Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word’s spell-checker

re: Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word’s spell-checker

Stewart Kirkpatrick — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 10:47:23 GMT

SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENT: Spell checker to check that day and date correspond. Example Tuesday 11th July 2012 (11th July 2012 is a Wednesday) and 31st June 2012 (there are only 30 days in June).

re: Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word’s spell-checker

arvind — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:54:26 GMT

some more ideas here, if you're interested

http://sensemaya.org/2009/11/06/11-simple-ways-improve-words-spell-grammar-checker

re: Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word’s spell-checker

bhaskar — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 17:10:29 GMT

fixed cell address by shotcut command without typing $.

addressing cell location by (if) function.

All Graph feature in single selection menu.

re: Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word’s spell-checker

bhaskar — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 17:06:13 GMT

bullet seting removal. table setting in word 2007

re: Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word’s spell-checker

Natural Language Group Microsoft Office — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:31:34 GMT

Hi Brad,

This is exactly what the Word 2007 contextual speller does, in fact. The examples above with the show that “manger” is flagged in certain contexts (in a sentence like He is a marketing manger, for instance) and not in other contexts (e.g. Jesus was born in a manger). See the screenshots above with these examples about “manger”: the word is flagged in some contexts and is still in the lexicon. The kinds of statistics you mention have been used to create this contextual speller (you can follow the links above to read the other posts about that cool feature).

Thanks for your feedback!

Thierry

re: Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word’s spell-checker

Brad Dodson (bdodson@microsoft.com) — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:22:11 GMT

I've thought this kind of thing for a while. I actually think that the Word spell-checker should use a bayesian approach: basically do a probability analysis of the usage rates of all words in the english language, along with their co-occurance rates. Thus if I use the word manger, it gets flagged if also used with business and program, but not if used with barn and cattle. I've always thought that the binary decision to either include or exclude a word from the dictionary was a rather crude tool. It would be very cool if the spell-checker knew a huge variety of words but nevertheless flagged them if the context did not suggest that they were appropriate.

I'm sure performance could get tricky, but basically the decision to flag a word would become just answering the question: how likely is this word to appear here.

I think this could also improve the quality of suggestions made too.

Can I remove a word from Office’s speller dictionary?

Office Natural Language Team Blog — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 08:54:08 GMT

The other day, I was discussing a number of suggestions to improve Office’s spell-checker . A customer

Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word???s spell-checker : EasyCoded

Suggested improvements to Microsoft Word???s spell-checker : EasyCoded — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 07:46:57 GMT

PingBack from http://www.easycoded.com/suggested-improvements-to-microsoft-word%e2%80%99s-spell-checker/