By Divya Jyoti Munjal

One of the decisions a copy editor makes repeatedly is surprisingly simple to describe: Should I make this change, or should I query the author?

Some corrections are straightforward. A missing comma, an obvious typo, or an inconsistency that can be resolved by analyzing the manuscript may not require the author’s involvement. Other changes are less certain. The sentence may be grammatically correct but unclear, two pieces of information may contradict each other, or a proposed edit may alter what the author intended to say.

The challenge is knowing where to draw the line.

When you can edit confidently

If the intended meaning is clear and the correction does not change that meaning, an editor can usually make the change.

Consider this sentence:

Original: The participants was interviewed individually.

Edited: The participants were interviewed individually.

There is little reason to query the author. The grammatical error is clear, and correcting it does not introduce a new interpretation.

The same principle can apply to an obvious inconsistency. Suppose a manuscript uses e-mail throughout but contains email in one paragraph. If the required style specifies email, the editor can make the change without asking the author which form was intended.

Unnecessary queries can slow the process and create additional work for everyone involved.

When a query is safer

The situation changes when the editor has to interpret the author’s meaning.

Consider:

Original: The results were higher in Group A, which was unexpected because the treatment was more effective.

What exactly was unexpected? Were the higher results unexpected, or was the effectiveness of the treatment unexpected? An editor might be able to rewrite the sentence, but doing so would require choosing an interpretation.

That is a good reason to query.

Contradictory information can create a similar problem:

Methods: The study included 120 participants.

Results: Of the 125 participants included in the study, 18 withdrew.

The editor should not simply change one number to match the other. Either figure could be correct, and only the author can confirm which one should appear.

Querying does not mean avoiding decisions

Editors sometimes worry that raising a query suggests uncertainty or a lack of confidence. In fact, a well-judged query can demonstrate exactly the opposite.

The purpose of a query is not to transfer every difficult decision back to the author. If the editor can resolve an issue using the manuscript, the style guide, house style, or another reliable source, that should usually be done first.

A query becomes valuable when the information needed to make the decision belongs to the author.

Finding the balance

If an editor makes a change when the author’s meaning is unclear, the edit may unintentionally alter what the author intended to say. On the other hand, raising a query for every small issue can overwhelm the author with questions that the editor could have resolved independently.

The key is knowing when clarification is genuinely needed.

A useful way to decide is this: If you understand the intended meaning and can correct the problem without changing it, you can edit it safely. If you have to guess what the author means, a query would be the better choice.

Good copyediting is not measured by how many changes an editor makes or how many queries are raised. It is reflected in the judgment behind those decisions.

As an editor, what makes you stop editing and raise a query instead?