Recently Rated:
Stats
Blogs: 172
Pages: 4
Memos: 113
Invitations: 1
Location: Kyoto and Auckland
Work interests: research, editing, science communication
Affiliation/website: National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka
Preferred contact method: Any
Preferred contact language(s): English, German
Contact: email = researchcooperative-at-gmail-dot-com
Favourite publications: Various, and especially the open access versions of older journals with effective review systems
Work interests: research, editing, science communication
Affiliation/website: National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka
Preferred contact method: Any
Preferred contact language(s): English, German
Contact: email = researchcooperative-at-gmail-dot-com
Favourite publications: Various, and especially the open access versions of older journals with effective review systems
Founding Member
Work: ethnobotany, prehistory, museum curation
Affiliations: 1996-present: National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka. 1995: Freelance editor, Kyoto. 1994: JSPS Research Visitor, Kyoto University, Kyoto. 1993: Research Visitor, Australian National University, Canberra. 1991: Visiting Researcher, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka.1990: STA Fellow, National Institute for Ornamental Plants, Vegetables, and Tea (NIVOT), Ano, Japan
Contact: National Museum of Ethnology, Senri Expo Park, Suita City, Osaka, Japan 565-8511
Biographical: Established the Research Cooperative in 2001
Favourite Publications: Various
Affiliations: 1996-present: National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka. 1995: Freelance editor, Kyoto. 1994: JSPS Research Visitor, Kyoto University, Kyoto. 1993: Research Visitor, Australian National University, Canberra. 1991: Visiting Researcher, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka.1990: STA Fellow, National Institute for Ornamental Plants, Vegetables, and Tea (NIVOT), Ano, Japan
Contact: National Museum of Ethnology, Senri Expo Park, Suita City, Osaka, Japan 565-8511
Biographical: Established the Research Cooperative in 2001
Favourite Publications: Various
Editing and editors in Japan
The Research Cooperative website was first developed as a response to the needs of the academic research community in Japan.
English is an important second language for research in Japan, and is used by many researchers here. Many Japanese academic publications encourage mixed use of Japanese and English (for example, figures may be labelled in English, while the text is written in Japanese), or require English abstracts. A few are published entirely in English.
Most bilingual or partly-bilingual publications are distributed entirely inside Japan. Japanese researchers are also using English for articles and books published outside Japan, but this is very difficult for most of them. The difficulty is not just a question of English knowledge. It is also related to unfamiliarity with writing methods.
Some of the difficulty may lie in different understandings of the English term "editor", as discussed below.
Problems may also appear when the writer and editor differ in their experience or academic status. Social barriers may prevent people from building trust and working relationships.
In relation to writing, the English term "editor" has two common meanings...
1) someone who revises or helps correct a manuscript, and
2) someone who compiles a set of manuscripts for an edited book, or who deals with all the manuscripts submitted to a journal.
From conversations with Japanese colleagues, it appears that the second meaning is more commonly associated with the terms "editor" and "editing", in Japan. The term "editor" is usually translated as "henshuu-sha". This Japanese word is unambiguous, and does not have the first meaning that English speakers give to "editor" (see above). English speakers use context to distinguish the two meanings.
Another Japanese word "kooetsu-sha" does have a meaning close to the first meaning above, and indicates someone who may revise a book, look over a manuscript, or supervise someone's work. It has the connotation of a superior or someone senior to the original author.
The English word "editor" , in the first meaning above, is neutral with regard to social status. An editor is identified as an editor by virtue of their ability to review, constructively criticise, correct, and improve a piece of writing. Different editors with different skills may be required to improve different aspects of a complex paper. What matters is their skill, and the author's willingness to recognise that skill and give consideration to the comments made. Relative social status may be a factor, of course, but it is not a factor by definition.
For Japanese, the connotation of "kooetsu-sha" as someone superior or more experienced may create unneccesary expectations or bias in writers and potential editors. Writers may unwisely exclude or ignore the offer or advice someone who is not superior or senior, and potential editors may be shy about negotiating with a writer who is superior or senior.
I have discovered one further word in my discussions with colleagues so far: "saadoku", or peer review. The person who carries out peer review is someone selected by the publisher of a manuscript, not the author. Their status is not necessarily higher than that of the author, but they are not chosen by the author. This word seems to fit very closely with the meaning given to peer review in English.
It thus seems especially difficult to translate the word "editor", in its first sense above. My Japanese colleagues also indicate that there is no long history or strong culture of academic authors using their own initiative to seek advice from peers or anyone else, before a manuscript is submitted. The publishers and organisational editors in Japan routinely receive manuscripts in a very rough state, and must make great efforts to improve the manuscripts after they have been accepted.
Of course, there are exceptions. Some individuals, and authors in certain research fields, are more likely than others to seek criticism of a manuscript before publication. Many have had experience overseas, and are familiar with the rigorous editing and review process required for English-language publications that have high standards.
I am still do not have a clear understanding of academic research writing in Japan. From what I have learned so far, it seems that it will be a long time before many Japanese authors actively and positively look for help from potential editors. There is a strong tendency to avoid this if at all possible, when writing in Japanese or English or another second language, but more so when writing in a second language.
A great deal of importance is attached to the editor having some kind of personal connection with the author, directly or indirectly through a friend, colleague, or senior. The idea of negotiating with strangers who speak another language is almost unthinkable for writers who are not confident about their own second-language skills. This is understandable, because the writer must feel that he or she is negotiating from a position of weakness.
Personal connections are of course useful, and should be used, but they are not always an option. Such connections are often not available, through no fault of the author. If we really have something important to say and publish, we should not be shy about finding help to get the job done (see our forum for editing requests).
In any case, this website may be difficult for many readers to understand, for linguistic, cultural, and social reasons. This is probably true for all researchers who are primarily working in language communities other than English.
As opportunity permits, articles published at this site will be translated into other languages so that all potential users can undertsand the aims and operation of this site. Any offers of help with translating this website are welcome.
Offers of original articles on any of the themes raised here are also welcome.
For an indication of the size of the translation problem, when we want to negotiate writing services across languages (see also our article on the semantic field of academic research and writing).
English is an important second language for research in Japan, and is used by many researchers here. Many Japanese academic publications encourage mixed use of Japanese and English (for example, figures may be labelled in English, while the text is written in Japanese), or require English abstracts. A few are published entirely in English.
Most bilingual or partly-bilingual publications are distributed entirely inside Japan. Japanese researchers are also using English for articles and books published outside Japan, but this is very difficult for most of them. The difficulty is not just a question of English knowledge. It is also related to unfamiliarity with writing methods.
Some of the difficulty may lie in different understandings of the English term "editor", as discussed below.
Problems may also appear when the writer and editor differ in their experience or academic status. Social barriers may prevent people from building trust and working relationships.
In relation to writing, the English term "editor" has two common meanings...
1) someone who revises or helps correct a manuscript, and
2) someone who compiles a set of manuscripts for an edited book, or who deals with all the manuscripts submitted to a journal.
From conversations with Japanese colleagues, it appears that the second meaning is more commonly associated with the terms "editor" and "editing", in Japan. The term "editor" is usually translated as "henshuu-sha". This Japanese word is unambiguous, and does not have the first meaning that English speakers give to "editor" (see above). English speakers use context to distinguish the two meanings.
Another Japanese word "kooetsu-sha" does have a meaning close to the first meaning above, and indicates someone who may revise a book, look over a manuscript, or supervise someone's work. It has the connotation of a superior or someone senior to the original author.
The English word "editor" , in the first meaning above, is neutral with regard to social status. An editor is identified as an editor by virtue of their ability to review, constructively criticise, correct, and improve a piece of writing. Different editors with different skills may be required to improve different aspects of a complex paper. What matters is their skill, and the author's willingness to recognise that skill and give consideration to the comments made. Relative social status may be a factor, of course, but it is not a factor by definition.
For Japanese, the connotation of "kooetsu-sha" as someone superior or more experienced may create unneccesary expectations or bias in writers and potential editors. Writers may unwisely exclude or ignore the offer or advice someone who is not superior or senior, and potential editors may be shy about negotiating with a writer who is superior or senior.
I have discovered one further word in my discussions with colleagues so far: "saadoku", or peer review. The person who carries out peer review is someone selected by the publisher of a manuscript, not the author. Their status is not necessarily higher than that of the author, but they are not chosen by the author. This word seems to fit very closely with the meaning given to peer review in English.
It thus seems especially difficult to translate the word "editor", in its first sense above. My Japanese colleagues also indicate that there is no long history or strong culture of academic authors using their own initiative to seek advice from peers or anyone else, before a manuscript is submitted. The publishers and organisational editors in Japan routinely receive manuscripts in a very rough state, and must make great efforts to improve the manuscripts after they have been accepted.
Of course, there are exceptions. Some individuals, and authors in certain research fields, are more likely than others to seek criticism of a manuscript before publication. Many have had experience overseas, and are familiar with the rigorous editing and review process required for English-language publications that have high standards.
I am still do not have a clear understanding of academic research writing in Japan. From what I have learned so far, it seems that it will be a long time before many Japanese authors actively and positively look for help from potential editors. There is a strong tendency to avoid this if at all possible, when writing in Japanese or English or another second language, but more so when writing in a second language.
A great deal of importance is attached to the editor having some kind of personal connection with the author, directly or indirectly through a friend, colleague, or senior. The idea of negotiating with strangers who speak another language is almost unthinkable for writers who are not confident about their own second-language skills. This is understandable, because the writer must feel that he or she is negotiating from a position of weakness.
Personal connections are of course useful, and should be used, but they are not always an option. Such connections are often not available, through no fault of the author. If we really have something important to say and publish, we should not be shy about finding help to get the job done (see our forum for editing requests).
In any case, this website may be difficult for many readers to understand, for linguistic, cultural, and social reasons. This is probably true for all researchers who are primarily working in language communities other than English.
As opportunity permits, articles published at this site will be translated into other languages so that all potential users can undertsand the aims and operation of this site. Any offers of help with translating this website are welcome.
Offers of original articles on any of the themes raised here are also welcome.
For an indication of the size of the translation problem, when we want to negotiate writing services across languages (see also our article on the semantic field of academic research and writing).
