Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=952543
 
 

Citations (1)



 


 



Editing


Carol Sanger


Columbia Law School


Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 82, p. 513, 1993

Abstract:     
We are all familiar with the process. At its best, law review editing, like editing elsewhere in the academic and literary worlds, results in a piece improved in style, structure, and content. Too often, however, law review articles are not so much improved as simply changed, sometimes hundreds of times within a single manuscript.

My purpose here is not to complain line by line about various dissatisfactions with the editing of my little review. I accept that authors, like teenagers convinced the world is focused on their every imperfection, are more aware of perceived deficiencies in an article than any reader is likely to be. Nonetheless, many of us have spent many hours resuscitating sentences, paragraphs, lines of argument, and sometimes whole manuscripts that have been edited nearly to death. What I want to discuss is why this sort of thing happens so regularly and what we might do about it.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 16

Keywords: editing, law review, student, scholarship, journals, courts, academy

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: December 20, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Sanger, Carol, Editing. Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 82, p. 513, 1993. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=952543

Contact Information

Carol Sanger (Contact Author)
Columbia Law School ( email )
435 West 116th Street
New York, NY 10025
United States
212-854-5478 (Phone)
212-854-7946 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 380
Downloads: 80
Download Rank: 184,348
Citations:  1

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.391 seconds