Spell checker: When to use MS Word's and when Hunspell's? Thread poster: romimiret
|
|---|
romimiret
Local time: 12:04
English to Spanish
Hi everyone.
I've read several threads about one spell checker or the other being better when used with a specific tool.
But I wonder now WHY one Spell checker can be better for some languages than the other spell checker. As well do you know for which languages it is recommended to use Hunspell and for which MS Word and why?
I understand, for exmaple, that MS Word works perfectly well for Spanish, but for Slavic langauges, such as Russian and Ukranian, Hu... See more Hi everyone.
I've read several threads about one spell checker or the other being better when used with a specific tool.
But I wonder now WHY one Spell checker can be better for some languages than the other spell checker. As well do you know for which languages it is recommended to use Hunspell and for which MS Word and why?
I understand, for exmaple, that MS Word works perfectly well for Spanish, but for Slavic langauges, such as Russian and Ukranian, Hunspell is the one recommended.
Thanks in advance
Romina ▲ Collapse
| | | | | MS Word not for German | Oct 28, 2016 |
I would not recommend MS Word for German as the spell checker still uses the old orthograph.
In German I'd only use the Duden spell checker.
| | | | | I have not used Hunspell for years... | Oct 28, 2016 |
... but it does depend on the dictionary, and this will obviously vary from one language to another.
I can see that in Danish it is actually used, chiefly with Open source and Mac applications - which is logical.
For English, when I had to use Hunspell with Trados, it flagged a lot of false errors, because it simply did not recognise the terminology I was using - and I believe it was more based on US English than UK. This may have been due to the way it was set up, but wheneve... See more ... but it does depend on the dictionary, and this will obviously vary from one language to another.
I can see that in Danish it is actually used, chiefly with Open source and Mac applications - which is logical.
For English, when I had to use Hunspell with Trados, it flagged a lot of false errors, because it simply did not recognise the terminology I was using - and I believe it was more based on US English than UK. This may have been due to the way it was set up, but whenever I have had the choice, I go for Microsoft's spelling checker.
Microsoft recognises most of the terminology I use, but has an has an 'add to dictionary' option for anything that may be missing.
English is so widely used that any self-respecting spelling checker has to handle it, but with other languages it probably does vary considerably, depending on what resources are available, who has developed the dictionary, and other factors too.
I must admit I am surprised that MS Word still uses the old orthography for German - the reform was back in the last century! But if in practice everyone uses Duden, and there is no demand for any other updated spelling checker, then there is no point spending a lot of time and resources, even for a major language like German. ▲ Collapse
| | | | |
|
|
|
| MS Word German | Oct 28, 2016 |
I did not know that I could activate it.
I have the last version of MS Word so I would have found it normal to have a spell checker with it which is up to date without having to activate whatsoever.
I'll try that tough.
| | | | Heinrich Pesch 
Finland
Local time: 18:04
Member (2003)
Finnish to German
+ ...
| Hunspell useless for Finnish | Oct 29, 2016 |
Because every Finnish substantive or verb or adjective can have thousands of endings depending on the grammatical position, only MS Word can be used. Word knows the rules of Finnish quite well, but of course there are cases where it thinks some perfectly spelled word is not right. But the same is true for Word in German.
Alas Word spellcheck stopped working in SDL Studio 2015 editor, and it never has worked in WFP.
| | | | romimiret
Local time: 12:04
English to Spanish
TOPIC STARTER | Amazing thanks! | Oct 31, 2016 |
Thanks, people. I will continue gathering information.
As for Spanish, we have always been told that MS Word spell checker is THE one, but I never asked myself why it was better than the others, and therefore never tried a different one.
Any French linguist out there? I would like to have an input for French language specially.
| | | | Didier Briel
France
Local time: 17:04
English to French
+ ...
| Similar results for English to French | Nov 2, 2016 |
romimiret wrote:
Any French linguist out there? I would like to have an input for French language specially.
I use both, because I use Hunspell in OmegaT and proofread in Word (2010).
As far as *spelling* is concerned (I'm not talking about grammar), I don't see much difference between Word and Hunspell.
Personally, I find Hunspell slightly better.
For the 1990 orthography reform, you can choose to use it or not in Word.
With Hunspell, you can select your preferred dictionary:
http://www.dicollecte.org/download.php?prj=fr
There's "français classique", "français moderne" and "français toutes variantes".
Didier
| | |
|
|
|
esperantisto
Local time: 18:04
Member (2006)
English to Russian
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER
Hunspell
a) supports more languages (no support for, say, Belarusian or Esperanto in MS Word, whereas Hunspell dictionaries are available for both);
b) lets you switch between language/spelling variants that have no distinctive codes (such as with ё, or without ё, or mixed, or even pre-1917 spellings for Russian, taraškievica or narkomaŭka for Belarusian);
c) is more versatile, used in a bunch of programs (OmegaT, Mozilla Firefox, memoQ, W... See more Hunspell
a) supports more languages (no support for, say, Belarusian or Esperanto in MS Word, whereas Hunspell dictionaries are available for both);
b) lets you switch between language/spelling variants that have no distinctive codes (such as with ё, or without ё, or mixed, or even pre-1917 spellings for Russian, taraškievica or narkomaŭka for Belarusian);
c) is more versatile, used in a bunch of programs (OmegaT, Mozilla Firefox, memoQ, Wordfast Pro, Apache OpenOffice/LibreOffice…);
d) lets you edit dictionaries that are mere text files;
e) is much better for badly misspelled or joined words (especially useful for checking scanned documents);
f) does not require Word ▲ Collapse
| | | | CafeTran Training (X)
Netherlands
Local time: 17:04
esperantisto wrote:
Hunspell
a) supports more languages (no support for, say, Belarusian or Esperanto in MS Word, whereas Hunspell dictionaries are available for both);
b) lets you switch between language/spelling variants that have no distinctive codes (such as with ё, or without ё, or mixed, or even pre-1917 spellings for Russian, taraškievica or narkomaŭka for Belarusian);
c) is more versatile, used in a bunch of programs (OmegaT, Mozilla Firefox, memoQ, Wordfast Pro, Apache OpenOffice/LibreOffice,
CafeTran…);
d) lets you edit dictionaries that are mere text files; e) is much better for badly misspelled or joined words (especially useful for checking scanned documents); f) does not require Word
g) lets you tweak its behaviour via a settings file
h) can be used for stemming
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Spell checker: When to use MS Word's and when Hunspell's? | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
| | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
