Most modern word processing applications have automated checking tools built-in, usually for things like spell-checking, grammar checking or even a built-in thesaurus. Most writers understand and appreciate the value of such tools and use them daily to help ensure a level of quality in their writing. Some, however, see an over-reliance on them as a contributing factor in a general degradation of the English literacy standard. If, like me, you view them as a valuable tool to assist your writing, when used properly and wisely, then there are some points you should consider. Don’t be fooled; they will never cure your writing ills.
A spell checker will save you huge amounts of time, especially if you write a lot, but you must bear its limitations in mind. Modern word processors like Microsoft Word, with instant highlighting of spelling mistakes allow you to go quickly through your text and correct obvious errors before you undertake your proofreading. This is where a great many authors go wrong or fail to appreciate what the spell checker is doing and what it’s checking for. They mistakenly believe that having carried out a spell-check, all the words will now be spelled correctly.
In general terms, the spell checker only confirms that all of the words are in the software dictionary, not whether you, the writer, have used them in the right place or even in the right order or context. Think about common mistakes when using ‘their’ and ‘there’. A spell-checker will not highlight where you might have used the wrong one. You would have to read your writing to notice that mistake.
Spell-checkers will not help with consistency either, since you can easily use different, but still correct, spellings of the same words within a single document or article. For example, you could include both ‘authorize’ and ‘authorise’ in the same document without necessarily attracting a spell-checker error, but this could be seen as a significant inconsistency in your work. For technical writers especially, there should be a project or customer-related style guide to tell which version is acceptable. If you are writing as a freelancer, then you might be forced to decide for yourself which version is appropriate. Consider writing your personal style guide to help record such decisions for future work and clients.
Just as with spell-checkers, some writers dismiss automatic grammar checking as something the experienced writer shouldn’t need, or even as a menace to the English language. Despite such views, a grammar checker can still be a useful tool, provided it’s used in combination with a sound understanding of what it contributes to your writing and its significant limitations. All writers need to understand that a software-based grammar checker is not, and can never be, a substitute for thorough proofreading and having a fundamentally firm grasp of grammar and language use. Grammar checkers can be excellent for catching small typos like repeated words, missing words or double spaces and will help to keep the quality of your writing high.
Bear in mind that the grammar checker is a piece of programmed software, using preset rules and algorithms, to compare your text with what it believes to be correct English. A particularly irritating tendency can be the highlighting of long sentences for correction. While in some cases, a long sentence can be shortened and made more readable, there are times when a well constructed long sentence is needed, despite what the grammar checker may highlight.
Critics have also highlighted that some checkers will confuse the subject-verb relationship and suggestions should always be taken as such; suggestions for you, the writer, to consider. Every writer must understand what automated grammar checkers and spell-checkers are able to provide in the way of assistance and improvement, but an understanding of its limitations is also vital. Spell-checkers and grammar checkers should complement your writing, editing, revising and proofreading process – not replace it.