Thought for the day - genetics and spellcheckers

Chat about anything your heart desires here, just be civil. Factual or scientific questions about philosophy go here (e.g. "When was Socrates born?"), and so most homework help questions belong here. Note, posts in the off-topic section will not increase new members post counts. This includes the introductions and feedback sections.
Post Reply
Steve3007
Posts: 4681
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes
Location: UK

Thought for the day - genetics and spellcheckers

Post by Steve3007 » February 5th, 2018, 7:43 am

As a general rule, I tend not to abide by the modifications to English spelling that were introduced by Noah Webster, possibly due to some kind of irrational linguistic patriotism (a bit like the French people who refuse to accept terms like "le Weekend" in their precious language). For example, I spell words like colour, flavour and humour with too many 'u's for the taste of the American-English spellchecker. And too many 'a's in paeodophile.

The result is that I get red lines under those words which I know I can ignore. This seems to me a bit like a copying error in a piece of genome that persists because there is no selective pressure for it to be removed. If I make (what I regard as) a genuine spelling mistake in one of those words I'm less likely to spot it. So if I copy and paste (to save time) the error is propagated because there's no selective pressure to remove it. It spreads like a virus. This is more likely to happen with longer words because I'm more likely to copy and paste them to save typing them again.

Funny eh.

(P.S. I've just noticed that the spellchecker accepts my spelling of the 'u' words, but not the 'a' word. The principle still applies though.)
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea." - Eric Cantona.

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 312
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Thought for the day - genetics and spellcheckers

Post by ThomasHobbes » May 20th, 2018, 8:11 am

Steve3007 wrote:
February 5th, 2018, 7:43 am
As a general rule, I tend not to abide by the modifications to English spelling that were introduced by Noah Webster, possibly due to some kind of irrational linguistic patriotism (a bit like the French people who refuse to accept terms like "le Weekend" in their precious language). For example, I spell words like colour, flavour and humour with too many 'u's for the taste of the American-English spellchecker. And too many 'a's in paeodophile.

The result is that I get red lines under those words which I know I can ignore. This seems to me a bit like a copying error in a piece of genome that persists because there is no selective pressure for it to be removed. If I make (what I regard as) a genuine spelling mistake in one of those words I'm less likely to spot it. So if I copy and paste (to save time) the error is propagated because there's no selective pressure to remove it. It spreads like a virus. This is more likely to happen with longer words because I'm more likely to copy and paste them to save typing them again.

Funny eh.

(P.S. I've just noticed that the spellchecker accepts my spelling of the 'u' words, but not the 'a' word. The principle still applies though.)
It should be the unfailing duty of every red-blooded Englishman to teach those pesky spell checkers to get it right.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 6697
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Thought for the day - genetics and spellcheckers

Post by Greta » May 20th, 2018, 6:22 pm

My Firefox has an Australian-English dictionary plugin for exactly the reason on its blurb:
English (Australian) Dictionary. I'm sick of all my favoUrite coloUrful language being marked incorrect. Are you sick of all your favo-U-rite colo-U-rful language being marked as incorrect? Me too. Live no more in the world of crazy American spelling - get the Australian English Dictionary :)
http://ww17.justcameron.com/incoming/en-au-dictionary/

Mind, if you have worked with HTML there is no way around the COLOR tag. We are fighting a losing battle because almost all using English as a second language use the American version rather than actual English with its more elegant constructions.

Elegance is out. Lean and mean is in.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 848
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Thought for the day - genetics and spellcheckers

Post by -1- » May 20th, 2018, 10:20 pm

I had always thought that there is a way to adjust the spellchecker. If you want to use the Exchequer's spell-checker, switch it to "UK Enlgish". There are precisely 24948* different English spellcheckers in Microsoft products,each catering to a local indiotsyncrasy of the language. (i.- Which is a rule of sinning by idiots. Look up the root aeteauoauimology if you don't believe me.)

* There is the Angolan English Dictionary, the Anglican, the Bangla Deshi, the Bermudan, the Barbados, the Bengali, the Biafran, the Burundi, the Bahranian, the Belizi, the Botswanian, etc. etc. English language spell-checkers.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 2789
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Thought for the day - genetics and spellcheckers

Post by LuckyR » May 21st, 2018, 4:19 am

The best part of changing my phone's language to English UK was the sexier accent of the Google maps directions.

The French accent is even better but I might get lost.
"As usual... it depends."

Post Reply