Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Does anybody else find that posts on RMWeb seem to suffer higher instances of 'rogue autocorrect' than anywhere else?

 

By that, I mean that it "corrects" words that are already correct and in the process changes the meaning?  I proofread my posts before I hit submit - and I used to be the Editorial Assistant for CUP's  Journal of Child Language so I'm pretty sharp eyed - and yet often when reading back I suddenly spot an error which I am sure wasn't there before posting!

 

Case in point - "How does that effect the threat length?" ... sounds like something the government would be asked in a daily briefing! Yet I typed (and checked, in the name of St Peco and all that's OO-ly!) "How does that effect the throat length?", which makes a lot more sense when talking about pointwork!

 

Is there an option to turn off autocorrect in RMWeb?!

 

HOUNDS OF FUME!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no autocorrect (aside from a few technical terms which are often mistyped) so it's down to users and their browsers.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy -

 

Thanks for responding (wasn't sure it was the right place to ask).  So, that clears that little mystery up! That means it must be on my iPad, so am now going to see if I can turn the little b*gg*r off!

 

Many thanks

 

Steve S

 

HOURS OF FUN! 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Settings->General->Keyboard->Auto-Correction

 

Roy

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

) "How does that effect the throat length?", which makes a lot more sense when talking about pointwork!

 

I think you meant to type 'affect'.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

Settings->General->Keyboard->Auto-Correction

 

Roy

 

Thank you, Roy - I have now removed all the predictive nonsense and autocorrect features, so from now on I am responsible for my own errors!  

 

2 hours ago, Mick Bonwick said:

 

I think you meant to type 'affect'.

 

Noooooo! My personal Achilles' Heel! I always end up second guessing myself over the use of effect and affect!  You are quite right, Mick - "How does that affect the throat length?"  However, I would normally ask "What is the effect upon overall throat length of using longer points?" simply to avoid that verb/noun confusion!  In my defence (or defense, for our American readers!) I was ranting about autocorrect/predictive text changing the word "throat" to "threat"!

 

Just so I remember in future, I have attached a simple graphic to visually bludgeon myself with in the future.  Hopefully, that will have the desired effect affect effect  result!

 

HOURS OF FUN!

 

 

IMG_1017.PNG

  • Like 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a nice little illlustration, I bet a lot of people would find that handy! Probably one for imply/infer too, and a few more besides. One with huge red letters saying "of is not a verb" would be good as well!

 

I feel your pain though, the number of mistakes I see in things I've proof read in Word when I see them on a proof of a magazine page is scary sometimes, I wonder the same, how on earth did I not see that, or even sometimes how I managed to write it in the first place!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JDW said:

That's a nice little illlustration, I bet a lot of people would find that handy! Probably one for imply/infer too, and a few more besides. One with huge red letters saying "of is not a verb" would be good as well!

 

I feel your pain though, the number of mistakes I see in things I've proof read in Word when I see them on a proof of a magazine page is scary sometimes, I wonder the same, how on earth did I not see that, or even sometimes how I managed to write it in the first place!

 

As part of my compositor's apprenticeship (many, many years ago) I was taught to proofread with great care. In those days it was the ultimate sin for anything to be printed containing an error, whether spelling or grammatical, but the sad reality is that now most magazines do not employ proofreaders and rely totally on the person doing the keying and AutoCorrect. I find some of the errors which appear highly amusing, some can be seriously misleading but most are just simply annoying like the erroneous use of apostrophes and the now almost universal "fed up of".

 

John

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JDW said:

 One with huge red letters saying "of is not a verb" would be good as well!

 

 

I would of thought that to be a good idea.

  • Like 1
  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Careful! You'll end up down the rabbit hole of Dave Gorman's Catphrase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JJGraphics said:

...the sad reality is that now most magazines do not employ proofreaders and rely totally on the person doing the keying and AutoCorrect. I find some of the errors which appear highly amusing, some can be seriously misleading ...

There was a recent corker on the Beeb accompanying 'Covidwatch' which informed us that six people in England could now meet outdoors. I immediately nominated myself, but have yet to learn the identity of the other four (St Dominic obviously a shoo in).

8 hours ago, JDW said:

...One with huge red letters saying "of is not a verb" would be good as well...

That's opinion. If standard English usage makes a verb of of, then it will be enverbed (or whatever the correct linguistic term is for 'expanded to recognised use as a verb').

 

What I would propose is something I recall from a work of David Crystal:

 

The (C18th) prescriptivists had (and still have) two impossible aims: they wanted to stop the language changing, and they wanted to eliminate usage variation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

 

That's opinion. If standard English usage makes a verb of of, then it will be enverbed (or whatever the correct linguistic term is for 'expanded to recognised use as a verb').

 

 

What I would propose is something I recall from a work of David Crystal:

 

The (C18th) prescriptivists had (and still have) two impossible aims: they wanted to stop the language changing, and they wanted to eliminate usage variation.

 

I'm very well aware of how language develops over time (I have a degree in such things). Another opinion might be that its just laziness or bad education, and that some people's English is so poor they can't grasp the difference between of and the contraction 've. But I'll leave it there as I'll probably get in trouble or offend if I carry on...

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JJGraphics said:

 

As part of my compositor's apprenticeship (many, many years ago) I was taught to proofread with great care. In those days it was the ultimate sin for anything to be printed containing an error, whether spelling or grammatical, but the sad reality is that now most magazines do not employ proofreaders and rely totally on the person doing the keying and AutoCorrect. I find some of the errors which appear highly amusing, some can be seriously misleading but most are just simply annoying like the erroneous use of apostrophes and the now almost universal "fed up of".

 

John

 

 

We usually proof our own once its written, then two of us will proof every page after it is designed, and a final proof after amends are made. Somehow the odd blooper slips through, but thankfully it is rare! It is often a case of reading what you expect to see not what it actually says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, JDW said:

I'm very well aware of how language develops over time (I have a degree in such things). Another opinion might be that its just laziness or bad education, and that some people's English is so poor they can't grasp the difference between of and the contraction 've. But I'll leave it there as I'll probably get in trouble or offend if I carry on...

What your degree must have taught you, is that the poorly educated or less informed 'don't do what they should of' and as a result have a major say in the development of language. Academic opinion has no more authority than the usage of the person on the Clapham omnibus. It really is a truly democratic process, which never truly finds favour; despite all the cant which would have us believe it is a generally upheld principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

 

 

 

 

IMG_1017.PNG

I would gently point out that effect can also be a verb, as in to effect change. 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

What your degree must have taught you, is that the poorly educated or less informed 'don't do what they should of' and as a result have a major say in the development of language. Academic opinion has no more authority than the usage of the person on the Clapham omnibus. It really is a truly democratic process, which never truly finds favour; despite all the cant which would have us believe it is a generally upheld principle.

 

There's a distinction though between what is real 'development' to cover things that are changing, such as computers which required words and references that had never been needed before, and people who blame autocorrect (that's probably among the most common answers/excuses I've heard when asking people why they write "of" not "have") for their inability to conjugate a verb. 

I would respectfully argue that the ability to use a basic verb like to have is a fairly basic requirement of English, one of the first that is taught, and achieveable by even poorly educated and less informed foreign learners of the language, who must read things like "he would of gone" and wonder what on earth the writer is trying to say. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JDW said:

...I would respectfully argue that the ability to use a basic verb like to have is a fairly basic requirement of English, one of the first that is taught, and achieveable by even poorly educated and less informed foreign learners of the language, who must read things like "he would of gone" and wonder what on earth the writer is trying to say. 

There have to be some advantages for the native users of a language...

 

I am one of those who passed through the UK's educational system when  'grammar' had about the same status as 'sexism' currently enjoys. I recollect some brief discussion about nouns and verbs which was clearly distasteful to our teacher, and the subject was thereafter never mentioned, other than negatively. Conjugation hove into view in chemistry and physics, and also steam engine valve gear. I know there's something called a gerund, and I literally wouldn't recognise one even if it was standing in front of me, and I seem to get by without difficulty.

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of things I like about this site, as opposed to for example Pistonheads, is that posters who make spelling or grammatical errors are not abused by those more educated, more careful, or just more pedantic than themselves.

And I say this as someone thought to be a bit of a pedant in my working life.

 

I think it's probably fair game in this thread though!!

  • Agree 2
  • Funny 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On any site like this there are bound to be mistakes as people type quickly and hit Post, it's a conversation not an essay, so occasional errors are easy to overlook. It happens, people generally get what was meant, and sometimes it will be accidentally amusing so we have a laugh about it. Of course, there are those who genuinely struggle with letters and words, and again most people are willing to make exceptions for them just like in other areas of life. It's true that this site is generally pretty good for that kind of thing. 

 

8 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

There have to be some advantages for the native users of a language...

 

Haha true! Though I'll never be convinced there's any valid reason for using of instead of have. It's completely the wrong worm. It doesn't make any dense. It doesn't even sound the lame. Most people probably know butter but just don't seem to bare. 

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

I would gently point out that effect can also be a verb, as in to effect change. 

 

In New York they say that there ain't a noun that can't be verbed.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"You have tasted two whole worms, hissed all my mystery lectures...."

 

  • Like 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the same auto-corrupt feature on my iPad annoying, especially when browsing Amazon and the like, type in a brand name, up it pops in their auto populate choices...press search and bang it changes giving a pointless search...

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy, what have I done?!  Apologies to go so OT, but I suppose I started it!

 

I should explain that I also survived school, college and university with nowhere near the depth of knowledge of grammar that my 10 year old demonstrated when she explained to me what a fronted adverbial sentence was... :blink:. Years later when it was suggested I should think about teaching English because I had an A level in English Literature, I pointed out that there was a difference between being literate and teaching language!

 

However, from an early age I absolutely devoured books of any description; that expanded my vocabulary and I suppose much of my understanding of grammar is simply through exposing myself to so much of it in printed form at a young age.  When there were only three TV channels, being able to lose yourself in a good book was a good way to keep yourself entertained!  Also, reading and rereading my father's large collection of Railway Modeller magazines not only got me used to reading articles written for adults (as opposed to simplified children's factual books) but also taught me DC wiring theory (enough to get me through Physics O level!!) plus the ability to size rooms in feet and inches, despite being a post-decimilisation child!

 

I mainly teach music and - for my sins - mathematics, but in a previous existence I also worked with people with dyslexia, so am generally quite laid back about grammatical and spelling errors - unless they are my own!  I agree with Sotto and JDW that RMWeb members do make allowances for errors and avoid pendanticism - except occasionally over loco class details! 

 

Prior to working in teaching, I worked for the Journal of Child Language, and was not only responsible for the day to day running of the academic journal but also occasionally proofreading (so like John JJGraphics I am familiar with the strange squiggles and marks used by proofreaders).  Which is why when I proofread before hitting SUBMIT and then spot an error afterwards I get quite annoyed at myself!  Even more annoying is when, as has been discussed, you type, proofread, read again, submit, and then as if simply to spite you autocorrect changes a word that you know you typed correctly!  Incidentally, it was also whilst doing that role that I came into quite frequent contact with Professor David Crystal, who was academically brilliant and had a very dry sense of humour!  Nice to see him quoted, thanks 34theletterbetweenB&D

 

I personally don't use autocorrect as a lazy excuse for errors (I own up to them!) although I do seem to suffer from the vagaries of predictive text - there was one instance when I texted someone to say that "I'm bring messed about by predictive text" and the [email protected]@dy thing changed to "I'm ringing about my predator sex" ... :o

 

Finally, I learnt to touch type back in the day when one learnt to do so on a big manual typewriter, so that when you moved on to an electric typewriter you initially double printed most letters due to striking the keys too hard! Fast forward a few years, and I produced the electronic copy for a report published by the Rowntree Foundation; I stayed at work until 11:30pm the night before deadline with the authors, to make sure the copy was laid out correctly (no automatic widow and orphan detection in those days!) and departed the University happy that I had prepared the document with no mistakes and laid out perfectly.  Imagine my horror upon seeing it published to find widows and orphans in several places in the report; turned out the authors decided to nip back in  the day after and made "just a couple of changes" ... which happened to mess up all my careful work!!

 

It is true that langauge changes; new words are created, others drop out of use.  Similarly spellings can change, and even grammatical forms change over time.  So language is flexible - the main thing, IMHO, is having the vocabularly to express yourself, and hopefully in a way that makes sense.

 

Having said that, teaching in Bolton meant that it was guaranteed to see students writing things such as, "I could of used a different font" or, "I should of done it different" [sic] - but the day that a colleague brought in a clipping from The Bolton Evening News, where a professional journalist had written the sentence "The play was enjoyable but could of been half an hour shorter" ... that was the day the English teachers started drinking in earnest!

 

Normal RMWeb services will resume shortly!

 

Steve S

 

HOURS OF PHONETICS FUN

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Funny 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JDW said:

It is often a case of reading what you expect to see not what it actually says.

My father used to proof-read starting at the end and working up, line by line, for exactly that reason.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sotto said:

"You have tasted two whole worms, hissed all my mystery lectures...."

 

... and you will leave by the town drain.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.