PDA

View Full Version : Spell checker



max
-16th April 2003, 12:23
Please could we have a spell checker and make it compulsory?

The poor spelling makes most posts virtually unreadable.
:mad:

kingkenny
-16th April 2003, 14:05
Its something I have looked in to there used to be free program that you could add to V- bulletin but it closed down if anyone hears anything let us know.
:transport

Neo
-17th April 2003, 12:12
I could possibly come up with a spell checker, for instance making an exec() call to ispell or something, depending on what your hosting supports, if u want. Might take some time as I'm tied up with exams for the next month or two tho

kingkenny
-17th April 2003, 12:33
That would be really usefull. You could also offer it to lots of v-bulletin forums like www.soccerpages.com . I also know alot of people looking for something like a spell cheecker on the v-bulletin forum.
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/index.php

What do you study?

pinkelephant
-17th April 2003, 17:09
This was written in Word, spell checked (or is that spell-checkered, James?) and then pasted across. Problem solved?:party:

Mischa
-17th April 2003, 17:12
Yeh, and you should always copy & paste before posting, in case your browser crashes.

wingnutLP
-18th April 2003, 11:10
Or learn to spell perhaps?

Hudson
-18th April 2003, 15:15
That's far two mutch hard wrok i'd have too put mi beer down
:drink:

pinkelephant
-21st April 2003, 13:09
Of coarse, their will all ways be sum things a spell chequer wont pick up. :upset:

Boo Boo
-21st April 2003, 13:15
And spell checkers can always help introduce errors...

...fortunately my Dad did pick up the errors in my A-level Geography essay on "carnivorous trees" - not sure that would have been easy to live down during 6th form....

Boo
(not the world's greatest speller...)

Aoife
-21st April 2003, 20:15
Spell checker would be handy, but would be able to add words to it's vocab? I'm not cetain most spell chekcs would recognise a multitude of fencing terms (not to mention, my name! :) )

Gav
-11th July 2003, 10:40
Barry Paul has made another request for a Spell Checker. I've done a little (admittedly not exhaustive) research into the topic and found that there are options for adding a spell checker to forums. However theses are hacks and possible rewuire extra software to be installed wherever the this board is hosted.

I have an alternative that I found on the Vbulletin forum, an IE add-in called IE spell. To get it go here (http://www.iespell.com/) .

I don't use IE myself so it's of no use to me and I haven't tested it so I can't comment on it's reliability or what it may do your system. It seems like a good idea from the website.

clockity
-11th July 2003, 11:17
Originally posted by Gav
I have an alternative that I found on the Vbulletin forum, an IE add-in called IE spell. To get it go here (http://www.iespell.com/) .

I shall have a look at it, sounds like a good idea, plus freeware for personal use is good too.

Have the nagging feeling that it will be "Americanized English" spellings though... :eek: It's a start though, and sounds useful. Maybe it has a customizable dictionary! ;)

Adam the Flatulent
-20th June 2006, 14:46
Or learn to spell perhaps?

I've been trying to learn for 18 years :upset:

add

Adam the Flatulent
-20th June 2006, 14:51
But yeah I think a spell checker would be a great idea (I know I need it most)

add

pinkelephant
-20th June 2006, 16:24
You can always type in Word, spell check, and then paste it across.

Gav
-20th June 2006, 17:27
Beware American spellings!

nessyfencer
-20th June 2006, 18:18
Download the google toolbar. Spell chacking any form which you are filling in is only one of it's features.

nessyfencer
-20th June 2006, 20:00
Download the google toolbar. Spell chacking any form which you are filling in is only one of it's features.

And you can see that I used it for that post :rolleyes:

dferg
-23rd June 2006, 10:15
Is it not a universal law that any thread in which you comment on spelling - especially if you are being critical or pedantic - will contain at least one spelling arror or typo?

nessyfencer
-23rd June 2006, 10:20
Is it not a universal law that any thread in which you comment on spelling - especially if you are being critical or pedantic - will contain at least one spelling arror or typo?

hwhw. .

dferg
-23rd June 2006, 10:28
do you know, the worst thing is I considered inserting a deliberate error (tpyo instead of typo) but decided that would be too obvious. But the Universal Law got me anyway. Perhaps we should name the law? What can we call it?

Gav
-23rd June 2006, 10:30
Is it not a universal law that any thread in which you comment on spelling - especially if you are being critical or pedantic - will contain at least one spelling arror or typo?


That is not the point. People who complain about the spelling/grammar nazis often fail to realise that it's effort that counts. If you make the effort then invariably your writing is legible. No one is going to be put up for a major literary prize basd on a fencing forum entry, however I will be happier if people made more of an effort. This goes doubly for the teens out there. It seems de rigeur for teens (please excuse the vast generalisation) to not bother setting themselves out meaningfully. How the hell can you expect help if you cannot be bothered to communicate [clearly] what is you want, or need? Not only that but it degrades a forum's usefulness for others.

One forum I [only occasional] frequent rewards people who have made a well written comment with a prize every month. If you think the membership here is bad for jumping on you, if you type up something stupid therr you should see how that forum's members treat you.

dferg
-23rd June 2006, 10:43
Sorry Gav, I wasn't saying people shouldn't make an effort, I wholheartedly agree (even if I sometimes fall short). I was merely following on from Nessy's post where he'd spotted himself making an error and making a light hearted ironic aside. Sorry if it came across as anything else.

I used to post on a newsgroup where pedantry was considered high art, this place is pretty tame by comparison!

Yes, I think people should make an effort, and even if they are still not perfect, their posts will be much better received. At least one poster is now proving that IMO.

I do think it perhaps a little harsh that so many people see to have given negative rep for poor spelling, but only because a new arrival to the forum can't tell if someone has a rep indicator in the red because when they first arrived they were a bit lazy or had some problems with typing/spelling, or if the person in question garnered negative rep for being a trolling, hate filled, polemic spouting Nazi (or something). (NOTE: I am not even suggesting we have any such persons here and assume that if we did, Gav would soon deal with them!)

Aramis
-23rd June 2006, 12:07
Perhaps writing with words rather than text-speak might help understanding some of these posts too...

Red
-24th June 2006, 00:37
I seem to be the only person I know who avoids textspeak like the plague, even in the bane of literacy that is the text message.... That said most of the work I do on a computer demands a high level of accuracy - compilers just don't like poorly written code, and my lecturers don't appreciate poor SPG in work or emails either...

nessyfencer
-24th June 2006, 11:18
I seem to be the only person I know who avoids textspeak like the plague, even in the bane of literacy that is the text message.... That said most of the work I do on a computer demands a high level of accuracy - compilers just don't like poorly written code, and my lecturers don't appreciate poor SPG in work or emails either...

"Txtspk" is OK in a text message. In fact you could say that it quite clever. Very limited space available is used to the best possible. There is absolutely no need for it on the net though. You have a full keyboard in front of you and as much space to type what you want.

dferg
-24th June 2006, 11:29
"Txtspk" is OK in a text message. In fact you could say that it quite clever. Very limited space available is used to the best possible.
What really hacks my code though is when people who you KNOW have mobiles with predictive text and can splice messages together still use txtspk - for short messages too - even though it probably takes them longer to type it out!

its nt bg nd its nt clvr, its jst irit8ing!

Red
-24th June 2006, 12:30
If I've accidentally run into two messages then I'll try to cut it down slightly by deleting spaces after full stops and commas, then I'll grudgingly use very limited text speak.
Has anyone actually started the Campaign for Real English?

Aramis
-26th June 2006, 15:38
If I've accidentally run into two messages then I'll try to cut it down slightly by deleting spaces after full stops and commas, then I'll grudgingly use very limited text speak.
Exactly! It's not hard!

Adam the Flatulent
-26th June 2006, 16:10
Just out of curiosity, can I ask the age of people who don't like text speak?? I know this may be rude so if you don't agree with it, then don't reply. But I think that people who never grew up with mobiles are now trying to either catch up with the youth of today or bloke them out/use them as little as they can. Whereas people who have grown up with mobiles find it quite easy (second nature even) to just type in text speak. I got my first mobile when I was in my first year of secondry school, I was 11, so I have had a mobile in my pocket for 7 years, mobiles were, relatively, young then and so people were still working out how to make a text as short as posible. I am still finding new ways of typing words and stil asking people what sumthing says, if someone writes something in text speak then basically it is pronounced how it sounds.

I have predictive text on my mobile but it is easy to use text speak as the mobile either comes with a normal and a text dictionary, and they learnt words.

cheers

add

gbm
-26th June 2006, 16:25
I'm 20 and a Grammar Nazi. :whistle: I'd like to think (though I may be horribly mistaken) that most of my post are correct in terms of spelling and grammar; that way at least some of my posts make sense!
And I HATED English at school.

randomsabreur
-26th June 2006, 16:51
I generally dislike text speak, but use it with people I know know it (i.e. my boyfriend) where I've run over a text message (or 2) by not very much. Mostly "U" for "you" and derivatives. He uses loads of text speak, but I know that his phone has a number of temperamental keys (so it's forgiveable to want to avoid them).

Quite a clever one I had introduced to me was s%n for soon as in cu s%n! Very convenient for getting that last letter in, and actually looks like what it's supposed to.

On this kind of forum, there is no point, you do not need to save space (generous character limit!) and it is as quick to type in proper English. Also good to practice proper English and spelling, otherwise you'll find it harder to be correct when it really matters (i.e. CV or similar)

pinkelephant
-26th June 2006, 17:54
Also good to practice proper English and spelling, otherwise you'll find it harder to be correct when it really matters (i.e. CV or similar)

Practise as a verb has an s; with a noun it is c (unless you are American, when it is c for both).:nanananan

Aramis
-26th June 2006, 17:59
26. I text all the time (and doesn't my mobile bill know about it...). I've had a mobile since I was 16 (before we could text across networks) and I'm a Grammar Nazi (this is getting like a Grammar Nazi's AA meeting!). I DON'T use text speak unless all the characters for the one text are used up and I physically can't reduce it any further.

Oh, yeah, well spotted PE...!

Red
-26th June 2006, 18:59
I'm twenty and I'm a Grammar Nazi.
I've had a mobile for about six years, and I seem to use more than my three hundred message allowance (so my bills insist on telling me....). I never liked english at school as I found the vast majority of the content to be rather tedious and irrelevent.

Baldric
-26th June 2006, 19:47
I am 43, and am not a grammar nazi.

I had a mobile phone back in the days when it weighed more than todays laptops!

I take a simple approach to text speak. If someone uses a means of communication that is easier for them to create, but harder for me to interpret, then I assume that they don't value their communication with me very highly - so why should I value it any more?

Basic rule #1 of communication is that you use a medium that your audience is comfortable with. If you want to reach only teenagers, then text speak is probably fine, just as I would try to use French if I wanted to reach French people.

But if you want old fogeys like me to read what you are writing, then write it in plain English.

Is tht clr enuff 4 u?

:nanananan :nanananan :nanananan

PS - smilies are probably the best enhancement to written communication since the keyboard!

dferg
-26th June 2006, 19:49
I'm 33, and had my first mobile about 8 years ago. I used txtspk back in the bad old days when you had to keep messages short, and predictive text was in it's infancy (ie - crap). And in case you think I'm 2old2 txt, I remember when the 'internet' was largely text based and bandwidth so restricted that you had to use abbreviations and short hand, that is where txtspk was born for me. there really is nothing new under the sun!

So I have no objection to txtspk per se, I even still use it sometimes if doing so will make the difference between one text and two. I just think it is unneccesary when using a medium that doesn't limit your characters.

I'm not a grammar nazi, I think I may be too old :whistle: . I also like English at school, so I may be too sad too!:eek:

Oh, and as for trying to catch up with the youth of today? Nah mate, we were there first!:nanananan But then we peobably annoyed our elders by thinking we invented rock/punk/rebellion delete as appropriate

Adam the Flatulent
-27th June 2006, 08:36
Ok. Time to eat humble pie, looks like I was wrong with my theory. Looks like somepeople are grammer nazis and others aren't. Thank you for any and all replies.

add

Steve
-27th June 2006, 08:38
I'm 20 and a Grammar Nazi. :whistle: I'd like to think (though I may be horribly mistaken) that most of my posts are correct in terms of spelling and grammar; that way at least some of my posts make sense!
And I HATED English at school.
Great post! Would have thought you'd have read and re-read this a few times before posting :nanananan

randomsabreur
-27th June 2006, 09:53
Oops!

If I could get these wretched smilies working, there'd be one of me blushing.

Never could remember which way round those two go - fortunately in word, all I need to do is right click and look for synonyms and I can work out whether I've got the verb or the noun.

Anyway, the forum isn't that important, really...

In addition, now that the error has been pointed out to me once again, I have marginally more chance of remembering to check. Which helps, a lot.

Aramis
-27th June 2006, 10:44
Oops!

If I could get these wretched smilies working, there'd be one of me blushing.

Never could remember which way round those two go - fortunately in word, all I need to do is right click and look for synonyms and I can work out whether I've got the verb or the noun.

Anyway, the forum isn't that important, really...

In addition, now that the error has been pointed out to me once again, I have marginally more chance of remembering to check. Which helps, a lot.
The way I remember it is that n (for noun) comes before v (verb) in the alphabet, as do c (noun) and s (verb).

(Was gonna use licence as another example, but it appears that c is used for both in English).

pinkelephant
-27th June 2006, 11:52
Another mnemonic is that it's just like advice (noun) and advise (verb) - these have the benefit of sounding as they are spelt. Isn't English wonderful?

fencingmaster
-30th June 2006, 10:16
Please could we have a spell checker and make it compulsory?

Even the forum isn't error free!


Coaches Corner Swap hints and tips on training tecniques here.

fencingmaster
-12th August 2006, 13:19
tecniques
...still waiting...

nessyfencer
-12th August 2006, 14:29
...still waiting...

...For a Blue Peter badge? ;)

Spider5
-12th August 2006, 17:41
This is a digression but it must amuse foreign people learning English no end. The 'ough' part of many English words has at least 4 different pronounciations none of which are phonetic as in:

Cough
Dough
Slough
Through

Esperanto anyone?

pinkelephant
-12th August 2006, 17:50
Not forgetting rough.

Spider5
-12th August 2006, 18:36
Nobody expects the Rosado Pachyderm Inquisition!!!!!!!!!

Our chief weapon is Cough, Cough and........ Dough
Our two weapons are Cough and Dough......... and Slough
Our three weapons are Cough, Dough, Slough ....... and Trough
Our four, no amongst our weapons, amongst our weaponry are such elements as Cough, Dough......

I'll come in again.

fencingmaster
-12th August 2006, 19:25
Tough language to spell correctly.
Though I'd expect better from some...

fencingmaster
-12th August 2006, 19:43
..still waiting...

pinkelephant
-12th August 2006, 21:26
Wasn't it George Bernard Shaw who suggested spelling fish GHOTI? (GH as in couGH, O as in wOmen and TI as in staTIon)?

Aramis
-12th August 2006, 23:56
I was told it was just "ghot".

Spider5
-13th August 2006, 09:06
Wasn't it George Bernard Shaw who suggested spelling fish GHOTI? (GH as in couGH, O as in wOmen and TI as in staTIon)?

I don't know but it sums up some of the idiosyncrasies of English quite nicely.

nessyfencer
-13th August 2006, 10:30
I don't know but it sums up some of the idiosyncrasies of English quite nicely.

The bandage was wound around the wound.

Gav
-18th August 2006, 13:05
I believe, though I haven't checked it out yet, that Firefox 2.0 will have a built-in spell checker - you lucky people.

ChubbyHubby
-18th August 2006, 13:42
I believe, though I haven't checked it out yet, that Firefox 2.0 will have a built-in spell checker - you lucky people.

but still means less than 20% of people will have it....

Gav
-18th August 2006, 18:20
but still means less than 20% of people will have it....

Are you and I going to have the same argument we always have?

Sumerian Haze
-21st August 2006, 10:45
Sorry to interrupt your pending arguement... :grin:

... but all that "cough rough through plough though" stuff (stough?) reminded me of this little English language ditty which I encountered some years back.

Try reading it aloud at first sight.

http://www.unique.cc/ron/estuff.htm

Gav
-23rd October 2006, 11:29
Check this article on Firefix 2.0 (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/23/firefox2_release_imminent/). It seems set to include a spell checker by default.

Gav
-27th October 2006, 08:37
It's what you've all been asking for - a spellchecker that works in forms. There are a couple of things that you should all be aware of:

It defaults to the US spellings.
Even after you install an alternate dictionary you still have to tell it to use the newly installed dictionary.

But it does work.

Spider5
-27th October 2006, 09:09
Thanks Gav. It does work :)