|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 11:35 am
I'd like everyone's opinion on spell checkers, like the one built into MS Word and the Firefox extensions that can be downloaded. Are these a good thing because they catch spelling mistakes, or do they encourage laziness because people don't feel the need to proofread anymore?
I think they're alright, but should never be used as a substitute for proof reading. For one, they're not entirely accurate. "Ewe like two go too there house" wouldn't be flagged because all the words in the sentence are in the dictionary. When I first started using Word with its spell checker, I noticed that it lets some stuff get by, so now I do use it to run through what I write, but I also proof read.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 5:36 pm
They're ok, but they do increase laziness, and it sometimes doesn't even have the word in the spell check when it's marked wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 9:11 am
I don't like'm too much. Firstly, half the time, they are wrong. Secondly, they do encourage laziness.
A point of interest, I do alot of typing on Gaia, partly to escape the dang spell-checkers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:09 am
I think they are ok as long as learn how to spell the word. I generally use a spell checker for words that I am not sure about. However they do increase laziness, but not in me because I proof read, then spell check words I'm not sure about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 12:53 pm
That's a good idea. The one really nice thing about a spell checker like the one in Word, is you can add custom words to it. My CUSTOM.DIC file is quite fat. Lately I've found Google to be a great spell checker too. If I find a word I'm not certain of, I just plug it into the Google Bar and use either Google or Dictionary.com to check it. I find that the best since those are up-to-date with all the newest words being added to our lexicon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 7:10 pm
It isn't something that I wouldn't use all by itself. Since I am a fanfiction authoress, I have to have all of my spelling correct and with the spell check alone, I cannot properly have every single last word checked using that program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[-T h e a t r e.G e e k-]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:10 am
I am quite dependent on spell-checkers, because my spelling is actually quite horrible- I try, but I often just can't tell what the correct spelling of a particular word is. However, while they are useful, you can't rely on them completely, for the reasons that people have already mentioned- they often don't catch new words or different spellings of words (e.g. they are set in US or UK English), and I don't find them all that helpful for correcting grammar. In conclusion: spell checkers are useful, but you still have to proof read and know how to form a proper sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 11:32 am
Eh... I use spellcheckers, yes, but not terribly often. I've always been able to do well with most words, and so don't often find need for one. There are times when I do use them though, and that's only because my spelling of a word doesn't look right. I rely more on dictionaries and thesauruses, myself. Also, if you use the wrong version of a word, though it is pronounced the same way, it will not realize so. I found this out while typing up a memoir of sorts in which I used 'through' instead of 'threw'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 2:46 pm
Shinobi 1977 I'd like everyone's opinion on spell checkers, like the one built into MS Word and the Firefox extensions that can be downloaded. Are these a good thing because they catch spelling mistakes, or do they encourage laziness because people don't feel the need to proofread anymore? I think they're alright, but should never be used as a substitute for proof reading. For one, they're not entirely accurate. "Ewe like two go too there house" wouldn't be flagged because all the words in the sentence are in the dictionary. When I first started using Word with its spell checker, I noticed that it lets some stuff get by, so now I do use it to run through what I write, but I also proof read. I personally like it, especially when you have to type a huge essay. When you're done and you want to spellcheck your essay, you don't have to look over the entire essay and try to correct it yourself. All you have to do is push a button (or something) and the computer does it for you. But, I can see what you're getting at. It is annoying when those kinds of things happen (Let's go too their house)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 4:00 pm
Spellcheckers are imperfect. But so are people. I am a professional editrix, and it's hard to proofread on the screen for me; I typically have to print everything out and edit by hand in order to catch every single error.
My biggest problem with spellcheck is the frequency of false positives.
I've lost track of the number of times they tell me words are incorrectly spelled, when in fact the program is just too limited or ignorant to know what the word means, or to recognize a real word.
What they are good for is correcting my poor typing habits. For example, I nearly always type "visiting" with only two 'i's, simply because I peck rather than touch-type; there are about a half-dozen other (common, basic) odd words that I similarly and consistantly mistype, even though I know how to spell them, which spellcheckers do catch for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 6:23 am
I think that it is better to proofread your writing becuase off the screen it's not like you apply for a job and if you write a word wrong it is going to be underlined right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:18 pm
I personally think that spellcheckers are not worth crap. They encourage laziness though they are useful to detect misspells (as in typography errors). I am often told that my spelling is almost flawless and that my vocabulary is quite extended for someone whose first language is French, although my syntax sometimes is erroneous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:03 am
I think spell-checkers are useful for verifying spelling, and sometimes if you're typing out a long paragraph it's hard to catch all your typing errors.
It's annoying that the Firefox spell-checker plugin flags contractions that have apostrophes as spelling mistakes though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:30 pm
Does that mean words like "couldn't", "wouldn't" and "shouldn't" would be flagged? confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 4:48 pm
Shinobi 1977 Does that mean words like "couldn't", "wouldn't" and "shouldn't" would be flagged? confused Yes. Isn't that silly? As of the time of this post, there is no version of Spellbound that works with Firefox 1.5 either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
![[-T h e a t r e.G e e k-]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/73/c6/74be98fc13c673_flip.png?t=1225313487_6.00_00)
