A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

TOT spelling



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 16th 13, 10:42 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Ian Jackson[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,968
Default TOT spelling

In message , Jeff Layman
writes
On 16/09/2013 08:44, Brian Gaff wrote:
Yes, but that is typong errors, not actual spelling. I find my spelling has
got worse since I lost my sight. Listening to words obviously does not
always make the spelling any better. Sight is still the trigger.
However we al make mistakes and normally cannot see them. The one good
thing about reading with artificial speech is that unlike the sighted proof
reader, it says what is actually there not what one might expect to be
there. One has to be acreful as spell checkers see nothing wrong withe the
term Pubic Transport when there is an L missing.
Brian


But why didn't your spell checker pick up the two obviously misspelt
words in your post - "typong" and "acreful" (to say nothing of
"withe")? I guess that you could have misheard "typong" as "typing",
but surely "acreful" would have sounded very odd indeed, and nothing
like "careful".

And as for "Pubic transport", well, you need a merkin box, don't you?

A serious failure of spellcheckers is that they don't recognise when
you've simply hit an adjacent key, and as a result either offer an
obviously wrong alternative - or more often than not when the mistake is
near the beginning of the word, suggest absolutely nothing.
--
Ian
  #22  
Old September 16th 13, 10:46 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Dave Plowman (News)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,332
Default TOT spelling

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
+1. The trouble is that most spilling chuckers, whether on-line or
within the computer, are American based, and when they throw up a
'mis-spelt' word, I usually have to resort to a hard copy dictionary
to confirm the spelling. They don't seem to be able to handle plurals,
either, insisting in offering 's as an alternative. Funny language,
American! My commonest error is dropping the las lette of a wor.


Firefox has an 'English' dictionary. Not caught it out trying to use US
spelling.

--
*Why do the two "sanction"s (noun and verb) mean opposites?*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #23  
Old September 16th 13, 11:02 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Stephen Wolstenholme[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 66
Default TOT spelling

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:13:26 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 02:15:34 +0100, Johny B Good
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 01:26:56 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

Johny B Good wrote:

I used to spell ratio as ration,

Some years ago I was asked to assess the likely veracity of a written
report. The report had 'ration' for 'ratio' throughout. It had been
professionally proofed.


I guess I'll make do with my DiY proof reading solution then and keep
the money. BTW, this free version of "Free Agent" doesn't have a spell
checker function. If I'm unsure of the spelling of a word, I'll simply
google it. Fortunately, my spelling abilities are pretty good so I'm
not googling for spellings very often.

I suspect that if I did use a spell checker, my spelling skills would
deteriorate (which is one of the reasons I eschewed the use of the
spell checker function in my previous mail/news reader client).


Squander $29.50 on Agent 7.2 and have a choice of many dictionaries.


I always set Agent to English (International) for sending email.
Sometimes the spell corrections are pointed out by my American
customers as incorrect but I never get complaints from non English. I
suppose I should run a separate copy set to English (American).

Steve

--
EasyNN-plus. Neural Networks plus. http://www.easynn.com
SwingNN. Forecast with Neural Networks. http://www.swingnn.com
JustNN. Just Neural Networks. http://www.justnn.com

  #24  
Old September 16th 13, 12:05 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 853
Default TOT spelling

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:09:31 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 20:30:16 +0100, Tim+
wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:
I see that some contributors to this group spell certain simple short
words incorrectly, even though their general standard of literacy is
good. I always spell certain words wrongly. An example is 'rediculous'.
Anyone else aware of their habitual mistakes, but find themselves powerless to improve?

Bill


My fingers insist on typing "form" instead of "from".


A single transposition typing error.


I didn't think I was alone in making that sort of error but it's of
some comfort to know that it's not just me that suffers from that
problem.

I suspect it arises because very few of us would have had the benefit
of a course in touch typing. For me it seems to happen when my typing
speed builds up a head of steam that's too much (apparently) for my
clumsy digits to cope with (I just had to correct half a dozen typos
near the beginning of this sentence as well as backspace/delete
spelling errors in this parenthesis block).

Whenever I spot spelling errors in others' missives, the first thing
I check is the keyboard layout to verify what the adjacent letters
could have been (my innate curiosity demands that I solve even these
little mysteries).

I have to say that the mistyped letter can be be several keys away
from the obviously intended one in quite a significant portion of
typos, most probably due to the author being in too much of a hurry to
start the next word rather a 'spelling mistake' as such.
--
Regards, J B Good
  #25  
Old September 16th 13, 12:07 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
I'm Old Gregg[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default TOT spelling

"Johny B Good" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 01:26:56 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:


I suspect that if I did use a spell checker, my spelling skills would
deteriorate (which is one of the reasons I eschewed the use of the
spell checker function in my previous mail/news reader client).


A spell checker didn't help with this:-

I halve a selling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a quay and type a word
And weight four it to say
Weather eye am wrong or write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.

Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.

"Martha Snow"


Jon






  #26  
Old September 16th 13, 12:10 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 853
Default TOT spelling

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 08:02:01 +0100, Chris Hogg wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 21:41:12 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
wrote:


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I see that some contributors to this group spell certain simple short words
incorrectly, even though their general standard of literacy is good. I
always spell certain words wrongly. An example is 'rediculous'. Anyone else
aware of their habitual mistakes, but find themselves powerless to improve?


Yes, but not powerless - I run emails through a spell checker before
dispatch.

Catches most but not all (e.g. from instead of form or vice versa).


+1. The trouble is that most spilling chuckers, whether on-line or
within the computer, are American based, and when they throw up a
'mis-spelt' word, I usually have to resort to a hard copy dictionary
to confirm the spelling. They don't seem to be able to handle plurals,
either, insisting in offering 's as an alternative. Funny language,
American! My commonest error is dropping the las lette of a wor.


Me too! So far, no one has offered mistyping habits that I haven't
also fallen prey to. Another spelling error that sometimes trips me up
is that of adding extraneous letters (I have to take extra care with
'banana' for example).
--
Regards, J B Good
  #27  
Old September 16th 13, 12:14 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 853
Default TOT spelling

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:13:26 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 02:15:34 +0100, Johny B Good
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 01:26:56 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

Johny B Good wrote:

I used to spell ratio as ration,

Some years ago I was asked to assess the likely veracity of a written
report. The report had 'ration' for 'ratio' throughout. It had been
professionally proofed.


I guess I'll make do with my DiY proof reading solution then and keep
the money. BTW, this free version of "Free Agent" doesn't have a spell
checker function. If I'm unsure of the spelling of a word, I'll simply
google it. Fortunately, my spelling abilities are pretty good so I'm
not googling for spellings very often.

I suspect that if I did use a spell checker, my spelling skills would
deteriorate (which is one of the reasons I eschewed the use of the
spell checker function in my previous mail/news reader client).


Squander $29.50 on Agent 7.2 and have a choice of many dictionaries.


No thanks! I think I'd rather maintain my spelling skills with hard
won practice thank you very much. :-)
--
Regards, J B Good
  #28  
Old September 16th 13, 01:14 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Richard Tobin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,381
Default TOT spelling

In article ,
Rob Gibson [email protected] wrote:
I allways misspell always . . .


An edition of the Pocket Oxford Dictionary came with an erratum slip
because it contained an entry for "mispell" instead of "misspell".

-- Richard
  #29  
Old September 16th 13, 01:14 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Max Demian
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,858
Default TOT spelling

"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 02:15:34 +0100, Johny B Good
wrote:


I guess I'll make do with my DiY proof reading solution then and keep
the money. BTW, this free version of "Free Agent" doesn't have a spell
checker function. If I'm unsure of the spelling of a word, I'll simply
google it. Fortunately, my spelling abilities are pretty good so I'm
not googling for spellings very often.

I suspect that if I did use a spell checker, my spelling skills would
deteriorate (which is one of the reasons I eschewed the use of the
spell checker function in my previous mail/news reader client).


Squander $29.50 on Agent 7.2 and have a choice of many dictionaries.


....but not British English. 'International English' (whatever that is) is a
peculiar mixture of British and US usage.

--
Max Demian


  #30  
Old September 16th 13, 03:15 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,381
Default TOT spelling

Norman Wells wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:
Johny B Good wrote:

I used to spell ratio as ration,


Some years ago I was asked to assess the likely veracity of a written
report. The report had 'ration' for 'ratio' throughout. It had been
professionally proofed.


You mean 'spell-checked'?

No, they paid someone to proof read it.

Bill
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.