Copy and Syntax

So there's this strange idea in the professional editing community that there are copy editors (those who focus on grammar and spelling) and developmental editors (those who focus on developing the structure and story of a piece).

This is like saying that there are "syntax programmers" and "solution programmers." Syntax programmers would be those whose whole career is built on just memorizing the syntax of as many languages as possible. (If you want to extend the analogy, you could say that syntax programmers only memorize the syntax of particular families of languages, much like how copyeditors will specialize in particular style guides, like Chicago or AP.)

Meanwhile, "solution programmers" would be those who focus on developing useful solutions.

Clearly, one type of programmer is more useful than the other—and the other type is far more likely to be replaced by AI.

Of course, in reality, this divide doesn't exist because a programmer that knows syntax but can't solve any problems is not a programmer.

But by the logic of the editing community, both syntax and solutions programmers are equally valuable.

To me, this seems like a needless separation of competencies. Learning just grammar/style (or just syntax) is not complex enough to consider it a distinct career track. Editors should be able to work across scopes.

Programming languages and written languages are both means to an end. Why focus on the means rather than the end?

The chaos of editorial production

Of course, I suppose that the general chaos of running a magazine—an insanity that I am far too familiar with—may justify the separation of labor in this way. Having some editors focus on story development while others focus on copy editing will result in a better end product.

Similarly, hiring senior architects to develop the overall solution and then pass the nuts-and-bolts coding off to junior SWEs (is "code monkey" too pejorative a phrase in 2025?) to glue together the libraries is an effective allocation of resources.

But the entire point of junior SWEs is to evolve beyond that. At some point, syntax knowledge should be just one competency in their toolbelt.

So why don't we encourage copy editors to evolve?