BS: Down with spell-checkers

28 Jun 01 - 08:59 PM (#494392)
Subject: Down with spell-checkers
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)

In the thread about hats and manners, one of the contributors used the word disrespectful. Some nitwit called him down because his spell-checker didn't recognize the word as valid. Webster's Collegiate, The Oxford Dictionary and others worthy of the name all recognize the word. Spell-checkers are for morons. Anyone who respects the English language (or whatever language they speak) should consult a good dictionary if he/she is uncertain about a word. Our language has deteriorated as a result of the ignoramuses who program spell-checkers into software. (Or should I start another thread titled down with Bill Gates and his motley crew?)

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:06 PM (#494394)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Murray MacLeod

One ignoramus, two ignoramuses? Two ignorami? Wish I had a spell-checker .......

Murray

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:08 PM (#494395)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Jeri

Maybe there's some sort of official book telling folks how to recognise sarcasm. Of course, I could be thinking of the wrong thread.

You should also be aware you can add words to the spell checker. I believe you just click on the "add" button.

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:20 PM (#494402)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: CarolC

I think, if I read the post in question correctly, the 'nitwit' who mentioned the thing about the spellchecker was poking a little fun at himself. ...Or at least his own spellchecker.

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:21 PM (#494405)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Joe Offer

...but adding words to a Bill Gates spellchecker might be disrespectful.

Spellcheckers don't help me much with spelling, but they sure help with typographical errors.
-Joe Offer-

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:22 PM (#494406)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Bill D

yup....you can tell YOUR spell-checker to recognize 'importated' if you so desire,

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:25 PM (#494408)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: CarolC

Bill D, I think that's supposed to be spelled 'importatoed'.

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:31 PM (#494411)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: hesperis

I think it's correctly spelled "importahtoed", Carol. Oh, wait, that was just the "pronuncitation" of it...

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:49 PM (#494420)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)

I guess I would really flame all you all if I said that people with no respect for their language have no respect for themselves.

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:54 PM (#494422)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: CarolC

Dicho, I think the good people on this thread are trying as politely as possible to let you know that you have just stepped into a social cow-pie. Time to go clean off your shoes.

---

28 Jun 01 - 09:59 PM (#494425)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: hesperis

Dicho - "all you all"? Yeah, probably... lol

---

28 Jun 01 - 11:11 PM (#494457)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Jim Dixon

I LOVE having a spell-checker. It makes my job easier. I even love the fact that it questions my grammar. I don't always trust it, but then there is nothing that I always trust. Not even dictionaries.

---

28 Jun 01 - 11:23 PM (#494461)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Amos

Literal-mindedness is the last retreat of the literal-minded, as a rule.

Oh....

By the way -- speaking of respect for language -- I have seen too many people on this site (NOT "sight") dropping the hyphen out of anal-retentive. Please take note. ANAL-RETENTIVE SHOULD ALWAYS BE HYPHENATED. We must not abuse our common ground, less we end up finding each other incomprehensible.... .... .... ....EH?

A

---

29 Jun 01 - 01:57 AM (#494535)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Liz the Squeak

Could someone elucidate perchance?

Spellcheckers are mostly a toy as far as I'm concerned... learn a good standard of English and you shouldn't need it, particularly as even the English spellchecker comes up with American spellings, rejecting perfectly valid and original spellings. For example, it won't accept bollocks, but will take bollix.

The tool that is corrupting most people's English now is the text message system on mobile phones where you are charged per character, thus encouraging numbers for words, single letters for words (How R U 2day) and no punctuation, which infuriates me. Maybe that's why my bill was through the roof!!

LTS

---

29 Jun 01 - 05:15 AM (#494568)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Crazy Eddie

Liz, What strike me is how text messeges (the latest technology) so resembe Telegrams (Obselete) in this respect.
However, it also causes people to be somewhat creative. Best I've heard of was a message a friend received:
LIME(TRAF(STUCK)FIC)RICK

After some thought it was deciphered as "stuck in traffic in Limerick"!

---

29 Jun 01 - 06:07 AM (#494595)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: pavane

We had one recently where the guy's name Perret was replaced by the spell checker and mailed to the whole company as pervert! Lucky he had a sense of humour (or humor)

---

29 Jun 01 - 08:43 AM (#494683)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Liz the Squeak

Try putting the words of Gaudete through one. I particularly liked Bandicoot domino for benedicat domine.

Funny how they take obscenities but not placenames....

LTS

---

29 Jun 01 - 09:28 AM (#494714)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: GUEST,fretless (at work)

Eye halve a spelling chequer;/It came with my pea sea./It plainly marques four my revue;/Miss steaks eye kin knot sea./Eye strike a key and type a word;/And weight four it two say./Weather eye am wrong oar write,/It shows me strait a weigh./As soon as a mist ache is maid,/It nose bee fore two long./And eye can put the error rite,/Its rare lea ever wrong./Eye have run this poem threw it;/I am shore your pleased two no./Its letter perfect awl the weigh;/My chequer tolled me sew.

Sauce Unknown

---

29 Jun 01 - 09:29 AM (#494716)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Jeri

I've seen a poem (maybe Bill D posted it?) in which all of the words are spelled correctly, but many are the wrong homonyms (did I spell "homonyms" write?). I use the English spelling on words such as "realise" because it's easier to hit the "s" key than the "z" - I always manage to type "x" instead.

I can spell, but I think the spell checkers come in handy for people who can't. They shouldn't be viewed as the ultimate authority though. They're just a quick, easy way to help improve writing. They're not perfect, but they're better than nothing.

When I type, I try to be as correct as possible. When I read, I read for understanding. If a person's spelling errors don't get in the way of that, I ignore them. Fore exampel, I can reed this sentense with no porbelm.

While spelling errors may offend the sensibilities of some, the thought that people are made to fear sharing ideas because they can't spell worth a damn offends me a lot more.

In my job, I score kids' essay questions. The ideas seem to flow freely from dyslexic (and other spelling impaired kids) until a certain age. After that, they quit trying. I don't know whether they get embarrassed about spelling or what happens, but a kid who would once write three paragraphs of wonderful, badly spelled ideas, writes one or two badly spelled sentences. My guess is they've met up with a teacher or other kids who perhaps called them ignoramuses. When expressing your pet peeve doesn't serve to educate and only hurts people, it's perhaps time to take a step back and see if you really need to voice those thoughts.

Anyone who respects language will do their best to make sure others can use it to the best of their ability, and not call them names for making mistakes. Anyone who respects people will care about what they have to say, not how they say it.

---

29 Jun 01 - 10:37 AM (#494773)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: GUEST

Ugh , I can't stand the Grammar police. Narrow minded pompous people with nothing better to do than try to smugly appear smarter than everyone else. Are Misspellings or grammatical errors so grievious? Y'all like to pretend comprehension is the issue, you couldn't make the correction if you failed to comprehend the intent.Flamers is what you is.

---

29 Jun 01 - 10:45 AM (#494781)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Jeri

Fretless, that was pretty good. You posted the poem while I was typing!

---

29 Jun 01 - 11:10 AM (#494811)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Wolfgang

If you have ever wasted 30 minutes searching for a thread you knew it was there only to realise that Rhondda was spelt Rhnda in that thread you know why correct spelling can make a difference.

Wolfgang

---

29 Jun 01 - 05:10 PM (#495018)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River

Okay, like, I know you are gonna find this perty hard to beleeve,,,but I have daze when I dont spelle that good. Sereiusly. I dont let it get to me none. I figger whats the big deal! I am not trying to be some kind of flippin perfessor here eh? As long as I can still hoyst a beer and sing 99 bottles without screwing up too bad then why should I get all bent outa shape because I didn't dot the i in idiot....or wahtever.

Do what I do. When someone tells you that you can't speel that good say "Bite me!" That yewshuwally shuts em up and they go away.

BDiBR

---

29 Jun 01 - 05:30 PM (#495030)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: CarolC

I'm not such a great speller. People have been kind enough to not point this out (so far), but where I've really been having trouble since I joined the Mudcat is with keeping the English/Canadian spellings separate from the American spellings. I seem to be spelling both ways now, and I often don't know which is which.

The other problem I'm having is that when I see the words on the screen, a lot of the time they just don't look right. Even when they are. Don't know what that's all about.

---

29 Jun 01 - 06:19 PM (#495062)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Geoff the Duck

The wonderful thing about a good dictionary is that it not only lets you know how to spell words, it also - and here is a secret which some of you might not know - tells you what the words mean as well.
What is more fun is to find an OLD dictionary. If old enough ( and that need not be that far away temporally [is that a real word, or did I invent it? I must look it up some time!] ) you can find some wonderful words, and obsolete definitions for current words which have been hijacked.
Open a page at random and take a word. If you do not understand the definition, use a dictionary to look up the meaning of the words in the definition - you may be surprised! You can go on for hours if you start with the wrong word!
When I used to edit a beer magazine I used a spell checker regularly. It used to throw out dozens of correctly spelt words, so I spent more time checking in a dictionary that my spellings were correct - 99% of them were! Where it did come in handy was checking beer and brewery names, also local place names. I entered them as a custom dictionary and used it to check for typographic errors (or should that be typing mistakes?) before printing out the pages.
Conclusion - spel cheekers hav a plaice, but do not trust them or buy a used car from them.
Quaque!
Gerroff the Duck!!!!!

---

29 Jun 01 - 06:51 PM (#495075)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Jon Freeman

Wolfgang, I do take your point re: Rhondda. This is an area though I THINK JoeClones may be willing to help with... Just my thoughts but if the word is what I will term a "Key Word", e.g. Rhondda could be pointing to Cwm Rhondda, or maybe a Max Boyce song I enjoy; Rhondda Grey... there may be a case for one of us correcting it... I would be interested in Joe or other Clones thoughts on this.

Overall though, I am pretty much against correcting spelling either as a Joe Clone or as a member of this forum (and one with awful spelling). Unless done in such a way as the "guilty" poster can get a laugh out of the error, I think "corrections"/ comments are best avoided. I hate "smart ass" type corrections in threads...

Just live and let live and as long as the meaning is clear, there is no problem.

Jon

---

29 Jun 01 - 07:01 PM (#495084)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Chicken Charlie

I have no problem with spell CHECKERS. Word Perfect and I have gotten along famously for years, with the exception of a few times when I want to used mixed case abbrevs. like "VAdm" for Vice Admiral, and it fights me.

What I do resent most totally are spell CHANGERS that automatically change my stuff, implying that the 19 year old nerd who makes four times my salary because he can right a program knows what I meant to say better than I do. "Word" totally hacks me off in that respect.

It is BECAUSE I respect the nuances of English that I resent being controlled to that expect. Dicho, I think it's dangerous to make blanket statements like "All people who don't xxxx don't respect yyyy," before asking about their individual reasons.

A parallel occurs to me which has nought to do with spelling but which is right on with this whole thread. I went to a patriotic celebration at which a local had, at his own expense, provided replicas of about 50 American flags from different eras, from Betsy Ross on down, and they were on separate flagstaffs in front of the building. The local Legion Auxiliary battleaxe was upset because the current 50-star "American flag" (all others being chopped liver, I guess) was not on the correct end of the line and, "Well, that just shows such disrespect for the American flag ...." (It does?? Oh, OK--Take 'em all down then, guys.) Such stupid shyte still stuns me; I don't know why. There's a parallel here somewhere. Go figure.

CC

---

29 Jun 01 - 07:42 PM (#495098)
Subject: RE: BS: Down with spell-checkers
From: Bill D

all the spell checkers I use ASK me if I want to spell the word the way I did, and offer to change it, and sometimes I add a form I don't want it to ask about again...(nite)..because I intend to use that at times.

If you REALLY wish to explore common usage and try several versions of a word..(especially an unusual word), simple use a major search engine. It works like a Delphic survey, and reports on hundreds, thousands, or millions of WWW uses of the word or phrase. You can usually discern the 'best' spelling, but you can also tell if alternate spellings are common, rare or non-existant. (Rhondda got 20928 hits, 'Rhnda' got 8...but Rhonda got 319392!! Which tells me that 'Rhondda' is a serious word with a special use....and a brief look at the first few dozen 'Rhonda's, make it plain than this form is almost always a woman's name.

Of course, all this assumes you care...and some indicate that it is very much like categorizing music to them....they'd just rather not bother.

Now, as to English vs. American spellings, you can choose your spell checker to reflect your preferences...(I prefer American, because English 'usually' has MORE letters (color-colour), and I am lazy. *grin*

---