Adam Pearson wrote:
Alan Mead wrote:
keith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thank you for the lead on a grammar checker.
When I am putting the ideas on "paper" the ideas flow without much
concern about grammar. Then once it is on paper I sometimes done
see what I wrote but what I think I wrote.
I like the grammar checker because it catches some of the typo
where the typo is a real word.
their vs there
in vs inn
car vs care
bear vs. bare
Verb agreement is big with me
I could go on for quite a long list. W
Keith,
I didn't mean to put you on the spot... If the grammar checker were
closer to perfection then I would be a big fan. I was kind of hoping
that what you wanted was easy... 'in' from 'inn' probably would stick
out to a simple algorithm but I don't think telling 'bear' from
'bare' would be easy...
Take a look at Higgins (from the link on the OOo grammar page) for an
idea how complex this stuff is...
-Alan
I think the problem with any grammar checker is that there is no
absolutely "correct" grammar (just as there is no one single "truth").
We all write differently and who is to say what is "correct"? I always
found MS Word's opinion about grammar quite abhorrent and was thankful I
could switch it off. So beware the false confidence that
"grammar-checkers" can give you. The next thing will be an art-checker,
writing and art are both self-expression. Spelling ain't.
Adam
Any halfway decent writer will tell you grammar check is worthless.
Colin Ritter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
