Re: Trigger spell checking before sending [flyspell?]

["Loris Bennett" <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de>]

Emanuel Berg <embe8573@student.uu.se> writes:

> "Andrzej A. Filip" <andrzej.filip@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Do you use flyspell? It may deliver what you want in
>> another way.
>
> Ispell is better. Write, then spell, then send. Do it
> all at once you loose your mindfulness and the result
> will suffer.

We didn't have mindfulness (or spell-checking, for that matter) when I
was growing up.  Historians of the future will tell us (or themselves)
whether the results suffered.

> Flyspell sounds good but in practice too
> many words that should be there aren't, which means
> correct words will pop up as incorrect or unknown all
> the time while typing.

To avoid this, add the words to your personal dictionary (don't you have
to do with ispell too?).

> This is when the brain should not focus on spelling but on conveying a
> message from one person to another. The fingers should do the spelling
> and in time they will. For the occasional mistake spellcheck just
> before send is a much better idea.

When I'm writing English, my first language, flyspell tends to pickup
typos rather than real spelling mistakes.  In German, my second
language, I'm more likely to misspell a word (although German spelling
is easier, even if they do change it every few years ...)

It would be interesting to know whether there is any empirical evidence
as to whether being corrected as you go à la flyspell as opposed to
doing a final spell-check ispell-style has any effect on the quality of
one's spelling over time.

Cheers,

Loris

-- 
This signature is currently under construction.
_______________________________________________
info-gnus-english mailing list
info-gnus-english@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-gnus-english