Spelling and Typos

[Jack Harrison]

Some people – like me – have bad backs. Some can’t spell or are dyslexic. We are stuck with our limitations and there’s not much we can do about them.

So attacking someone’s spelling and grammar on internet postings is bad form.

However, spelling errors and typos can be amusing. A recent local posting about an East Anglian road improvement referred to A11 DUELLING. It’s an annoying road I know but I’ve never seen that degree of road rage. On a bird group, someone reported that he had a wonderfully quiet day in the Broads and hadn’t seen a SOLE - not a likely fish to be found on inland lakes I would have thought. Maybe the poster was referring to the absence of discarded footwear.

Jack

[MikeOxon]

Yes, it's a great pity that these web post entry forms don't have spelling checkers - we all come to rely on these in other applications, even though they can make pretty wild suggestions sometimes. I frequently find myself editing a post just after making it because, somehow, the mistakes usually only become obvious after posting!

In fact, it doesn't matter how you spell, as the following extract shows. Most people have little difficulty with this text:

"The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid. Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the first and last ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can still raed it wouthit a porbelm. This is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh?"



Mike

[millerd]

However, if you use the wrong word, as long as it's a real one, it won't get picked up by a spell-checker (duelling for dualling as in Jack's example, or sight for site).

Dave

[Padfield]

If you view these pages with Chrome, as I do, then you do get a spelling (but not grammar) check when you make posts. I just tried with IE8 (which I abandoned long ago because it loaded too slowly) and there was no spelling check.

Not surprisingly, Chrome considers IE8 to be a spelling mistake.

Guy

[David M]

A smart pesron can tell the difference between a typo and a gennuine spelling error.

[MikeOxon]

If you view these pages with Chrome, as I do, then you do get a spelling check

Thank you, Guy. I use Firefox and you set me exploring - I had failed to load any dictionaries and now have spell checking too!

Of course, as others have said, it's far from foolproof but useful, nevertheless. Incidentally, Firefox fails to recognise 'Firefox' as a word!!!

Mike

[Michaeljf]

Hi all,

I didn't realise Chrome did such a thing as spell-checking. I admit that when I do post long reports etc I write them up via a Windows package, which automatically hints to me if I've gone off the rails a bit . I've seen Mike Oxon's 'quote' regarding what the brain can do with poor grammar / poorly spelt words before, so you might be tempted to say "why bother to do things correctly?" - well why bother doing anything correctly? I'm very sad to say that working in a further education establishment the state of many young teenagers spelling and grammar now is absolutely frightening! I never thought of my education as being particularly brilliant. And now I really sound like an old man, but the use of text for so many kids can't necessarily be good - writing something down, as opposed to typing or typing a shortened version, no doubt makes the brain work harder and links to muscle-memory and dexterity. However, I can't do text and I'm sure speed-texting is a skill in it's own right. And I bet my handwriting has gone downhill since I now type everything on computer!!!

Having stated the above, we all make mistakes Since I started writing some books via Blurb, I've started doing a spell-check at the end when I'm double-checking the book. Suddenly I realise I've a tendency to spell some words incorrectly and I've been doing so for many years. None of us are perfect When I was in School, I willfully didn't use a capital letter to start a new sentence. It used to drive my English teacher mad. I used to think 'Why is one letter any more important than the others?'

Michael

[Jack Harrison]

There is a lovely one in a campaign against a wind farm in the south Cambridgeshire village where I lived before moving here to Norfolk. I cite an extract here:

There is evidence that wind turbines sighted inland are not efficient in producing electricity and should be sighted offshore

Indeed, windfarms can indeed be sighted offshore from Hunstanton and there is now the Sheringham Shoal windfarm further along the coast; they are actually quite an attractive sight when sited in suitable places.

It wasn't the reason that I moved away from south Cambridgeshire, but I was something of a pariah in the village when I went on record at a public meeting that I was not necessarily against a windfarm; my comments were of course interpreted as being pro windfarm.

Jack

[Piers]

Some people – like me – have bad backs. Some can’t spell or are dyslexic. We are stuck with our limitations and there’s not much we can do about them.

So attacking someone’s spelling and grammar on internet postings is bad form.

I have to disagree. I am dyslexic, but I still attempt to maintain a certain standard of spelling, grammar and punctuation. These things are, to me, no less important on an internet forum post than in any other written medium. It simply means that I have to try harder, carefully analyze what I have written prior to making the post, and take full advantage of some of the on-line checkers that are available.

However, I do agree that "attacking" someone for their shortcomings is poor form; however the 'Flashman' types will have their fun...

It's much like issuing scarcely veiled threats of violence to the person from the safety of a computer keyboard, or bullishly throwing ones weight around secure in relative anonymity. This sort of behavior seems to be tolerated on internet fora theses days, but to me it is an absolute no-no.

Piers.

[Pete Eeles]

It's much like issuing scarcely veiled threats of violence to the person from the safety of a computer keyboard, or bullishly throwing ones weight around secure in relative anonymity. This sort of behavior seems to be tolerated on internet fora theses days, but to me it is an absolute no-no.

Completely agree. We've been busy "behind the scenes" (one of the reasons that some of us have been rather quiet of late) and one item to surface is a set of member and moderator "rules". These are almost complete and, once done, will be put into effect.

Cheers,

- Pete

[NickMorgan]

If you download the Google toolbar there is a spell-checker included.

[Susie]

Completely agree. We've been busy "behind the scenes" (one of the reasons that some of us have been rather quiet of late) and one item to surface is a set of member and moderator "rules". These are almost complete and, once done, will be put into effect.

Cheers,

- Pete

Oooooh, we'd better be really naughty now then before the rules come in and we can be told off for breaking them!

[MikeOxon]

Oooooh, we'd better be really naughty now

Bet they'll forget to ban risqué avatars - go for it, Susie!

EDIT - I was wrong - they have!

Mike

[JohnR]

We've been busy "behind the scenes" (one of the reasons that some of us have been rather quiet of late) and one item to surface is a set of member and moderator "rules". These are almost complete and, once done, will be put into effect.
Cheers,
- Pete

Not rules, please, no rules. One of the reasons I like the Butterfly forum and lepidopterists in general is that they are all individualists who wander round with a middle finger extended to the world and when they are tired of holding up one finger they hold up two. Rule makers should take this into account. We don't want to have to wear hard hats in case a butterfly lands on our heads, we like eating bent cucumbers, water does hydrate us and spolling mysteaks enliven oru reeding. Rules could mean that nothing except butterflies gets mentioned here, moth recorders could be out of the window, and we may not be permitted to insult people who come from south of Dover or north of Watford.

After rules are introduced next comes taxation.

[Dave McCormick]

If you view these pages with Chrome, as I do, then you do get a spelling (but not grammar) check when you make posts. I just tried with IE8 (which I abandoned long ago because it loaded too slowly) and there was no spelling check.

Not surprisingly, Chrome considers IE8 to be a spelling mistake.

Guy

I noticed that often Chrome can't correct many simple spelling mistakes, giving you words you don't want instead of the one you do. Google search is better at it than Chrome which is strange given chrome was made by Google.

[Jack Harrison]

JohnR

Not rules, please, no rules.

Agreed.

Info re: North of Watford:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watford#.2 ... ord_Gap.22

Jack

[Goldie M]

I can't see what the big deal is about spelling. I went back to college to take GCSE and A level's when I was in my Fifties in English and English Lit and i still make mistakes with both grammer and spelling (I got B's for both incidently) So i don't really care if i make the mistakes, i proved to Myself i could get them having failed the 11 plus when i was younger. Goldie M

[Michaeljf]

After rules are introduced next comes taxation.

That sounds like the plot of 'Phantom Menance' to me . To my mind, there doesn't seem to be much problem with the site (say, in the last year), which may just show how well it is run by the moderators etc. From time to time there are spammers and these are often taken off so quickly most folks probably wouldn't notice. And I'm pretty sure we all 'clicked' a code of conduct when we joined.

I have no problem with some folks raising two fingers to life generally, the problem comes when they raise two fingers to another poster here or a known (named) person. Here you are on the subject of 'defamation of character' (I had to look the correct spelling of that up) and people who run this site must take this seriously. So I'm presuming the moderators are looking at this. There have been plenty of reports this year of battles on Twitcher or facebook and in the worst cases, legal procedures, unfortunate suicides due to bullying etc. While I'm sure we are not really worried about this here (folks on here can only normally be accused of helpfulness and pleasantness) I can understand why moderators would like to try and pre-empt any such problems as have been seen elsewhere in social network media). At the same time moderators behaviour must be exemplary. Good luck with that bit

Unless we're talking about butterflies with eight legs. That's another subject entirely...

Michael

[Michaeljf]

P.S. I see the new rules are up, and I can't see why anyone would object to them. In fact, most are still very similar to what the rules were before!