I apologize for my gross incompetence and ignorance. But to this old
country boy a sentence is a sentence whether I write one-hundred or
one-hundred thousand of them. They all have to be written correctly. And
that is my responsibility. Although it has been my experience that
editors actually do something as well. But perhaps that's only here in
the downtown district.
I may be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure these elusive beasts you refer to
as "large manuscripts" predate the computer and the all knowing program.
But I sincerely hope you find the magic program you're looking for.
You're welcome,
Tom
On 9/17/2015 6:49 PM, Diana Kube wrote:
Not that I don't agree with your sentiment but when one is dealing with 400
page, 100,000 word documents, errors will be made and need to be addressed.
Unfortunately, editors and reviewers are not willing to make corrections
they believe should be addressed prior to submission. Just because I have
asked for a programme recommendation to assist in proofing my rather large
documents, doesn't mean that I am illiterate or have no understanding of
grammatical rules and conventions. Your comments illustrate that you have
little to know experience in working with large manuscripts. This work is
very different to a 10 page essay.
-----Original Message-----
From: Talk [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Tom Kingston via Talk
Sent: Friday, 18 September 2015 1:41 AM
To: Diana Kube <[email protected]>; Window-Eyes Discussion List
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Professional level robust Punctuation/grammar/proofing tools
that work with Window-Eyes.
Hi Diana,
I don't at all mean to sound arrogant. But in my opinion the best thing
to do for yourself is learn how to do it right yourself. No program is
going to be perfect. And editors don't mind making minor corrections.
That's their job. Also, part of it is simply their personal preference
or that of the publication.
When it comes to punctuation there isn't a set of rules carved in stone
for the English language. And that is what a program works best with.
Editors and writers will always disagree over things like the use of
semicolons instead of separate sentences, too many or too few commas or
clauses, the latter of which may or may not also involve semicolons.
Then there's the timeless debate over the serial comma, which is also
referred to as the Oxford or Harvard comma. I have no idea what a
program would do with that. Do you know the difference between a
parenthetical statement enclosed in parentheses and one enclosed in em
dashes? No program can.
One consensus among editors is a raw hatred for the exclamation mark.
Why this is is a mystery. But it's been preached from the bully pulpit
for as long as I can remember. So I suppose a program could simply
blacklist the exclamation mark. Then again, under just the right
circumstances it is just the right mark for the occasion. Still, whether
the editor agrees or not is a roll of the dice every time.
So it's a combination of developing your own style and knowing that of
the publication you're submitting to, because, as I said, they're not
all hard and fast rules. I say the publication rather than the editor
because often it's the publication's rules the editor wants you to
adhere to, which aren't necessarily one and the same. Professional
publications typically desire consistency throughout. So it may be more
the publications rules you and the editor are working toward rather than
either of your own personal preferences.
Academia is pretty well set but there's still wiggle room even there.
"professional" is an open field on what is right or wrong depending on
the particular genre or sub-genre. And again, there's the matter of the
editor's/publication's preference. No reasonable editor is going to have
a problem with preferential edits. They know they're forcing their style
on your writing. These are the cases wherein you simply have to learn
and write to that predefined ideal.
When you say "Word misses a high percentage of unusual errors including
punctuation with narrated and quoted text in the same sentence," I read
that as pretty much everything. If you meant something more specific
please feel free to elaborate.
Good luck,
Tom
On 9/17/2015 7:05 AM, Diana Kube via Talk wrote:
The default spell/grammar check that comes with word is not robust enough
for large, professional or academic manuscripts. Is anyone aware of a high
quality, professional
level tool that works effectively with Window-Eyes?
I have tried both "Grammarly" and "Ginger" but although they work well for
my sighted husband, they are not effective using Window-Eyes. I am getting
a
lot of negative comments regarding errors in manuscripts that reviewers
and
editors believe should be addressed prior to submission. Any suggestions??
_______________________________________________
Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared.
For membership options, visit
http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/tom.kingston%4
0charter.net.
For subscription options, visit
http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com
List archives can be found at
http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com
_______________________________________________
Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared.
For membership options, visit
http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/kube%40netspac
e.net.au.
For subscription options, visit
http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com
List archives can be found at
http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com
_______________________________________________
Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared.
For membership options, visit
http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/archive%40mail-archive.com.
For subscription options, visit
http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com
List archives can be found at
http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com
