Re: Fwd: Yakov! (rule still giving error)
Thanks, Yakov and Jan! Kind regards, >Marco A.G.Pinto --- On 17/08/2016 20:37, Yakov Reztsov wrote: > Another variant of rule: > > > > > > há > regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? > atrás > > Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": > no="2"/>. > Há n segundos > atrás. > > > > Среда, 17 августа 2016, 21:49 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto": > > Hello! > > I sent a private message to Yakov but maybe he didn't receive it, > so I am sending it to the mailing list: > > The rule still gives an error: > > > > > há > > > regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? > atrás > > Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": > > . > Há n segundos > atrás. > > > TESTRULES PT says: > > > What shall I do? > > Thanks! > > Kind regards from your friend, > >Marco A.G.Pinto >--- > > -- > > > -- > > Yakov Reztsov -- -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
RE: [en] Maven error when approximately 820 lines are added to grammar.xml
On 2016-08-17 14:01, Mike Unwalla wrote: > I am confused. Does 'nightly build' mean the snapshots on > https://languagetool.org/download/snapshots/?C=M;O=D? Yes. There's not really a good solution, but I've now added a parameter "-DdisableHardcodedTests" which you can add when you call Maven to skip these tests. For example, instead of "mvn test", you'd call "mvn -DdisableHardcodedTests test". This is only useful for developing rules outside of the standard set (STE etc.). If a rule in the standard set triggers this test, it should probably be made more strict, as the sentence as not supposed to have an error. Regards Daniel -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: Fwd: Yakov! (rule still giving error)
Another variant of rule: há segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? atrás Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": . Há n segundos atrás. >Среда, 17 августа 2016, 21:49 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto": > >Hello! > >I sent a private message to Yakov but maybe he didn't receive it, so I am sending it to the mailing list: > >The rule still gives an error: > > > > > há > > segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? > atrás > > Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": . > Há n segundos atrás. > > >TESTRULES PT says: > > >What shall I do? > >Thanks! > >Kind regards from your friend, > >Marco A.G.Pinto > --- > > >-- >-- >___ >Languagetool-devel mailing list >Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel -- Yakov Reztsov -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: Fwd: Yakov! (rule still giving error)
Marco,
I tested this rule with local mashine and community.languagetool.org:
há
[a-záãêéçôłę]{1,6}
segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?
atrás
Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás":
.
Há n segundos
atrás.
You may extend regexp in [a-záãêéçôłę]{1,6}
>Среда, 17 августа 2016, 21:49 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto"
>:
>
>Hello!
>
>I sent a private message to Yakov but maybe he didn't receive it,
so I am sending it to the mailing list:
>
>The rule still gives an error:
>
>
>
>
> há
>
> segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?
> atrás
>
> Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar
"atrás": .
> Há n segundos
atrás.
>
>
>TESTRULES PT says:
>
>
>What shall I do?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Kind regards from your friend,
> >Marco A.G.Pinto
> ---
>
>
>--
>--
>___
>Languagetool-devel mailing list
>Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
--
Yakov Reztsov
--
___
Languagetool-devel mailing list
Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Fwd: Yakov! (rule still giving error)
Hello! I sent a private message to Yakov but maybe he didn't receive it, so I am sending it to the mailing list: The rule still gives an error: há segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? atrás Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": . Há n segundos atrás. TESTRULES PT says: What shall I do? Thanks! Kind regards from your friend, >Marco A.G.Pinto --- -- -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
RE: English native speaker help
Here are results from the British National Corpus and the Corpus of Contemporary American English (http://corpus.byu.edu/): Search phrase COCABNC I have never been 642 136 I never have been 42 9 have never been 2672489 never have been 1019266 A rule to find ' I never have been' is useful. A rule that finds only 'never have been' is probably not useful. Regards, Mike -Original Message- From: Jan Schreiber [mailto:jan.schrei...@languagetool.org] Sent: 17 August 2016 13:04 To: languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: English native speaker help Hi list, What Athena says is exactly what I learned in school, and they were supposed to teach us British English there. So it's probably safe to add this as a rule for both variants. See also: http://www.englishteachermelanie.com/grammar-present-perfect-have-you-ever-b een-to/ -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re[2]: Help improve rule pt_PT
Try: >Среда, 17 августа 2016, 15:05 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto" >: > >Thanks, Jan, I use "1" and "3" but TESTRULES PT gives an error in: >Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3. > >Can you help? > >Thanks! > >On 17/08/2016 12:36, Jan Schreiber wrote: >>Marco, I think you could replace from your original version with the following: (Replace 0 with 1 if necessary.) Best, Jan Am 17.08.2016 um 13:25 schrieb Marco A.G.Pinto: >>>Yakov, It didn't work. I tried it in the stand-alone tool after using *TESTRULES PT*, with the sentences: *Isso aconteceu à quase 20 anos!** **Isso aconteceu à quase vinte e três anos!** **Há 10 anos atrás** **Há quarenta e dois anos atrás* Rules I changed: *** **** ** ** **há** **** **segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** **atrás** ** ** ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3.** ** Há n segundos atrás.** **** ** ** **** **** **** ** ** **** **à** **** **quase** **** **segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** ** ** ** Substituir «à» por há.** ** Conheço a Ana à quase 30 anos.** ** * Thanks! Kind regards, >Marco A.G.Pinto --- On 17/08/2016 11:35, Yakov Reztsov wrote: Hello! One of the options is add *skip="1":* há segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? atrás Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3. Há n segundos atrás. Среда, 17 августа 2016, 10:59 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto" <>: Hello! I want to improve the following rule: *** **** ** ** **há** **** **segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** **atrás** ** ** ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3.** ** Há n segundos atrás.** *** I want the token after "há" to accept up to three words. For example: "há *vinte e três* dias atrás" What changes shall I make? Thanks! Kind regards, >Marco A.G.Pinto --- -- -- Yakov Reztsov >>>-- > > >-- >-- >___ >Languagetool-devel mailing list >Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel -- Yakov Reztsov -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: Help improve rule pt_PT
I would try it like this: há segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? atrás Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás". Há n segundos atrás. In other words, replace 'atrás' with an empty string. I am not sure if this leaves an undesired space character before the period, though. Also, IIRC rule ids should not contain accented characters. I couldn't test my version though, since I don't have Java installed on this office machine. Am 17.08.2016 um 14:05 schrieb Marco A.G.Pinto: > Thanks, Jan, I use "1" and "3" but TESTRULES PT gives an error in: > Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 > \2 \3. > > Can you help? > > Thanks! > > On 17/08/2016 12:36, Jan Schreiber wrote: >> Marco, >> >> I think you could replace >> >> from your original version with the following: >> >> (Replace 0 with 1 if necessary.) >> >> Best, >> Jan >> >> Am 17.08.2016 um 13:25 schrieb Marco A.G.Pinto: >>> Yakov, >>> >>> It didn't work. >>> >>> I tried it in the stand-alone tool after using *TESTRULES PT*, with the >>> sentences: >>> *Isso aconteceu à quase 20 anos!** >>> **Isso aconteceu à quase vinte e três anos!** >>> **Há 10 anos atrás** >>> **Há quarenta e dois anos atrás* >>> >>> Rules I changed: >>> *** >>> **** >>> ** ** >>> **há** >>> **** >>> **>> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** >>> **atrás** >>> ** ** >>> ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": >>> \1 \2 \3.** >>> ** Há n segundos >>> atrás.** >>> **** >>> ** >>> ** >>> **** >>> **** >>> **** >>> ** ** >>> **** >>> **à** >>> **** >>> **quase** >>> **** >>> **>> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** >>> ** ** >>> ** Substituir «à» por há.** >>> ** Conheço a Ana à quase >>> 30 anos.** >>> ** * >>> >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Kind regards, >>>>Marco A.G.Pinto >>> --- >>> >>> >>> On 17/08/2016 11:35, Yakov Reztsov wrote: Hello! One of the options is add *skip="1":* há >>> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? atrás Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3. Há n segundos atrás. Среда, 17 августа 2016, 10:59 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto" <>: Hello! I want to improve the following rule: *** **** ** ** **há** **** **>>> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** **atrás** ** ** ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3.** ** Há n segundos atrás.** *** I want the token after "há" to accept up to three words. For example: "há *vinte e três* dias atrás" What changes shall I make? Thanks! Kind regards, >Marco A.G.Pinto --- -- -- Yakov Reztsov >>> -- >>> >>> > > > -- > > > -- > > > > ___ > Languagetool-devel mailing list > Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel > -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: Help improve rule pt_PT
Thanks, Jan, I use "1" and "3" but TESTRULES PT gives an error in: Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3. Can you help? Thanks! On 17/08/2016 12:36, Jan Schreiber wrote: > Marco, > > I think you could replace > > from your original version with the following: > > (Replace 0 with 1 if necessary.) > > Best, > Jan > > Am 17.08.2016 um 13:25 schrieb Marco A.G.Pinto: >> Yakov, >> >> It didn't work. >> >> I tried it in the stand-alone tool after using *TESTRULES PT*, with the >> sentences: >> *Isso aconteceu à quase 20 anos!** >> **Isso aconteceu à quase vinte e três anos!** >> **Há 10 anos atrás** >> **Há quarenta e dois anos atrás* >> >> Rules I changed: >> *** >> **** >> ** ** >> **há** >> **** >> **> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** >> **atrás** >> ** ** >> ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": >> \1 \2 \3.** >> ** Há n segundos >> atrás.** >> **** >> ** >> ** >> **** >> **** >> **** >> ** ** >> **** >> **à** >> **** >> **quase** >> **** >> **> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** >> ** ** >> ** Substituir «à» por há.** >> ** Conheço a Ana à quase >> 30 anos.** >> ** * >> >> >> Thanks! >> >> Kind regards, >>>Marco A.G.Pinto >> --- >> >> >> On 17/08/2016 11:35, Yakov Reztsov wrote: >>> Hello! >>> One of the options is add *skip="1":* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> há >>> >>> >> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? >>> atrás >>> >>> Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": >>> \1 \2 \3. >>> Há n segundos >>> atrás. >>> >>> >>> Среда, 17 августа 2016, 10:59 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto" <>: >>> >>> Hello! >>> >>> I want to improve the following rule: >>> >>> *** >>> **** >>> ** ** >>> **há** >>> **** >>> **>> >>> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** >>> **atrás** >>> ** ** >>> ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": >>> \1 \2 \3.** >>> ** Há n segundos >>> atrás.** >>> *** >>> >>> >>> I want the token after "há" to accept up to three words. >>> >>> For example: >>> "há *vinte e três* dias atrás" >>> >>> What changes shall I make? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >Marco A.G.Pinto >>>--- >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Yakov Reztsov >> -- >> >> -- -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: English native speaker help
Hi list, What Athena says is exactly what I learned in school, and they were supposed to teach us British English there. So it's probably safe to add this as a rule for both variants. See also: http://www.englishteachermelanie.com/grammar-present-perfect-have-you-ever-been-to/ Best, Jan Am 17.08.2016 um 10:10 schrieb Athena Santora: > Hi there > > In American English the sentence is awkward. It's not "wrong" to say "I > never have been" but a native speaker wouldn't commonly phrase it that way. > > The other "error" : "been IN" isn't technically an error either but a > native speaker wouldn't commonly phrase it this way either (now that I > live in Spain, i find its super common for non Native speakers when they > translate). > > A native speaker would say ..."been TO London." So > > You may say > I've never been to London > Or... > I have never been to London > > Hope this helps.! -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
RE: [en] Maven error when approximately 820 lines are added to grammar.xml
Hi Daniel, I am confused. Does 'nightly build' mean the snapshots on https://languagetool.org/download/snapshots/?C=M;O=D? If no, what is the nightly build? My problem is that testrules gives no errors, but when I put the rule into my languagetool clone, which I always has the latest LT changes, Maven gives an error message. The message is indeed Did not expect an error in test sentence: '...', but got: ... But the message does not help me to find the cause of the problem. Here is the rule for 'of': chief|head of department|staff|unit ofdispose Many of our authors use 'of' as an all-purpose preposition in the place of 'from', 'by', 'in', 'on', 'at' etc., Moreover, phrases with 'of' are often used instead of possessive '-s' constructions or noun-noun compounds. This can lead to ambiguity even where it is not grammatically wrong; for example, in the phrase 'the system of control of the Commission', is the Commission being controlled (audited?) or is it doing the controlling? http://euenglish.webs.com/ EU English: of Previous reports of the Court… Previous reports by the Court… Communication of the Commission… Communication from the Commission… EC reports of the projects… EC reports on the projects… Dispose of the waste. When you are disposing of the waste, wear protective clothing. Each head of department must… All chiefs of units must… This is the Maven message: --- T E S T S --- Running org.languagetool.JLanguageToolTest Tests run: 9, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 2, Time elapsed: 2.44 sec <<< FAILURE! - in org.languagetool.JLanguageToo lTest testEnglish(org.languagetool.JLanguageToolTest) Time elapsed: 1.56 sec <<< FAILURE! java.lang.AssertionError: Did not expect an error in test sentence: 'Dog mushing is more of a sport than a true means of transportation.', but got: [EUPUB_OF:20-22:Many of our authors use 'of' as an all-purpose preposition in the place of ' from', 'by', 'in', 'on', 'at' etc., Moreover, phrases with 'of' are often used instead of possessive '-s' construct ions or noun-noun compounds. This can lead to ambiguity even where it is not grammatically wrong; for example, in the ph rase 'the system of control of the Commission', is the Commission being controlled (audited?) or is it doing the control ling?, EUPUB_OF:49-51:Many of our authors use 'of' as an all-purpose preposition in the place of 'from', 'by', 'in', 'on', 'at' etc., Moreover, phrases with 'of' are often used instead of possessive '-s' constructions or noun-noun comp ounds. This can lead to ambiguity even where it is not grammatically wrong; for example, in the phrase 'the system of co ntrol of the Commission', is the Commission being controlled (audited?) or is it doing the controlling?] expected:<0> bu t was:<2> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88) at org.junit.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:834) at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:645) at org.languagetool.JLanguageToolTest.assertNoError(JLanguageToolTest.java:112) at org.languagetool.JLanguageToolTest.testEnglish(JLanguageToolTest.java:86) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62 ) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl .java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod. java:50) at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.j ava:12) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.ja va:47) at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.jav a:17) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:325) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.jav a:78) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.jav a:57) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:290) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:71) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:288) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:58) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:268) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:363) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java: 367) at
Re: Help improve rule pt_PT
Marco, I think you could replace from your original version with the following: (Replace 0 with 1 if necessary.) Best, Jan Am 17.08.2016 um 13:25 schrieb Marco A.G.Pinto: > Yakov, > > It didn't work. > > I tried it in the stand-alone tool after using *TESTRULES PT*, with the > sentences: > *Isso aconteceu à quase 20 anos!** > **Isso aconteceu à quase vinte e três anos!** > **Há 10 anos atrás** > **Há quarenta e dois anos atrás* > > Rules I changed: > *** > **** > ** ** > **há** > **** > ** regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** > **atrás** > ** ** > ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": > \1 \2 \3.** > ** Há n segundos > atrás.** > **** > ** > ** > **** > **** > **** > ** ** > **** > **à** > **** > **quase** > **** > ** regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** > ** ** > ** Substituir «à» por há.** > ** Conheço a Ana à quase > 30 anos.** > ** * > > > Thanks! > > Kind regards, >>Marco A.G.Pinto > --- > > > On 17/08/2016 11:35, Yakov Reztsov wrote: >> Hello! >> One of the options is add *skip="1":* >> >> >> >> >> há >> >> > regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? >> atrás >> >> Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": >> \1 \2 \3. >> Há n segundos >> atrás. >> >> >> Среда, 17 августа 2016, 10:59 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto" <>: >> >> Hello! >> >> I want to improve the following rule: >> >> *** >> **** >> ** ** >> **há** >> **** >> **> >> regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** >> **atrás** >> ** ** >> ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": >> \1 \2 \3.** >> ** Há n segundos >> atrás.** >> *** >> >> >> I want the token after "há" to accept up to three words. >> >> For example: >> "há *vinte e três* dias atrás" >> >> What changes shall I make? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Kind regards, >> >Marco A.G.Pinto >>--- >> >> -- >> >> >> -- >> >> Yakov Reztsov > > -- > > > -- > > > > ___ > Languagetool-devel mailing list > Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel > -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: Help improve rule pt_PT
Yakov, It didn't work. I tried it in the stand-alone tool after using *TESTRULES PT*, with the sentences: *Isso aconteceu à quase 20 anos!** **Isso aconteceu à quase vinte e três anos!** **Há 10 anos atrás** **Há quarenta e dois anos atrás* Rules I changed: *** **** ** ** **há** **** **segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** **atrás** ** ** ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3.** ** Há n segundos atrás.** **** ** ** **** **** **** ** ** **** **à** **** **quase** **** **segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** ** ** ** Substituir «à» por há.** ** Conheço a Ana à quase 30 anos.** ** * Thanks! Kind regards, >Marco A.G.Pinto --- On 17/08/2016 11:35, Yakov Reztsov wrote: > Hello! > One of the options is add *skip="1":* > > > > > há > > regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? > atrás > > Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": > \1 \2 \3. > Há n segundos > atrás. > > > Среда, 17 августа 2016, 10:59 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto" <>: > > Hello! > > I want to improve the following rule: > > *** > **** > ** ** > **há** > **** > ** > regexp="yes">segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** > **atrás** > ** ** > ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": > \1 \2 \3.** > ** Há n segundos > atrás.** > *** > > > I want the token after "há" to accept up to three words. > > For example: > "há *vinte e três* dias atrás" > > What changes shall I make? > > Thanks! > > Kind regards, > >Marco A.G.Pinto >--- > > -- > > > -- > > Yakov Reztsov -- -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: Help improve rule pt_PT
Hello! One of the options is add skip="1": há segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? atrás Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3. Há n segundos atrás. >Среда, 17 августа 2016, 10:59 +03:00 от "Marco A.G.Pinto" <>: > >Hello! > >I want to improve the following rule: > > > > > há > > segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos? > atrás > > Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3. > Há n segundos atrás. > > > >I want the token after "há" to accept up to three words. > >For example: >"há vinte e três dias atrás" > >What changes shall I make? > >Thanks! > >Kind regards, > >Marco A.G.Pinto > --- > > > >-- >-- >___ >Languagetool-devel mailing list >Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel -- Yakov Reztsov -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
RE: Possible English rule
Yes, the rule would be useful. Aside. The rule I_MOVING finds some related problems: Finds: I as walking. Finds: I as eating. Does not find: He as smiling. Does not find: I as calling. The disambiguator log shows that for the 2 sentences that I_MOVING does not find, the disambiguator uses rule AS_NOT_ADVERB[1], which correctly removes the reading RB from 'as'. I would like to refine the rule AS_NOT_ADVERB to remove the reading RB from 'as' in the first 2 sentences. (But, I don't have the time to look at the problem now.) Regards, Mike Unwalla Contact: www.techscribe.co.uk/techw/contact.htm -Original Message- From: Marco A.G.Pinto [mailto:marcoagpi...@mail.telepac.pt] Sent: 17 August 2016 00:45 To: Mailing List - LanguageTool Subject: Possible English rule Hello! I typed this on IRC hours ago: [22:13] just to tell you: before leaving to bed I found out an error in my course project... I as calling a function using -F instead of +F We could add a rule: I + AS + VERBGERUND -> I + WAS + VERBGERUND Is it a good rule? Thanks! Kind regards, >Marco A.G.Pinto --- -- -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: English native speaker help
Hi there In American English the sentence is awkward. It's not "wrong" to say "I never have been" but a native speaker wouldn't commonly phrase it that way. The other "error" : "been IN" isn't technically an error either but a native speaker wouldn't commonly phrase it this way either (now that I live in Spain, i find its super common for non Native speakers when they translate). A native speaker would say ..."been TO London." So You may say I've never been to London Or... I have never been to London Hope this helps.! El El mié, 17 ago 2016 a las 9:40, Daniel Naber < daniel.na...@languagetool.org> escribió: > Hi English native speakers, > > a user complained about two errors not found in: "I never have been in > London." > > Is it actually wrong to say "I never have been" vs. "I have never been"? > What's the other error. > > Regards > Daniel > > > > -- > ___ > Languagetool-devel mailing list > Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel > -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: English native speaker help
Hi Daniel, Not a native speaker, but it sounds weird for me. I think I heard/read * I have never been* Never have I been Few variations: * I have never been better* Never have I been better* Never been better* Have never been better But "I never have been better" would still sound weird for me. Not a native speaker, so just my 0.02 c Bruno From: Daniel Naber To: LanguageTool Developer List Sent: Wednesday, 17 August 2016 7:41 PM Subject: English native speaker help Hi English native speakers, a user complained about two errors not found in: "I never have been in London." Is it actually wrong to say "I never have been" vs. "I have never been"? What's the other error. Regards Daniel -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Help improve rule pt_PT
Hello! I want to improve the following rule: *** **** ** ** **há** **** **segundos?|minutos?|horas?|dias?|semanas?|mês|meses|anos?** **atrás** ** ** ** Com o verbo haver não é necessário usar "atrás": \1 \2 \3.** ** Há n segundos atrás.** *** I want the token after "há" to accept up to three words. For example: "há *vinte e três* dias atrás" What changes shall I make? Thanks! Kind regards, >Marco A.G.Pinto --- -- -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
English native speaker help
Hi English native speakers, a user complained about two errors not found in: "I never have been in London." Is it actually wrong to say "I never have been" vs. "I have never been"? What's the other error. Regards Daniel -- ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
