View the edtech Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in edtech's December 1992 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in edtech's December 1992 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the edtech home page.
Jay Lemke makes some good points. Couldn't say I disagree with any of them. But I occasionally use grammar checkers and their summaries __ Because __ they are superficial and non-semantic. 1. If you write instructions for people, you want the instructions as simple and direct as possible. Simple sentences and simple, unambiguous words are desirable for this use. You also might want a quick summary of statistics that indicate that the instructions are at a sixth grade level using the Flesch scale, for example. Given these, you can comfortably assume that many college graduates will be able to follow the instructions --IF-- they read the instructions. 2. If you couldn't care less whether a period goes inside or outside of a parenthesis, as long as you understand what you read and write, a checker can point out these sorts of trivial conventions and save time. You al so get to concentrate on semantic meaning instead of the hobgoblins of academia .... 3. Computers are tools. Languages are tools. Bob Kamper [kamper at nervm.bitnet] "It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing"