terms of the time and effort expended for researching and writing the article, lost professional opportunities such as lost outside consulting fees, and foregone leisure time. The nature of these costs are such that they will not diminish rapidly after the writer’s research skills mature. In fact, costs may even be an increasing function of publishing, if lost consulting fees are related to professional reputation and professional reputation is an increasing function of publishing. Faced with such a cost return structure, it is apparent that the rational writer makes an economic decision each time he decides to write an article. The purpose of this paper will be to define the rational behavior of an academic writer. Once rational behavior is defined, it will be shown that this behavior is consistent with currently observed trends in academic publishing.
Revision: Academicians receive more monetary and professional rewards for working as consultants than as scholars once they have established their reputation and eamed tenure.

Sample: Bowlby (1973,1988a) perceives agoraphobic individuals as experiencing a chronic state of anxiety over the availability and responsiveness of their attachment figures. Because of their uncertainty and fear of desertion or worry that they may not be cared for, they seek to maintain proximity to assure contact with attachment figures. The apprehension about their relationships hampers their going forth into the world and also their coping with stressful conditions such as separation and loss when they do occur.
Revision: Bowlby (1973, 1988a) believes that agoraphobic individuals feel chronically anxious over the availability and responsiveness of their attachment figures. Their fear of desertion makes them stay close to their attachment figures, thereby hampering their going forth into the world and coping with stressful conditions.

COPY_EDIT FOR GRAMMATICAL, MECHANICAL, AND FORMATTING ERRORS
While you can depend on a journal’s or publisher’s copy editors to identify stylistic infelicities, you can establish yourself as a pro and a detail person by eliminating errors from your text. Now that you have attacked your document at the textual, paragraph, and sentence level, you should make one final search for errors in pronoun agreement, subject_verb agreement, punctuation, and spelling. Look especially for errors that reviewers and mentors commonly find in your writing. If you have questions about identifying these sorts of errors, I recommend Claire Kehrwald Cook’s superb text, Line by Line. How to Improve Your Own Writing (New York: MLA, 1985).

FINAL COMMENTS
Taken in isolation, using each of the strategies discussed in this chapter may seem like nit_picking. Going through a document and reducing the number of linking verbs, for example, will not make a substantial difference in its readability. Yet, taken as a whole, these strategies can help you find the truth__the essence of what you want to express. Although at first these techniques may seem awkward or mechanical, once you have worked with them for a while they will become natural and automatic. The end result will be smooth prose that is a joy to read. After a while, you will apply these strategies without even thinking about them. Soon you will be editing everything you hear, from television commercials to editorials in the daily newspaper. Soon your colleagues will be coming to you for editorial help beca~se somehow your work always seems so well written.

NOTES

1. For example, Page Smith leads readers to believe that professors commonly teach two to three classes a year, despise students, and are paid on average $80_100,000 per year. In turn, Charles Sykes portrays professors as Machiavellian figures who routinely sexually abuse their protégés, produce nothing but profspeak, and rarely teach. (See Chapter 18 for a more complete discussion of how critics have misrepresented problems in academia.)
2. As you may recall, an appositive is a word or phrase that renamcs or redefines a noun or pronoun; a participle is a verb form that functions as an adjective; and a relative clause, which usually begins with that, who, or which, is a dependent clause that offers additional information about a noun.

WORKS CITED

Day, Robert A. “The Development of Research Writing.” Scholarly Publishing (January 1989): 107_115.
Goodrich, Chris. “Crossover Drearns: What Academics Need to Know about Agents and the Literary Marketplace.” Lingua Franca (August 1991): 16-21.