March 30, 2005
More on grammar checker
It has been entertaining to sift through the ongoing discussion of UW professor Sandeep Krishnamurthy's campaign to improve Microsoft Word's grammar checker. A few of the highlights:
- Slashdot comment: "Hulk work hard on Grammar Checker for Microsoft! Program many long hours. Very hard to type with huge green hands and puny little keys! Many times get angry and smash keyboard. Many keyboards broken. Hulk also get help with grammar from Yoda. Yoda very wise. Maybe not best work in world, but Hulk take pride in work. Why puny University of Washington professor criticize hard work of Hulk? Criticism hurt Hulk's feelings. Hulk angry! HULK SMASH!"
- Arguing with signposts weblog: "This just in! Humans understand language better than computers. I know. It’s a shocker. ... I look forward to the paper’s forthcoming series on why paper is a better writing surface than porous rock. Maybe an investigative report on the fact that digital watches are easier to read than analog."
- On a more serious note, Rick Schaut, who works on the Word for Mac program as part of Microsoft's Macintosh Business Unit, describes the technical challenges of natural language processing as they relate to automated grammar checking. He also addresses some of the issues Krishnamurthy raises.
- And finally, I received this short e-mail message, hopefully satirical, from one reader: "rather than improving the computers grammar, students should improve their own grammar. a students 'badly written report' isnt magically healed by grammar check or spell check. a bad writer is a bad writer."
Posted by Todd Bishop at March 30, 2005 11:50 AM
The spelling and grammar checkers are handy tools but they can NEVER take the place of knowing how to spell or how to write. We shouldn't expect computers to do all the hard work for us. You have to learn some things on your own. Personally, I never use Word's grammar checker. IMHO: It's almost totally useless. Get a copy of "Elements of Style" by Strunk and White instead.
