|
Does Tool Exist to Spellcheck/Grammarcheck by Category?
3 Attachment(s)
I was wondering if anyone has come across anything like this in their travels? If so, please let me know.
To my knowledge, most tools allow you to check and replace on a one-by-one basis. They don't give you an easy way to see all spelling/grammar errors on a document-wide level. What I Envision Sample Input: Quote:
Seeing them broken down this way would allow you to easily tell, at a glance, how many of which types there are + surrounding context. You could also focus purely within a category to see if the recommendations are actually correct:
Current Tools (That I'm aware of) One-by-One Checking (Most tools are like this) If using Word/LibreOffice, you have to go through one-by-one in the order they appear, and Correct/Ignore/Ignore All. Attachment 166343 Pain Point: Word's grammarcheck frustrating, because you can only "Ignore" and CAN'T "Ignore All". On a huge book, this takes forever. Pain Point #2: In large works, there are typically common issues repeated throughout the entire document (author misspells "erros" + consistently misses a comma before/after certain words). You can't easily tackle all comma errors in a given pass, or solve them consistently, because you're constantly flipflopping between all the different types of issues. Pain Point #3: Another frustration in Word is when you get the dreaded "Too many spelling or grammatical errors" and it refuses to show you the red/blue squigglies within your document. This makes seeing context much more difficult. List-based Grammar-checking LanguageTool's standalone tool allows you to get an entire list of grammar errors in the order they appear: Attachment 166344 This is pretty great! And it allows you to "Ignore All" entire rules. But because you can't easily tell how many hits this rule actually caught in the entire book (is there just 1? Or 50?), you sometimes don't want to Ignore the entire rule. Pain Point: Because you can't easily ignore, there are a ton of false positives clogging up the list. Pain Point #2: You also aren't too sure what Ignoring a certain rule would effect. Take for example, the "Capitalization" grammar rule: 1. Ignore that specific instance of that specific word? - That second -> Second would be ignored, future ones would be caught 2. Ignore all future instances of that specific word? --- second -> Second would be ignored, future "second"s also ignored. 3. Ignore all cases of capitalization errors? --- second -> Second would be ignored, but so would i -> I. List-based Spell-checking Sigil/Calibre allow you to use the Spellchecking Lists to see errors in mass. This allows you to see all misspelled words in the entire book in an easy to view list, but you can only see individual words, not the surrounding context: Attachment 166345 You have to manually search for these words, or doubleclick the word X times in the Spellcheck List to jump to each instance. Pain Point: Again, when working on huge books, this can be a pain, especially if it's dealing with words that are very common, but potential misspellings in some contexts (or OCR errors, like "modem"<->"modern"). Reason Why I Thought of This I recently was looking at what they added into the latest versions of Word, and saw they introduced an "Editor Pane": https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/...3-6ea27c8f31f1 It finally allows you to split the Spelling + Grammar into separate steps (one of my pet peeves with a lot of the tools, constantly flipflopping between "Spelling Mode" and "Grammar Mode"). Sigil's method is by far my favorite way to spellcheck, but I think the hybrid approach I mentioned above (with lists AND context), would be yet another way to correct errors efficiently. |
Short answer is No.
Some notes on my usage of Word 2016’s spell checker. Because I dodge in and out of it a lot, I have the Proofing Options panel in the Quick Access toolbar; Alt 9 opens it. Early on in my workflow (after EpubTools S&R), I do a pass with "Check grammar with spelling" unset. It's not perfect, punctuation ‘errors’ (e.g. missing comma’s etc), which I regard as grammatical/stylistic issues, will pop up; but if you have strict Grammar and Refinements [1] settings most of those are excluded. In an ideal world there would be discrete Spelling, Punctuation, Grammar, and Style checkers. There is a Change all option for spelling. But for me it's deficient, in that it doesn't do the corrections en-masse, it does them progressively. So, if you don't continue checking through to end of document, the 'unseen' corrections aren't made. It also has an Ignore all, if I decide I need to review the context in which a misspelt word is used I select this option. Then after the first spelling only pass, I tap Recheck Document: Press Alt+Numpad+ to go to 1st misspelt word, which should be something I previously ignored en-masse. I copy/paste the word to the Navigation panel search box (I wish there was context menu option or kb short to do that). The Results tab will show the context for all occurrences of the misspelling. By stepping through the Results items, I can deal with each instance - Change, Ignore or Retype. Tap Ctrl+Home and Alt+Numpad+ to find the next misspelt word. In earlier versions of Word if you typed over a misspelt word, what you typed would be offered at the top of the Suggested list for subsequent occurrences of the misspelt word. That feature fell off the back of the truck sometime between 2010 and 2016. If anyone knows how to restore the feature in Word 2016, perhaps they'd let me know - either in here or in a PM. I use Exclusion lists to exclude some spellings in some documents. FX in some texts I might prefer a word on loan from the French to be spelt with the appropriate diacritics.[2] This can result in many 'misspelt' words, the correction, via Find and Replace, involves selecting the appropriate language from the Language option in the "Formats" drop-down button. I too quite like the Sigil and Calibre spell checkers in terms of the UI. Toxaris went some way towards doing something similar for Word in ePubTools. But I found it to be quite slow, and I didn't like having to use the hunspell dictionaries in the MS Office environment. Maybe it'll be better in version 2.0. Ideally it would have the same functionality as the native spell checker, or more, and it would use the Office dictionaries. I'll try to come back on Grammar and Style. BR [1] Where did this Refinements word come from! Why replace a 5 letter 1 syllable word with an established usage: Style, with the 11 letter 3 syllable word: Refinements! Has MS been infected by the penchant for prolix that is endemic within the realms of US officialdom. [2] Come Brexit, will the Anglosphere have to return the words it 'borrowed' from the EU languages; IIRC cravat was nicked from the Croats :-). |
It looks like the Editor Pane goes some way towards my ideal of four separate checkers. But it needs a live internet connection; so, it is only available in Office 365; which I don't have :(
Regrettably, I ticked the box for Office Home and Business when I bought my Dell, I assumed there would be an affordable upgrade to Office 365 should I ever want it. There is an upgrade option, but last time I looked, the cost was borderline extortionate :angry: BR |
3 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Let's say you reached the halfway point, you've been Ignoring on a case-by-case basis. You run into a common "error" clogging up your workflow, so you go into the "Proofing Options" and change a single setting. Every... dang... change... you just Ignored gets reset. Quote:
Attachment 166349 Attachment 166350 Side Note: This categorization is also a frustrating point in Word's grammarcheck. When you get a suggestion, you have no idea WHAT rule/category this "error" actually hit, because it doesn't tell you. Look at the screenshot I gave in Post #1 for Word: Quote:
Code:
GrammarAttachment 166351 ... I have no idea. So instead, you just have to Ignore one-by-one, the same issue throughout the entire document. And if you work on older books, non-formal stuff like Fiction, or throw in em dashes/ellipses, or variables (maths)... the false positives are through the roof! If I saw an annoying false positive in a List-based system, I could just easily skip my eyes to the next category! Quote:
It should be like Notepad++'s Find All. Just show me the entire list of every occurrence! I don't care if there are 100+! Quote:
My Ctrl+Home jumped me near the beginning of the document. And the Alt+Numpad+ inserted an equation. Side Note: I also went into File > Options > Customize Ribbon > Keyboard Shortcuts: Customize... (ugh, what a way to bury shortcuts). And I couldn't easily find a "Find Next Misspelled Word". According to a quick search online it may be Alt+F7... where it's buried in the menus though, no idea. Why oh why couldn't it be more like Sigil/Calibre's Shortcut pages? Full search + you could easily see what's assigned to what. Quote:
Spelling is the Spelling Police. ("This is an eror.") Grammar is the Grammar Police. ("This are not an error") Style is the Style Police. ("The Oxford Comma is simpler, correct, and superior!") Refinements are the Refinement Police! ("This is some super duper overly wordy sentence.") And when you let Word Replace All (heaven help you), it helps you—refine—your writing! :rofl: Quote:
And all of the online spellcheck/grammar tools I've run across so far are all one-by-one checkers, and/or have been purchased up/consumed by Grammarly. Side Note: And Grammarly is horrendous. You can see how the one-by-one annoyed The Digital Reader in his review: https://the-digital-reader.com/2017/...ing-grammarly/ |
@Tex2002ans: It's very easy to check for specific issues with the command line version of LanguageTool.
For example if you saved your test file as tex.text, you'd use the following command line to only look for agreement issues: java -jar languagetool-commandline.jar --language en-US --enabledonly --enable AGREEMENT_SENT_START tex.txt Code:
Working on tex.txt...Shameless plug: Sigil users could also use my LanguageTool Sigil plugin, which also allows you to enable or disable specific rules. |
Quote:
Sounds like something my good friend Doitsu would want to tackle. :whistle: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
My earlier post was based on Word 2016 from Office 2016 for Home and Business.
I went away and read up on the Editor Pane, it looked interesting. So I had a chat session with MS Support. The pricing is not as bad as I remembered ($200+pa), for Personal it's only AU$10 monthly for 1 desktop, 1 phone, and 1 tablet, which is the same as my weekly gym-fees! And I get to keep my Office H&B - I could put that on my Dell Alien Alpha Xbox box :lol: So I have it on a 1 month trial, I'll be responding based on my limited usage of it. The install was painless, download and run a little exe, which does a bit more downloading, a few minutes over DSL, then a similarly few minutes to install. No more than 10 minutes go-to-whoa. Quote:
I don't change the options under the Settings button. What I do is uncheck/check Check grammar with spelling, and when its checked I select the Writing Style check I want - Grammar or Grammar & Refinements Quote:
If a misspelt word is peculiar to a document, e.g. a place name, persons name etc, I add it to the custom dictionary. When I finish a document I replace RoamingCustom.dic with a 'starter' version of it, which gets rid of the document specific "Added" words. It's the nearest I can get to having a document specific custom dictionary. I can't recall which WP program I used that had them - WordPerfect, Multimate, Gypsy, who knows ? From time to time I consider saving the end of checking RoamingCustom.dic file to the calibre book where I have the DOCX, but I never do. So, when I hit Recheck Document I don't get many misspellings that I have to Ignore Once again. Quote:
Attachment 166354 Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Question - anyone have any idea why the context menu for a spelling error has an Ignore All option, but not an Ignore Once option. IIRC it's been ever thus. BR PS; Office 365 Word has an option to opt-out of so-called Intelligent Services. I don't know if or how it works or not. Maybe if you opt out they broadcast a message to the Intelligence Services. |
Quote:
I also wanted to get these thoughts out there, and see what others thought on this Spelling/Grammar situation. Quote:
Sometimes they call it an "Editor Pane", other times an "Editor Overview Pane" or "Editor" (this last one isn't helpful AT ALL for search!): https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/...5ecf039?auth=1 https://support.office.com/en-us/art...rs=en-US&ad=US And even a lot of their official posts are inconsistent. Quote:
Quote:
https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement Quote:
There are only ~9500 hits for "Editor Pane" + "Microsoft Word", most of it was articles parroting off the same talking points from Microsoft's blog. No real info, just the same copied/pasted paragraphs. And even Microsoft's blog barely has any info on it. And the handful of pages I found discussing the Editor Pane were all over the place (there was even a post+video from February announcing it and showing off its functionality... and the video is down!) Youtube barely has any hits. I doubt there's any in-depth review of this thing. Quote:
And I remember last time I messed around with it, it reset the document (perhaps my memory is wrong). Quote:
The books I work on have a lot of French/German/Greek words interspersed throughout (or potentially odd stuff like book/article titles). And while it might be valid in case A, it may not be valid in case B. Also ye olde time spelling, might be valid in a quotation, but wrong in the text itself. Or same with English US/UK spellings. Might be valid in a quote, but not outside. You have to be very careful with these things! :P Quote:
And their handful of categories are much too broad (it should break down like LanguageTool's rule > specific check hierarchy). Because sometimes just a single rule causes false positives to go through the roof. Do you still have to Ignore Ignore one at a time? Or can you Ignore the entire rule from there? Quote:
The worst is when you are partway through correction a giant book, and then you get the popup and all the squigglies disappear. Even if you then delete the second half of the book, ain't no way you get your squigglies back! (One of the reasons why I prefer a tool that just runs on the entire document and lists all the errors... like LanguageTool.) Quote:
Quote:
All the "Top 5 list of Grammar Checkers" or "Top 10 Grammar Tools" or "List of Grammar Checker" articles. 99.9% of them pointed to things which redirected right to Grammarly (or now used Grammarly in the backend). (And rarely do these sites even mention LanguageTool.) You pasted in your sample text? Redirects to Grammarly. Try this other site? "Why don't you log in using Facebook" and sends you to Grammarly! Wow, a top 20 list, there MUST be something in there that works. Grammarly! I can give them one thing, their damn marketing drowns out any sort of meaningful competition. A few days ago I did run across a reference to a whitepaper (believe it was based on a PhD where someone designed more accurate grammar recommendations). It was one of the few online tools that actually still existed and wasn't overrun by them! Sadly, it was mostly an API, and the online portion was extremely limited. |
Quote:
Quote:
I also have a suspicion that it gets re-enabled if you have Mark grammar errors as you type and/or Check grammar with spelling checked, without so much as a 'by your leave sir/madam'. More testing needed. Quote:
Those who have the knowledge to do an impartial review don't write for the hoi-polloi, and those that have the knowledge don't write reviews for software. Most internet hacks would scratch their heads wondering what giving birth or designing transport corridors has to do with writing, and couldn't differentiate a past participle from their grannies left gumboot :rofl: Whoops, hit Submit when I wanted Preview - to be continued BR |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Several of the MS and coffee&pasta posts had this https://support.content.office.net/e...8bb8538d58.png I cant find it. Some of the posts that have it, refer to Insider versions, so perhaps it didn't make it into the final cut. If anyone has it, can they tell me where they found it. And, back to the issue of keyboard shortcuts. You don't really need them in Office 2007-16 because everything in the ribbon tabs can be accessed with single finger keystrokes. Providing the first one pressed is the Alt key, the Ribbon will get a bunch of indicators showing what key(s) map to what. FX:- for me ePubTools is Y3; and within that; Dialogue check is Y1. Quote:
I make multiple passes focusing on different issues, rather than doing everything within a single pass. Spelling is the first pass, if I see a punctuation, grammar or style error I fix it there and then - according to my rules. Quote:
Attachment 166366 As you can almost see there are more 'Grammar' checks, sadly the dialogue box is fixed size :( BTW: any idea what the issue with the word 'Lack' might be, like how does it get misused - confused with Lakh? Quote:
Sigil's KB shortcut feature would be perfect if it showed the default and the customised settings, and I didn't sometimes lose my custom settings when I install a new version. Quote:
:offtopic: somewhat, Like many people I wasn't enamoured with the flat plastic look of Win 10's Settings App. The other day I downloaded a flat plastic File Manager App, it was very rudimentary so I've not kept it. However in playing with it, I discovered I could intuitively navigate my way around its UI with just the Tab and arrow keys, remember I don't like pointy things like mice and trackpads. No more accelerator keys, e.g. Alt+G for Grouping and Alt+G for Algorithm. I've since discovered that the various flat plastic Apps (I hate that word) MS ships are similar. So perhaps the flat plastic is not as bad as I first thought. BR |
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:
And they also tied that Editor into Bing (Definitions + Translation probably pulls definitions from there too). So they probably want to get all your approval before sending all your info to Microsoft-middlemen. No Bing? No spying? No new Editor Pane for you! :rolleyes: Quote:
It even shows it in this thread (people complaining about Readability Statistics being broken for a few months): https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/...1-b8a70b682eee in an image from September 6. Did you do a fresh install, or did it carry over a lot of your previous settings? Quote:
Attachment 166367 If you click your cursor onto some text, the Style which matches gets a little border around it (in the above image, you can see it around "Normal"). If the Style doesn't exist in that first row though... You hover your mouse over the Style box. Mouse scroll changes tabs left/right (Home <-> Insert <-> Layout) instead of styles scrolling up/down. Instead, you have to press the little itty buttons on the right edge... to clunkily scroll through styles a handful at a time. So dumb! (Yes, I also know you could pop out the entire Styles Pane [pressing the little itty bitty arrow in the bottom right of my image].) Side Note: Lately, I've also been a proponent of Select > Select All Text With Similar Formatting: Attachment 166368 This is super helpful when trying to clean up garbage Styles (either copied/pasted from the Internet, or junk from conversions). (Note: It does bring your computer to a crawl if you use it on enormous documents. Word probably doesn't like thousands of discrete highlighted pieces of text. :P) Quote:
Quote:
Side Note: Probably all the different meanings/forms smashed into a single word. In a quick search, I found this link: http://elss.elc.cityu.edu.hk/ELSS/Re...ords%20(Lack)/ Quote:
Quote:
If I do, I lean on LibreOffice (due to being free + working on all OSes). I'm actually one that much prefers the "Word 2003" look, and am not the largest fan of the Ribbon. (One of the things I like is that little Search box right above the ribbon though, where you can search for specific settings/buttons. That's helpful when you rarely do a task, and have no idea where it is buried in the buttons/menus.) And if I ever had to generate printable documents, I would just stick with LaTeX. You can pry that beautiful typography from my cold, dead, impeccably typeset hands. :P Quote:
And maybe not just a "Reset All" button, but a "Reset" button could be added. Quote:
The thing that frustrates me is each version, they keep trying to shove more and more of these "flat" versions of Settings down your throat, but they don't even have the full functionality of the old ones! (Network settings is the perfect example. It's absolute garbage. You can't change anything meaningful within it. Only "Copy" info.) |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
At one stage when I had IntelliServ disabled I got the really old (2007) spelling and grammar popup dialogue. The one where you could edit the fragment of text that was displayed in the 'error' popup - IMO that was the best one. But most of the time I'm getting the Editor Pane even though IntelliServ is unchecked. But here's the rub - sometimes when I go to Options->General IntelliServ is checked, and I'm positive it wasn't checked by me! My guess it that gets enabled behind the arras if there's a network connection, but it takes a while for the UI to wake up to that bit of jiggery-pokery, so it shows unchecked. This could be something specific to it being a Trial install, i.e. they want you to play with goodies so that you'll fall in love with them and shell out your money. I'll pull the plug on the network and see what happens Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If I wanted to see which style is in use, I would use the context menu, viz: Attachment 166370 Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
BR |
Well, I pulled the plug on the network - and I had Intelligent Services checked and I got the Editor Pane, and I could not induce it to revert to the 2007 dialogue! I checked Intelligent Services - same deal.
I'm going to do a no-network test with everything in Settings checked :( Oh, I discovered this morning that setting of Windows Default Programs is even worse in 1803 than it was in 1709 --- just like they did the previous bazillion times they've tampered with it. And they nuked the old one in Control Panel. BR |
1 Attachment(s)
For the past couple of days I've been using Word 365, including the Editor Pane on an isolated machine - i.e. no network, not even an avian carrier connection.
Seems to me that having or not having Intelligent Services (IS) checked makes not one scrap of difference to the current Editor Pane functionality. I say current because I'm wondering if... as they add functionality to grammar checking... they will do what Language Tools have done, make it a chargeable service - LT want $AU79 per annum for their latest and greatest... ouch. One feature that does need Intelligent Services is, unsurprisingly, Word's Translation tool, if it's unchecked you get this Attachment 166516 If the Editor Pane needed IS then it's reasonable to assume it would have a similar popup. Yes I did check every option in Settings, and I did test most conditions. BR |
Quote:
Then your eyes could focus purely on that section of the screen, instead of having to jump back and forth from the right-side pane to the middle-document. Complete Side Note: While poking around in standalone LanguageTool's options, I also found "Underline Color of Category". You're able to color code all the different types of errors shown in Post #4. That's a really nice touch! Quote:
And LanguageTool charging? Eh? (I had no idea, did they do a recent site redesign?) And with LanguageTool Plus, it looks like it:
The standalone, LibreOffice plugin, and browser plugins are still perfectly free. Side Note: From what I could gather, LanguageTool disabled donations about a year ago + laid the groundwork for Plus. LanguageTool's donations were <€50 per month, and caused a lot more overhead in taxes + documentation which made it not worth it at all: https://forum.languagetool.org/t/upd...guagetool/1713 Quote:
You know what would help you tell how many hits there are? A List-Based method. :rofl: Everything below this is more ranting! :P Quote:
(Yes, I know you can go mess with all this garbage in the Registry beforehand. Absolutely absurd.) Quote:
I rarely ever right click on stuff. The only thing I recalled being in that menu is Cut/Paste. And I feel like you, always using the keyboard shortcuts for that. :D Quote:
I don't want damn Edge to open up PDFs! |
1 Attachment(s)
I randomly stumbled across Antidote, which is a grammarchecking tool that does split different categories/errors into lists (here's an image out of their manual):
Attachment 167350 Also looks like they allow you to correct entire "similar errors" in one shot, or easily highlight/jump to the next specific case. They also use solid/dashed/wavy red/orange lines to indicate type/severity of corrections. Looks like it was initially a French only tool, but a few years ago they expanded into English too. The price is quite steep, ~$130. Looks like they temporarily took it down for sale from their site, because November 7th they're going to be coming out with a new v10. |
Diarised ;)
|
Quote:
BR |
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:
I've been dabbling around a bit with Antidote 9. I'll probably have a more thorough review at a later date. I like how it splits issues into 3 broad categories: Language + Typography + Style. Selecting each category highlights the text in the middle with the issues + lists errors on the right. There are many false positives, but it's very easy to skip/ignore most of them in mass (because of the list form). And they did implement quite a few of the things I mentioned: Attachment 167527
There's also a "Repetition" checker: Attachment 167528
On a similar note, the "Inconsistencies" was very good and also took into account root words + hyphenation (so it would catch "honor" + "honoured" + "semi-honourably"). Because Antidote also breaks each word into parts of speech, it was able to catch some typos I otherwise never would've been able to find: A few capital words in the middle of a sentence (turns out PDF had speck of dust in the upper right of 'h' turning it into 'H'): Quote:
|
AU$150 is far more than I'm willing to pay for a non perpetual software license - especially sight unseen. It would only be for my personal use now.
BR |
@Tex2002ans Can you please check these test sentences with Antidote 9?
|
Quote:
Out of 242 sentences: Wrong (11) Spoiler:
Ambiguous (7) It gave a potential correction, but it could have gone multiple ways. [My interpretation in brackets.] Spoiler:
Completely Missed (102) Spoiler:
The rest it corrected correctly (122/242). |
@Tex2002ans Thanks for the test! :thanks:
I tested the 102 sentences that Antidote 9 missed with LanguageTool and it flagged 40 of them: (Many sentences contain multiple errors; I listed all sentences for which LanguageTool provided at least one meaningful correction.) Spoiler:
|
@Doitsu - could you post the 62 LT didn't flag.
BR |
Quote:
Spoiler:
|
FYI Word 365 picked up a couple of the its/it's and my ePubTools S&R checks picked up two of my common typos - ash/has and exit/exist.
But they don't meet the criteria of presenting a list of errors by type. BR |
Quote:
Out of 242 sentences: Correct 1 but Wrong 1 (1) Code:
And its (it's) cool to fake romances.Code:
And it's cool (cools) to fake romances.Spoiler:
Ambiguous (1) Spoiler:
Completely Missed (127) Spoiler:
The rest it correctly corrected (88/242). |
Just saw this article linked over on The Digital Reader:
Grammarly vs. Hairston which tests Grammarly vs. the difficult sentences in this PDF: "Not All Errors Are Created Equal: Nonacademic Readers in the Professions Respond to Lapses in Usage" by Maxine Hairston Of course, the running theme throughout the article is that most Grammarly "corrections" were hidden behind the paywall. And many of its free "corrections" were not good. |
Quote:
Hitch |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Spoiler:
@Tex2002ans Can you please check the Hairston sentences with Antidote 9? * I disabled the built-in spell checker for my test. |
Quote:
My point being that her test--isn't. She didn't see most of the errata that Grammarly may have caught, because she's on the other side of the paywall, firstly, and never drilled down, secondly. I'm certainly not saying that Grammarly is a viable substitute for knowledge, or a proper edit, but it works a bit better than she's crediting. Offered FWIW. Hitch |
Quote:
Correct: (14/67) 19 (company's) 30 (fee, however,) 35 (anyone) 36 (kinds) 40 (have) 41 (It's) 42 (gone) 46 (can) 53 (is) 56 (affect) 61 (predict) 62 (were) 63 (its) 65 (doesn't) Bogus: (1/67) 17 --- It thought "french" and "german" were unknown words. Although it's strange, because other books I tested on it lets me know French/German are usually capitalized. Potential: (1/67) 50 I was last employed by (Texas Instruments) company. --- It knew "texas instruments" should've been capitalized. I could see how a strange proper noun like that could throw this sentence off. Wrong: (2/67) 21 When Mitchell moved, he (bring) his secretary with him 58 Senator (davits) (come) from (New York) --- I had no idea "davits" is even a word. Quote:
And the formatting on that article was absolutely atrocious. All the images made is absolutely impossible to follow what was what. Would be helpful if there was a nice formatted list at the end. Mind running it through paid-for Grammarly and see how it fares on the Hairston examples? |
Quote:
Hitch |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Hitch |
1 Attachment(s)
Just an Update on Word's Editor Panel. I recently stumbled on the following, of course it's possible it's been there all along.
Attachment 168973 It allows one to focus on each type of error, which makes quite a difference. But you still can't type corrections in the Editor box itself :( And most of the "Refinements" don't offer any suggestions. BR |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:59 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 3.8.5, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
MobileRead.com is a privately owned, operated and funded community.
