Word should catalog misspelled words to study.

[Guest]

For the purpose of becoming a better speller, Word should have the option to
catalog misspelled words. Words that the user more commonly typed correctly
can be treated as "mistypes" and removed from the list. Then one could come
back to this list for further study. Maybe a simple interface that can print
a study list and does a spelling test type routine: Computer says the word,
you type the word. Maybe even have a Typing Practice interface that takes
the common mistypes and builds a practice routine to improve typing skills.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://www.microsoft.com/office/com...923679&dg=microsoft.public.word.docmanagement

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Word is not a typing application. Word does make it easier to work around
common typos, however. When you right-click on a word marked as misspelled,
instead of selecting the correct spelling, you can click on AutoCorrect and
choose the correct spelling. From then on, whenever you type, for example,
"sotre" (one of my bugaboos), you'll get "store" automatically.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.

For the purpose of becoming a better speller, Word should have the option to
catalog misspelled words. Words that the user more commonly typed correctly
can be treated as "mistypes" and removed from the list. Then one could come
back to this list for further study. Maybe a simple interface that can print
a study list and does a spelling test type routine: Computer says the word,
you type the word. Maybe even have a Typing Practice interface that takes
the common mistypes and builds a practice routine to improve typing skills.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://www.microsoft.com/office/com...923679&dg=microsoft.public.word.docmanagement

 

[Jay Freedman]

For the purpose of becoming a better speller, Word should have the
option to catalog misspelled words. Words that the user more
commonly typed correctly can be treated as "mistypes" and removed
from the list. Then one could come back to this list for further
study. Maybe a simple interface that can print a study list and does
a spelling test type routine: Computer says the word, you type the
word. Maybe even have a Typing Practice interface that takes the
common mistypes and builds a practice routine to improve typing
skills.

I don't agree that Word should be cluttered with this sort of thing. If you
want a typing tutor, look for the "Mavis Beason Teaches Typing" program from
Broderbund.

 

[Greg]

While not as comprehesive as you suggest, you might find the following
useful:

http://gregmaxey.mvps.org/List_Spelling_Errors.htm

 

[Guest]

Suzanne,

I think you miss the point of my suggestion and maybe I confused it by going
into the whole “Typing Practice†thing. That was really an afterthought.

It would be a feature, if enabled, which would allow the creation of a list
of words that the user can study. This feature would be useful for anyone to
continue to enhance their vocabulary and more specifically for students who
need to work on spelling. The Word application as it is does a fine job of
auto correcting and a superb job of offering suggested corrections.

Thank you for your feed back.

 

[Guest]

Jay,

Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful feed back. However, the typing
tutor aspect was secondary to the building of a list of possible study words.

 

[Guest]

Greg,

Thank you. It would require turning off the Auto Correct feature and not
correcting any spelling errors during the creation of the document.
Subsequently, it would require manually determining the intended word,
potentially difficult to do when pulled out of context.

Although I have no idea how to implement this as yet, I will ask if someone
in the office can help. The instructions look clear for someone who has even
a slight idea of how this works.

Something like this with a bit more automation would be perfect.

Thank you again.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Where Word most often gets into trouble is through trying to be all things
to all people. I don't imagine, however, that the Word developers will ever
so far lose sight of the primary functions of Word as to incorporate
features that make it a spelling tutor.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.

 

[Guest]

Suzanne,

You make a good observation in regards to trying to be all things. As for
keeping MS Word from loosing sight of the "primary functions" (or focus)... I
believe even a cursory overview of the options and abilities in Word show's
the ship has set sail (Invoicing with macros, auto creation of TOC, auto
formatting, Auto fill forms, creating HTML documents, altering Image
attributes - all on a word processor???). It seems to me that MS Word most
definitely has higher aspirations than that of a functioned word processor or
computerize type writer.

If a spelling tutor, I like that term Suzanne, doesn't belong in a program
whose primary purpose is to type words in the creation of documents,
presumably for purpose of communicating information accurately...where then?

This isn't a fundamental change in the program or a complete change in the
interface (which is coming in the next version)...simply an option (or if
possible a macro as Greg has shown in a limited fashion) that could be
enabled for those that wish to expand their spelling abilities. Why so much
resistance and need to voice it?

Thank you again for the thoughtful comments.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

A word processor is a way for people who know what they want to say and how
to say it to put those words on paper. Some of the functions you mention
(such as automatic creation of TOCs) are fundamental to this purpose. Auto
formatting certainly facilitates it. Keep in mind that a huge target market
for Microsoft is "knowledge workers" (secretaries and the like) and
executives in large corporations. They need to be able to create letters and
reports and easily and quickly as possible. It is assumed that they either
know how to spell or will depend on spell check to correct their spelling.
I'll grant you that this is an unreasonable assumption in the first instance
and a dangerous one in the second, but there you have it.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.

 

[Guest]

Suzanne, spelling is Fundamental to this purpose. Period.

Again, why so much resistance and the need to voice it?

 

[Tony Jollans]

I'd have to agree with Suzanne here. Word Processing is what Word does. Just
because it uses words does not mean that it does, or should, provide every
imaginable function that might also use words; before you know it someone
will be suggesting that it solve crosswords.

It is generally true that adding essentially unrelated functionality is
likely to bring problems. Imagine trying to add a dish-washing facility to
your washing machine; they both use water and detergent to get things clean,
so why not?

 

[Guest]

Tony,

First, don’t debase yourself. You do not “half toâ€, you choose to. Second,
neither you nor Suzanne has established how “word processing†explicitly
excludes building a personalized list of misspelled words for further study,
personal development.

You and Suzanne have chosen a difficult point to argue (and for no reason).
If MS Word can manipulate HTML with web page previews, embed Excel tables
able to be edited from within the document and manipulate image
characteristics; the word processor has shattered the complexity barrier it
would take to build a simple list file - if the option was selected – of
misspelled words. The text to voice feature is already in place. The
argument that my request would add too much complexity is simply absurd and
baseless. My suggestion is not unreasonable and certainly not close to the
horrible washer parallel. Trying to negate a "spelling is to word
processing" relationship? You will half to try very hard.

While MS Word is ubiquitous, not just CEOs and MPV use the program daily but
it is on essentially every school computer in my district, it is not always
possible to rely on the crutch of spell check and auto replace in the real
word. This spelling tutor feature is one from which my children and I
believe many children and adults would greatly benefit.

The cause for so much resistance and the need to voice it still baffling… It
is just a list of misspelled words. Why would this be so disconcerting?

As always, except for the washer thing, thank you for the thoughtful comments.

 

[Tony Jollans]

I'm not going to quibble over words. Yes, I *choose* to agree with Suzanne

I'm not sure that the argument that Word already does things it probably
shouldn't is grounds for suggesting that it do more. In particular I would
say that it should leave web page design to other dedicated software (very
few people actually like what Word does with web pages and I've never seen
it recommended as a tool for this). What it can do with images is pretty
limited. What it does with embedded objects (not actually as much as you
might think) is almost a requirement for the creation of many documents.

I don't think it's a difficult point to argue, and the reason, of course, is
that I enjoy a good argument Word is not a study aid and what you are
suggesting would put quite a heavy load on everyday activity; it would have
to keep track of every word you typed and whether or not you corrected it
(or maybe just changed it later - because not all misspellings result in
invalid words) or it was autocorrected or it was picked up by the
spellchecker (or the grammar checker) - and if so, what you did with it. In
fact the more I think about what it would have to do to effectively
implement such a facility, the more I am certain it shouldn't be done.

OK - maybe the washer analogy was extreme, but the point stands. Word does
a certain type of manipulation of words and other document content and there
are other programs which do other types of manipulation. The more that's
bundled together, the more it would cost to produce and to buy. Perhaps a
better analogy would be this: I have just got broadband Internet access and
I looked at the various packages that were available. I bought one for £15 a
month. I could have bought one for £30 a month (AOL, say) but I didn't want
most of the facilities (all, loosely, related to internet connection) that
were included in the AOL package; I didn't want them running on my machine
and I didn't want to pay for them. Your suggestion (not unreasonable for a
separately purchased addon) would be attractive to a fairly small subset of
current, or prospective, Word users but all would have to pay for it.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Following up on this, the spelling function would be a perfect application
for a Word add-in, to be added in only by those interested in using it (and
willing to take the performance hit that would inevitably result).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.

 

[Greg]

If joining (or re-joining a healthy fray) is debasement, then I to am
heading to de basement ;-).
You and Tony both appear to enjoy a good argument. So what's good for
the goose is good for the gander.

Personnally I am a terrible speller (actually I know how to spell, but
I am a careless typer and poor proofreader). I noticed with amusement
that you emphasize your spelling of "half to." Ok, half is spelled
correctly, but the English teacher would still make a mark on your
paper.

How would the enhanceement to Word you propose handle that? ;-)

I would wager heavily that the powers at Microsoft have the wherewithal
create a spelling enhancer like you envison, but at the end of the day
I don't feel that they will do so for the reasons that Suzanne and Tony
have put forth. I will add that it certainly isn't something that I
would want to pay extra for.

The List Spelling Errors Addin that I have posted on my website was
more a result of my personal efforts to learn how to use Class Modules
in VBA than enhance my spelling. Yes it is limited. I thought about
the enhancements that you recommended and quickly realized that
achieving them was far beyond my capability.

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

I am almost positive this group *has* seen requests that Word should solve
crosswords. Or perhaps I have it confused with the request that Word should
help write poetry by providing a rhyming dictionary.

Not to mention all the demands that Word should include a template for "how
to word a cover letter", a template for a letter of condolence to a friend,
a template for a letter of reprimand for an employee, etc, etc, etc.

Rndthought,

Suzanne's resistance to your idea comes from a context of seeing years of
ridiculous requests for Word. The ability to "export a list of misspelled
words in this document" could be quite useful, and I might vote for that,
but Greg's add-in has it covered.

But I am *solidly* against any implication that it is Word's responsibility
to teach people how to spell, and that's what you seemed to be asking.

I personally think that the more we depend on computer programs to *think*
for us on an everyday level, the closer we move to the apocalypse. So
resisting such a suggestion becomes a matter of principle.

 

[Guest]

Thank you Suzanne.

Following up on this, the spelling function would be a perfect application
for a Word add-in, to be added in only by those interested in using it (and
willing to take the performance hit that would inevitably result).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.

 

[Guest]

Tony,

I apologize for that opening remark. It didn’t come across as I intended.
I’m sorry.

That MS Word shouldn’t do anything hasn’t been any concern of mine. All of
you have attention focused on explaining what I’d like it to do! And
hopefully I’ve been respectful and friendly throughout with one exception to
you Tony.

First, MS Word already keeps track of every word you type and checks it
against the dictionary. There would be no additional over head there.

Second, to simply write a word to a file when either the auto correct is
fired or when the user makes a selection in the drop down list from spell
checker would not seemingly over tax the system. Certainly trivial compared
to the UNDO feature that is undetectable in the background.

Third, I do not know what you mean by effectively implement. All I’ve mused
about is a simple misspelled word list that could be fed back into the text
to voice feature that is already a feature in MS Word. I’ll leave grammar
enhancements to the grammar checker that is, again, already a feature in MS
Word.

The more MS Word can do the better. (And it would seem every release has
aspired to do much more than each previous release) But again all those
other things everyone has brought up (crosswords, poetry, insipid math
puzzles in the Daily, word peace) haven’t been a concern of mine. The points
were brought up simply to demonstrate it already does so much more than “word
processing.†So saying that a feature that deals with spelling is
ridiculous, I dare say, is ridiculous. MS Word is not a study aid…why not?
Why not state MS Word isn’t a HTML code writing tool, go use (whatever MS
product is for that) or MS Word isn’t a layout tool, go use MS Publisher if
you want photos in a document. Why, because those features are there. So
arguing that if a feature isn’t already there then it should not be included
just doesn’t stand.

Am I correct that you, Suzanne, Greg, and now Daiya (hello) are opposed
because essentially: to produce a list of misspelled words would first, over
tax the system and second, add too much additional cost to the product?

If we assume, for friendly discussion, no performance or cost issues, that
then it would be an agreeable feature? If so then we’ll be at agreement and
I can go to bed thankful of some new acquaintances! If not, I’m still going
to bed and I’d still by each of you a pint!

And no Tony, I don’t believe the broadband parallel is much better. I
don’t do HTML or pictures in documents and still HAVE TO (just for you Greg
) take MS Word as it comes, and with no complaints! Eons better than Word
Perfect 5 for which I spent 2x as much. Spelling is to word processing as…

Thank you all.

 

[Guest]

Suzanne,

<wink> I'll buy you two pints!

Following up on this, the spelling function would be a perfect application
for a Word add-in, to be added in only by those interested in using it (and
willing to take the performance hit that would inevitably result).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.