Let a pro polish your prose.

Like many nonprofit publications, TRIAL depends on volunteer authors, not professional writers, for much of its content. And while good writers usually organize and convey their ideas well, good thinkers sometimes don't.

That's why every writer--professional or not--needs an editor. I've been on both sides of the publishing process, and I'd no more send my prose to print without an(other) editor than I would drive without a seat belt. I understand what I meant: I wrote it. But if my reader doesn't get my point, stumbles over a phrase, or can't cut through a thicket of verbiage, I've failed as a writer.

And, of course, if I insert mistakes or change meaning without the author's approval, I've failed as an editor. The writer is an expert in the subject; the editor is the expert in form. A professional editor's job includes ensuring clarity and readability by catching errors; correcting grammar, syntax, style, and usage; questioning and resolving inconsistency or illogic; and generally serving as Everyreader.

Those principles hold tree whether you're writing for a specialized audience in a legal publication or for general-interest readers of a mainstream newspaper, magazine, or Web site. That said, another precept comes into play here: Know--and write to--your audience. That does not mean it's OK to write paragraphs or sentences so long, with so many different thoughts, that your reader needs a road map: An article is not a brief or an opinion. Nor does it mean you should "dumb down" your prose for a mainstream audience. As President Jed Bartlet of NBC's The West Wing said, when advisers told him his audience would not understand the word "torpor," "They can look it up!"

Some editors share his view, others decide according to the audience, and still others hold that sending readers to a dictionary interrupts and may even halt their progress. (Woe betide the writer, though, who doesn't use a dictionary and therefore misuses "educated" words.)

An editor or team of editors might not even apply a single one of those views to every article or every publication--like judges, they need to remain flexible. And like writers (or lawyers), they sometimes make mistakes.

Yes, that can be frustrating, in court or in print. Yet as I've learned during three decades of journalism, writers who say "I don't need an editor" might as well add "or readers." They are usually the ones who need an editor most. And writers who won't respond to questions or refuse to consider changes often go unpublished.

No matter whose byline is on an article, readers infer that its quality, even if not its content, is endorsed by the publication that accepts the piece. That's why all this magazine's articles are edited, several editors read each one, and authors are asked to approve editorial changes (except some that are made in proofreading to adjust for type or correct errors).

The editors strive to make articles reader-friendly to TRIAL's entire readership of about 56,000--lawyers and nonlawyers, trial practitioners or not, novices and veterans. How do we do that? By "translating" legalese, avoiding cliches, correcting English, and making changes to better capture and keep readers' interest.

Among the written guidelines we send to prospective authors:

* Keep sentences and paragraphs short.

* Use familiar words.

* Avoid unnecessary words.

* Avoid jargon.

We use those guidelines in editing, too, supplemented by generally accepted principles of good writing such as using active, not passive, voice: "Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote the opinion," not "The opinion was written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist."

But a professional editor knows when, how, and why to break a "rule." If, for instance, the object of the sentence ("opinion") deserves more emphasis than the subject ("Rehnquist"), passive voice might be preferable. In other instances, editors might add or remove hyphens, split infinitives, begin sentences with "But," or break other "rules" you may have learned.

Unless you are a very good writer, however, don't try this at home. Go with the pro: As your client must trust you in court, you must trust your editor in print.

Beyond The Elements of Style

Though the small, short classic prized by English teachers and their students remains the must-have guide for those who write, several other, more comprehensive volumes are also invaluable resources. Among the best, in my book:

* W. Strunk Jr. and E.B. White, The Elements of Style (1959). Advice on how to write clearly and gracefully.

* Theodore M. Bernstein, The Careful Writer: A Modern Guide to English Usage (1965). Alphabetized examples of proper and improper use, answering such questions as Who or whom? Which or that? Colon or semicolon?

* Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (latest edition). The final authority on spelling for many publications, including TRIAL.

* The Chicago Manual of Style (latest edition). The lengthy, detailed style guide used by most books and magazines, including TRIAL. (Most newspapers use the very different guides of the Associated Press or The New York Times).

Anne Goodfriend is the editor of TRIAL.