October 31, 2006

Errata week: mundane typo

I'll end Errata Week here on the blog by noting one embarrassing typo in Creating the Dropout (Praeger, 1996):

Changes in the proportion of nineteen-year-olds dependent on relatives cannot account for the drop; a higher proportion was dependent in 1980 (86 percent) than in 1970 or 1980 (80 and 81 percent, respectively). (p. 20)

This is just a boneheaded proofreading mistake.  The first 1980 should be 1990. It's not my usual type of mistake, either; I'm far more likely to mismatch the number of subject and verb than to get a number wrong. (Often, I hasve to edit my blog entries to correct such mistakes, after publicatoion.) But for the thousands of you who were wondering if they were going a bit crazy on p. 20, no, you weren't. 

Oh, you weren't kept awake by my typographical errors?  I hope that by ending on the mundane, I've made a bit of a point about issuing errata as a professional process: it is not so much the typo (though we should be careful with that) as the sloppy interpretation and omission where we are most likely to make errors that last.

Update: One more (embarrassing) typo from a column July 6 on the Spellings Commission: I typed Barmak Nassirian's name as Barnak. My apologies, Mr. Nassirian. Listen to this article
Posted in Random comments on October 31, 2006 1:12 PM |