LawProse Lesson #409: The Kinds of Editorial Changes

LawProse Lesson #409: The Kinds of Editorial Changes

Whatever their level of competence, revisers can make only three types of alterations: delete, replace, and insert. Any of these should improve a piece, not detract from it.  

Deletions involve removing whatever is unhelpful, whether superfluous words (June of 2022 becomes June 2022), redundancies (general consensus becomes consensus), undesirable repetitions (often resulting from inexpert phrasing), and even weak arguments. Yes, sometimes you need to delete whole sections. At the word level, though, you can’t delete willy-nilly, as ineffective editors often do: you must keep the prose within the mainstream of standard idiomatic English. Hence you’d never, for written prose, change a couple of people to a couple people.

Replacements involve changing legalisms to everyday words (vel non becomes or not), formalisms to down-to-earth language (we are in receipt of becomes we’ve received), and imprecise expressions to more accurate ones (cause of action becomes claim or right of action, or sometimes even case). To know the hundreds of usual replacements that professional editors routinely make, you must be familiar with a thorough dictionary of usage, such as Garner’s Modern English Usage (Oxford, 5th ed. 2022) or Garner’s Dictionary of Legal Usage (Oxford, 3d ed. 2011). For example, the need to replace cause of action wouldn’t be known to someone unfamiliar with the literature on legal usage.

Insertions involve new words, sentences, and paragraphs supplied to clarify matters, as by immediately answering a question that would arise in the minds of reasonable readers—and inserting it so deftly that it doesn’t seem like something added. You must have a knack for knowing what clarifications are needed, without which readers would find the prose puzzling. Among the poor insertions that inept legal editors make are the kneejerk parenthetical (“Gribaldi”) after the first reference to Geraldine Gribaldi—when she’s the only Gribaldi anywhere in view. No conceivable reader would be puzzled by a follow-on reference to Gribaldi.

Bringing a piece of writing into pleasing proportions is a matter of amplifying some things and diminishing others. What are pleasing proportions? Saying just enough about each matter discussed, and no more.

On that point, we’ll conclude.

Next time: the difference between editing and proofing.

Live seminars this year with Professor Bryan A. Garner: Advanced Legal Writing & Editing

Attend the most popular CLE seminar of all time. More than 215,000 people—including lawyers, judges, law clerks, and paralegals—have benefited since the early 1990s. You'll learn the keys to professional writing and acquire no-nonsense techniques to make your letters, memos, and briefs more powerful.

You'll also learn what doesn't work and why—know-how gathered through Professor Garner's unique experience in training lawyers at the country's top law firms, state and federal courts, government agencies, and Fortune 500 companies.

Professor Garner gives you the keys to make the most of your writing aptitude—in letters, memos, briefs, and more. The seminar covers five essential skills for persuasive writing:

  • framing issues that arrest the readers' attention;
  • cutting wordiness that wastes readers' time;
  • using transitions deftly to make your argument flow;
  • quoting authority more effectively; and
  • tackling your writing projects more efficiently.

He teaches dozens of techniques that make a big difference. Most important, he shows you what doesn't work—and why—and how to cultivate skillfulness.

Register to reserve your spot today.

Have you wanted to bring Professor Garner to teach your group? Contact us at for more information about in-house seminars.

Scroll to Top