Artificial spell-checking and editing software like Grammarly has been around for several years, but in recent years, more robust artificial intelligence programs have been developed to write documents and fully edit them with little to no human interference. This flux in AI programs for writing and editing has certain implications for the future of copyediting, but can AI really become proficient enough to fully replace human editors? We’ll explore this question in this blog post.

Spell-check and grammar-checking features in word processors have existed since the early 2000s, but human editors have been editing with pen(cil) and paper for decades before that. And automated editors can misspell words or mark something grammatically incorrect while missing the nuance of that phrase or sentence if it’s not what is normally considered to be grammatically correct. Artificial intelligence can catch spelling errors, but it can’t understand or catch purposeful, stylistic spellings or misspellings, as you would find on a style sheet.

There are several programs that can write anything for the user, and even more that comb through your writing and edit it for you. Programs like DeepL Write, Quillbot Paraphraser, Wordtune Spices, and Wordvice can copyedit any document you plug into the software, and they can also provide rephrasing suggestions, sentence improvements (clarity, fluency, vocabulary, etc.), among other features. Other programs, like Lex.page and Grammarly’s premium subscription, can rewrite entire sentences and offer enhancement suggestions. All of these features are innovative and can prove to be helpful to a human editor, if they work properly (some of these programs are still in their beta testing phases). But what about the capabilities of human editors? Can, or should, AI editing programs entirely replace human editors?

Any copyeditor will tell you that no manuscript will ever be perfectly edited; no matter how many rounds of copyediting it goes through, at least a few small punctuation or spelling errors will be present, and that perfection isn’t the goal, but readability while keeping the author’s voice intact is. Unlike AI, which can only spot and correct spelling, punctuation, and some sentence structure errors, humans can read tone and understand special considerations for “incorrect” spellings and phrasings as described in a style sheet (for example, ain’t or keepin’ or ya [you]) that an AI program would probably flag as incorrect.

With new uses for artificial intelligence, new AI software being invented at the very quick rate they have been in recent years, and with many jobs being automated, it’s not surprising that software to edit, write, and rewrite documents is being introduced into mainstream use. Spell-checking software, like Grammarly and those built into Microsoft Word and Google Docs, has been around for several years and is very helpful for writing and editing, so new artificial intelligence programs that aid in writing and editing will be beneficial for editors to implement. But I do not think editing will become an entirely automated practice, as editing is a learned skill that is developed over years of practice. Editors, and publishers, have the opportunity to work with AI to make editing take less time, but entirely replacing human editors would be detrimental to publishing good books.

Blog written by Elliot Bailey.