Error in book?

[mavornia]

I was looking at this book in Waterstones today. Surely it should be “in the Blakes’ careful facade” rather than “Blake’s” as written? Would Blake’s ever be acceptable?

my dad once said “ ‘they’ always put an error in so the publishers can prove if it’s been copied” this made sense to me, I didn’t question it and I always find the deliberate mistake in a book, it’s usually just one spelling mistake, sometimes the name of a character wrong, never it seen it on the back cover though?

They really don’t. We try our best to find all errors. But some are persistent.

Nah, they'll have updated the website and kindle edition once the error on the dustjacket was spotted. It is quite unusual to see an error on the cover like that, but publishers, proofreaders (I am one) etc do make errors, we are not infallible.

This is definitely not a thing. But there will probably be at least one minor error in every book just because we all make errors. And even after several rounds of proofreading the act of correcting, or even just the creation of a pdf file for print, can easily introduce new errors. At some point you have to stop. Usually when you're about to miss the deadline at the printers and risking putting a massive bookshop order in jeapordy. Unfortunately perfect accuracy is not what sells books.

Is your dad Donald J Trump?

That's a particularly rubbish blurb. Reads like self-published puffery.

Thanks for all the responses. It’s so interesting learning about how the blurb gets written and the proofreading process.

Creating a PDF can’t introduce any errors.

It's a matter of style. Oxford, comma after the penultimate item (before 'and'). Non-Oxford, don't. Semicolons replace commas in a sub-punctuated list. It's just interesting to see.

But there will probably be at least one minor error in every book just because we all make errors.

I once read a book in a well-regarded series produced by a reputable publisher in which the dialogue was punctuated wrongly throughout.

So the blurb-writer put Blake's, whatever proof-reading it underwent missed it, the blurb was sent to various departments, dust-jacket design and print used it as it is, and marketing and website corrected their versions at some point? Because they can. Is that it?

That being so, we still need to know who spotted it. Perhaps @maudelovesharold saw it somewhere and alerted them.

No, there is no such thing as an Oxford semicolon. There is only one correct use of semicolons in a list; it’s not a matter of style at all.

@BellissimoGecko , I disagree. I don't like seeing a list separated by semicolons but it's not grammatically incorrect.

🙀

😂😂😂

I didn’t say it was.

I said the list was grammatically correct, and the only way to punctuate a list with semicolons. But a PP says that it was an ‘Oxford semicolon’ and that the last semicolon in the list is optional.

i was saying that an Oxford semicolon isn’t a thing, and they were wrong.

Ugh it sounds shit anyway.

Are you sure? That’s just not the kind of error that would be made. You have too many eyes on a book for that.

Maybe it was a deliberate style decision by the author?

Of course I'm sure.

'It's a lovely day today', said Jim is just wrong. It's not a style choice. And it had been done correctly in the previous books in the series.

Throughout the whole book? I’m amazed. It should have been edited, proofread, revises checked, and the author should have checked proofs. Various other departments should have seen it too. Which publisher was it?

Yes, I concede the point. The term 'Oxford semicolon' is only ever tongue-in-cheek, and there is virtually no controversy about its presence (unlike the comma).

There is no controversy about its presence, because it’s just not a thing.

I’ve been an editor for 25 years and no one else has ever mentioned it.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Unacceptable!! Even those working within publishing now ignorant of basic grammar 😠 . What's the betting the person responsible pronounces 'think' as 'fink'? RESIST THIS CULTURAL DECLINE ✊🏾🫡🖕

@BellissimoGecko , Same here. I can see why it's been used on this thread, but as a pedant, it's not an acceptable term.

I notice a lot of mistakes in the kindle books I read now - if they jump out to me I can't see why they've haven't been similarly noticeable to the proof readers. However, some are 99p Amazon reads so perhaps the publishing process is different!