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
Posts: 4656
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.

Post Reply