Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
This morning, I wrote:
Spell-checked an outgoing message tonight that contained this sentence:
For example, the common respectful greeting 오셨습니까
means literally, “You’ve come,” and a Korean may end
a conversation by saying “Then” (그럼).
SM ignored the Korean bit and flagged the word "ve," though it would
have been perfectly happy with "You've." It didn't recognize the fancy
apostrophe and treated it as a word separator.
Any chance someone could fix that?
I did some more experimentation and found:
1) Standard contractions with the straight (typewriter) apostrophe are
all recognized normally;
2) Most but not all contractions with the curly apostrophe are
recognized. The key factor seems to be that contractions with "’ve" for
"have" are not recognized, but others such as "I’m," "he’d," "we’re,"
etc. are fine.
That may be because the parts taken separately are not flagged by the
spell checker. "I", "he", "we" and "re" are words, and the single
letters "m" and "d" are not flagged by the spell checker individually
either (strangely, "i", "o" and "u" appear to be the only single letters
which are flagged by the spell checker; not sure why those are but no
others).
So it looks more like a lexical gap than a software issue. The following
contractions are not recognized because the spell-checker parses them as
two words each:
I’ve You’ve We’ve They’ve
you’ve we’ve they’ve
Could’ve Should’ve Would’ve Might’ve
could’ve should’ve would’ve might’ve
The corresponding forms with straight apostrophes are all recognized.
On the other hand, "ve" is not a word, so is flagged if it's not
recognised that it's part of a contraction.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
