. . . (But I Sure Wish I Knew the Name of the Guilty Party)
Store worker on break, sitting on toilet. Customer comes in and stands juuust outside the stall door: “Is there a cell phone in there?”
Store worker looks around. “No.”
Guy doesn’t leave. “Are you sure there isn’t a cell phone in there?”
“I’m sure. There’s no cell phone in here.”
Guy comes back in and stands right outside the stall.
“Is there a cell phone in there?”
“No. I sold it on eBay and a portal opened up under my butt. I delivered it to the buyer via the swirlies. Now let me take a crap in peace, OK?”
OK, I made up the last part. What the store worker actaully said was, “No.” Again.
Brainless wonder replied, “Oh, sorry.”
I’ve been reading an eARC by invitation today (the invitation consisting of a request to not[e] (Thanks Colin!) errors that “might have slipped by” editing/proofreading, and submit them via email before final publication). Most of the errors have been either homophonic (such as “peak” for “pique”) or mistakenly writing compound words as two separate words, with only a few actual word misuses not attributable to homophonic errors.
Almost all the mistakes are likely due to the writer having a larger _verbal_ vocabulary than is available in written form to the writer. This can really only be mended by more reading of well-written text by the writer. Until then, the writer is at the mercy of editors and proofreaders whose (and that was one: using “whose” when “who’s” was required) literacy may well–as seems to be the case with this eARC–be no better than the writer’s own.
Oh, and LOADS of misplaced commas, as well as just plain old everyday missing commas. VERY few comma splices, though. That’s nice.
Now, there are likely a number of problems I have not made note of for the writer, since I am NOT line-editing this book but just noting things that jump out at me. Line editing is demanding work, and I’d have to charge for that.