RE: Plain English rules
Marcin wrote: This said, they might be useful for technical writing; in such writing, linguistic variation is indeed to be limited. But Mike Unwalla would know better. Heikki's rules are good, but they are not always applicable. A style is not a standard. 'Plain English' is not a standard. Thus, to create a set of 'plain English' rules about which everyone agrees is difficult. A better strategy is to create set of rules for a specified style guide. Refer to 'Enable using multiple rule sets' on http://wiki.languagetool.org/missing-features. Although we can put a set of rules in an external file (http://wiki.languagetool.org/tips-and-tricks#toc9), we do not have an easy way to select a set of rules. Regards, Mike Unwalla Contact: www.techscribe.co.uk/techw/contact.htm -Original Message- From: Marcin Milkowski [mailto:list-addr...@wp.pl] Sent: 22 December 2014 12:33 To: languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: Plain English rules W dniu 2014-12-22 o 11:33, Daniel Naber pisze: On 2014-12-20 11:32, Heikki Lehvaslaiho wrote: Heikki, I've set up a gist with 80 English rules that (mostly) expand redundant/wordy rules in LanguageTools 2.7. Testrules script passes these, but it would be good for someone to go though them before inclusion to the main rules file. https://gist.github.com/heikkil/4efc378102037651f755 [1] thanks for those rules! Style rules can cause false alarms, or the messages could be considered to be false alarms, so I'm not sure whether we should activate these rules by default. What do others think? I think these rules are following extreme prescriptivism. I am strongly against the inclusion of such rules as turned on by default, because they raise false alarms for perfect English. My rough guide is this: if your rules tell that Jane Austen and Charles Dickens are bad writers, then your rules are simply wrong. And Dickens does use the words indicated in the rules; see for example 'accompany': https://books.google.pl/books?id=INkAes9Y5AYCpg=PA538lpg=PA538dq=accompan y+%22charles+dickens%22source=blots=_lFgWHI48osig=X1vs7tIDaTPM9WSA7sGsXCP OwRohl=plsa=Xei=zg6YVK6RCMWBU-XEgdAFved=0CE4Q6AEwBg#v=onepageq=accompan y%20%22charles%20dickens%22f=false (page 223). This said, they might be useful for technical writing; in such writing, linguistic variation is indeed to be limited. But Mike Unwalla would know better. Best regards, Marcin -- -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: Plain English rules
On 2014-12-20 11:32, Heikki Lehvaslaiho wrote: Heikki, I've set up a gist with 80 English rules that (mostly) expand redundant/wordy rules in LanguageTools 2.7. Testrules script passes these, but it would be good for someone to go though them before inclusion to the main rules file. https://gist.github.com/heikkil/4efc378102037651f755 [1] thanks for those rules! Style rules can cause false alarms, or the messages could be considered to be false alarms, so I'm not sure whether we should activate these rules by default. What do others think? Regards Daniel -- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration more Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=164703151iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
Re: Plain English rules
W dniu 2014-12-22 o 11:33, Daniel Naber pisze: On 2014-12-20 11:32, Heikki Lehvaslaiho wrote: Heikki, I've set up a gist with 80 English rules that (mostly) expand redundant/wordy rules in LanguageTools 2.7. Testrules script passes these, but it would be good for someone to go though them before inclusion to the main rules file. https://gist.github.com/heikkil/4efc378102037651f755 [1] thanks for those rules! Style rules can cause false alarms, or the messages could be considered to be false alarms, so I'm not sure whether we should activate these rules by default. What do others think? I think these rules are following extreme prescriptivism. I am strongly against the inclusion of such rules as turned on by default, because they raise false alarms for perfect English. My rough guide is this: if your rules tell that Jane Austen and Charles Dickens are bad writers, then your rules are simply wrong. And Dickens does use the words indicated in the rules; see for example 'accompany': https://books.google.pl/books?id=INkAes9Y5AYCpg=PA538lpg=PA538dq=accompany+%22charles+dickens%22source=blots=_lFgWHI48osig=X1vs7tIDaTPM9WSA7sGsXCPOwRohl=plsa=Xei=zg6YVK6RCMWBU-XEgdAFved=0CE4Q6AEwBg#v=onepageq=accompany%20%22charles%20dickens%22f=false (page 223). This said, they might be useful for technical writing; in such writing, linguistic variation is indeed to be limited. But Mike Unwalla would know better. Best regards, Marcin -- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration more Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=164703151iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Languagetool-devel mailing list Languagetool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/languagetool-devel
