[L. Mohan Arun]

Copy/paste these sentences into Word 2003 with spelling check enabled
(US english)

These are software that are very easy to use these days

There are downloads that is awesome

There is download that are awesome


The "are" in the first sentence is getting flagged for grammar when it
looks right to me.
The other two sentences seem to be wrong grammar yet W2003 does not
flag them.

I have always noticed that the words "software" and "download" have
trouble with Word 2003 grammar when used with different combinations
with the words "is" or "are" (singular or plural trouble)

-------------------------------------------------------
www.tinyurl.com/cheapwriting

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

I agree that the second and third are clearly wrong. I wouldn't use the
first, either, since I would avoid using "software" (clearly singular) with
a plural meaning.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"L. Mohan Arun" wrote in message
...
Copy/paste these sentences into Word 2003 with spelling check enabled
(US english)

These are software that are very easy to use these days

There are downloads that is awesome

There is download that are awesome


The "are" in the first sentence is getting flagged for grammar when it
looks right to me.
The other two sentences seem to be wrong grammar yet W2003 does not
flag them.

I have always noticed that the words "software" and "download" have
trouble with Word 2003 grammar when used with different combinations
with the words "is" or "are" (singular or plural trouble)

-------------------------------------------------------
www.tinyurl.com/cheapwriting

[L. Mohan Arun]

"Software" is not singular. It can be a plural term. May be this
discussion needs to be cross-posted to alt.usage.english but the
problem is with Word 2003 grammar.

In context:
You need to use special software to create your personal website.
These are software that are very easy to use these days.

This is correct but Word found fault with "are" so I changed it to
"These are pieces of software that are very easy to use these days."
and Word accepted the "are". This goes to show that software is not a
"singular" term.

To prove that Word 2003 does not consider software as a "singular" try
both these sentences:
Not all html editor software are created equal
Not all html editor software is created equal

Both do not get flagged for any error.

Here is another reference which clearly needs a plural reference for
"software"
"Other web site maker software are often bloated"

Here too, Word finds fault with the "are".

----------------------------------------
www.tinyurl.com/cheapwriting

[grammatim[_2_]]

On Feb 6, 12:53*am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:
"Software" is not singular. It can be a plural term. May be this
discussion needs to be cross-posted to alt.usage.english but the
problem is with Word 2003 grammar.

You are simply mistaken. The word "software" is singular, always. It
is what in English grammar is called a "mass noun," and even if it
refers to many different entities, it is always construed as singular.

In context:
You need to use special software to create your personal website.
These are software that are very easy to use these days.

This is incorrect. You can say "There is software that is very easy to
use," or you can say "There are programs that are very easy to use."
You cannot intermingle the two sentences.

This is correct but Word found fault with "are" so I changed it to
"These are pieces of software that are very easy to use these days."
and Word accepted the "are". This goes to show that software is not a
"singular" term.

No, it shows that "pieces" is a plural "count noun," which is
construed as plural.

To prove that Word 2003 does not consider software as a "singular" try
both these sentences:
Not all html editor software are created equal
Not all html editor software is created equal

Both do not get flagged for any error.

The first is incorrect. The second is correct.

Here is another reference which clearly needs a plural reference for
"software"
"Other web site maker software are often bloated"

That doesn't make any sense at all -- I can't even tell what you are
trying to say.

Here too, Word finds fault with the "are".

That is the least of the problems.

----------------------------------------www.tinyurl.com/cheapwriting

A further lesson of your experiences is that there is no fully
successful grammar-checking program. Language is just too complicated
for computers.

[L. Mohan Arun]

To prove that Word 2003 does not consider software as a "singular" try
both these sentences:
Not all html editor software are created equal
Not all html editor software is created equal
Both do not get flagged for any error.

The first is incorrect. The second is correct.

So how do you explain that Word does not flag the first sentence as
incorrect grammar? This is more about Word's grammar recognition than
about English usage..

Here is another reference which clearly needs a plural reference for
"software"
"Other web site maker software are often bloated"

That doesn't make any sense at all -- I can't even tell what you are trying to say.

It makes sense as is. A reference to all the other web site maker
software out there - clearly that is plural - a "collective noun" -
Word finds fault with the 'are" and wants to change it to "Other web
site maker software is often bloated". I want to say that all the
other software are bloated except this one.

Here too, Word finds fault with the "are".
That is the least of the problems.

It is a problem nonetheless... I dont agree that it is "least of the
problems".

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

The bottom line is that if you want to treat "software" as plural, then you
need to use another word, such as "programs" or "applications" or
"solutions."

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"L. Mohan Arun" wrote in message
...
To prove that Word 2003 does not consider software as a "singular" try
both these sentences:
Not all html editor software are created equal
Not all html editor software is created equal
Both do not get flagged for any error.

The first is incorrect. The second is correct.

So how do you explain that Word does not flag the first sentence as
incorrect grammar? This is more about Word's grammar recognition than
about English usage..

Here is another reference which clearly needs a plural reference for
"software"
"Other web site maker software are often bloated"

That doesn't make any sense at all -- I can't even tell what you are
trying to say.

It makes sense as is. A reference to all the other web site maker
software out there - clearly that is plural - a "collective noun" -
Word finds fault with the 'are" and wants to change it to "Other web
site maker software is often bloated". I want to say that all the
other software are bloated except this one.

Here too, Word finds fault with the "are".
That is the least of the problems.

It is a problem nonetheless... I dont agree that it is "least of the
problems".

[grammatim[_2_]]

On Feb 7, 2:26*am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:
To prove that Word 2003 does not consider software as a "singular" try
both these sentences:
Not all html editor software are created equal
Not all html editor software is created equal
Both do not get flagged for any error.
The first is incorrect. The second is correct.

So how do you explain that Word does not flag the first sentence as
incorrect grammar? This is more about Word's grammar recognition than
about English usage..

So now you have learned that computer grammar checkers are not
infallible! Machine Translation doesn't work particularly well,
either, because human language is far more complicated than anything
any computer yet programmed is able to handle.

Here is another reference which clearly needs a plural reference for
"software"
"Other web site maker software are often bloated"
That doesn't make any sense at all -- I can't even tell what you are trying to say.

It makes sense as is. A reference to all the other web site maker
software out there - clearly that is plural - a "collective noun" -

I'm sorry, but "web site maker software" isn't English. You might
intend "web sites of makers of software," or "software for making web
sites," and it isn't clear whether you are saying that the web sites
are bloated or the software is bloated.

Word finds fault with the 'are" and wants to change it to "Other web
site maker software is often bloated". I want to say that all the
other software are bloated except this one.

A string of four nouns with nothing between them is very unusual in
English, and the grammar-checking program probably simply saw that the
noun next before the verb is singular, and changed the verb to
singular.

Here too, Word finds fault with the "are".
That is the least of the problems.

It is a problem nonetheless... I dont agree that it is "least of the
problems".

It is not a problem, because the word "software" is singular, even if
it refers to more than one piece of software / more than one program.

[L. Mohan Arun]

I'm sorry, but "web site maker software" isn't English. You might
intend "web sites of makers of software," or "software for making web
sites," and it isn't clear whether you are saying that the web sites
are bloated or the software is bloated.


Disagree with you here - My work requires me to use this exact phrase
"web site maker software" It is just like "office productivity
software" . I dont intend to say web sites of makers of software - it
looks you are going on a different trail.

Going by your own version, "Other software for making web sites are
bloated." Gives an error in the "are" . It is not correct to say
"Other software for making web sites is bloated" because this sense is
plural not singular.

I dont want to use terms other than "software" because I need to use
the exact keyword phrase that includes the term "software".

Ultimately what I wanted to say is not about how infallible machine
translation is - I simply wanted to point out the quirks in W2003
grammar so the powers that be can fix it in the next release. I know
grammar sensing is not that perfect.

It is not a problem, because the word "software" is singular, even if
it refers to more than one piece of software / more than one program.

Disagree - IT IS a problem with W2003 grammar. And I still say
software is a term that needs to be plural not singular. Or both.

To prove this type this in w 2003
"There are other softwares for doing this."
"Softwares" term is flagged as error - right click - you will find
"software" as an option. Select that and it now complains about the
"are".

Bottom line: Both the words "download" and "software" needs fixing in
Grammar in W2003

[grammatim[_2_]]

On Feb 9, 8:28*am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:

I'm sorry, but "web site maker software" isn't English. You might
intend "web sites of makers of software," or "software for making web
sites," and it isn't clear whether you are saying that the web sites
are bloated or the software is bloated.

Disagree with you here - My work requires me to use this exact phrase
"web site maker software" It is just like "office productivity
software" . I dont intend to say web sites of makers of software - it
looks you are going on a different trail.

If your work requires that, I hope you don't intend your work to be
read by people in English-speaking countries.

Going by your own version, "Other software for making web sites are
bloated." Gives an error in the "are" . It is not correct to say
"Other software for making web sites is bloated" because this sense is
plural not singular.

How many times do you have to be told: verb concord in English follows
the grammatical number of the subject, not the notional or semantic
number. "Other software are bloated" is UNGRAMMATICAL in every variety
of English.

I dont want to use terms other than "software" because I need to use
the exact keyword phrase that includes the term "software".

Then you must use a singular verb.

Ultimately what I wanted to say is not about how infallible machine
translation is - I simply wanted to point out the quirks in W2003
grammar so the powers that be can fix it in the next release. I know
grammar sensing is not that perfect.

They will not, however, change the feature that correctly marks
"software are" as a mistake.

It is not a problem, because the word "software" is singular, even if
it refers to more than one piece of software / more than one program.

Disagree - IT IS a problem with W2003 grammar. And I still say
software is a term that needs to be plural not singular. Or both.

It is not a matter for "disagreement." It is a matter of the way the
English language is spoken. You do not get to decide to change
English.

To prove this type this in w 2003
"There are other softwares for doing this."
"Softwares" term is flagged as error - right click - you will find
"software" as an option. Select that and it now complains about the
"are".

Have you bothered to look in your English grammar book for the concept
"mass noun"? How is it possible that you studied English as a Second
Language and were never taught about mass nouns vs. count nouns?

Regarding those two errors, the computer is absolutely correct.

Bottom line: Both the words "download" and "software" needs fixing in
Grammar in W2003

Grammar checkers don't operate on words. They operate on grammar.

You had not previously brought up the word "download," and I most
definitely do not want to know what your problem with it is.

[L. Mohan Arun]

Disagree - IT IS a problem with W2003 grammar. And I still say
software is a term that needs to be plural not singular. Or both.

It is not a matter for "disagreement." It is a matter of the way the
English language is spoken. You do not get to decide to change
English.

I am not saying to change English - I am not interested in that. The
purpose of this discussion is that I think "software" can be both
singular or plural in meaning. The purpose of this posting is not
about usage of English, but about Word 2003 grammar. You can take a
look at the thread subject before you post any more of your answers or
please dont answer at all.

Specifically I am saying that both these sentences with the word
"software" are NOT getting flagged as errors in W2003 grammar

This Software pieces is great
These pieces of Software is great

It is blindly taking "software" as singular even though I have
qualified it with "pieces". So it IS something to do with W2003
grammar with the word "software"

To prove this type this in w 2003
"There are other softwares for doing this."
"Softwares" term is flagged as error - right click - you will find
"software" as an option. Select that and it now complains about the
"are".


Have you bothered to look in your English grammar book for the concept
"mass noun"? How is it possible that you studied English as a Second
Language and were never taught about mass nouns vs. count nouns?

Regarding those two errors, the computer is absolutely correct.

I have to say that you seem to be getting irritable with this thread
because you are indulging on a direct personal attack rather than
being an objective contributor. If this thread irritates you, then why
you are posting at all? Let others reply if at all they do.

Bottom line: Both the words "download" and "software" needs fixing in
Grammar in W2003

Grammar checkers don't operate on words. They operate on grammar.

Yeah so? What I meant is that the grammar implementation in W2003 that
involves these words are not perfect in my opinion.

You had not previously brought up the word "download," and I most
definitely do not want to know what your problem with it is.

Who said I wanted *you* to know what my problem is - This is a public
thread where others can read and understand about W2003 grammar
issues. I am not asking *you* in particular about any problem with the
word "download" in W2003 grammar.

If you really wanted to say that "software" is a mass or uncountable
noun you could have given an authoritative link like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun
I am not interested in *YOUR* opinion about English grammar or whether
Word 2003 grammar is correct or not, as you yourself may have English
as second language.

[grammatim[_2_]]

On Feb 13, 2:49*am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:
Disagree - IT IS a problem with W2003 grammar. And I still say
software is a term that needs to be plural not singular. Or both.
It is not a matter for "disagreement." It is a matter of the way the
English language is spoken. You do not get to decide to change
English.

I am not saying to change English - I am not interested in that. The
purpose of this discussion is that I think "software" can be both
singular or plural in meaning. The purpose of this posting is not
about usage of English, but about Word 2003 grammar. You can take a
look at the thread subject before you post any more of your answers or
please dont answer at all.

You are correct that "software" can be either singular or plural in
meaning. You are incorrect in supposing that the verb number agreees
with the meaning of the word rather than the form of the word.

I am a native speaker of English, I have a graduate degree in
linguistics, and I have worked as an editor for nearly forty years.

On this one particular point, "Word2003 grammar" is correct.

Specifically I am saying that both these sentences with the word
"software" are NOT getting flagged as errors in W2003 grammar

This Software pieces is great
These pieces of Software is great

You now completely change the topic, because the subject of the verb
is no longer "software," but "pieces"; of course the verb (as well as
the determinter "these") must be plural, and if "Word2003 grammar"
does not recognize that, then it's a pretty basic flaw in "Word2003
grammar."

It is blindly taking "software" as singular even though I have
qualified it with "pieces". So it IS something to do with W2003
grammar with the word "software"

You have not understood English grammar. What it should be reacting to
is not "software" at all, because "software" is not the subject of the
verb; "pieces" is.

To prove this type this in w 2003
"There are other softwares for doing this."
"Softwares" term is flagged as error - right click - you will find
"software" as an option. Select that and it now complains about the
"are".

Have you bothered to look in your English grammar book for the concept
"mass noun"? How is it possible that you studied English as a Second
Language and were never taught about mass nouns vs. count nouns?
Regarding those two errors, the computer is absolutely correct.

I have to say that you seem to be getting irritable with this thread
because you are indulging on a direct personal attack rather than
being an objective contributor. If this thread irritates you, then why
you are posting at all? Let others reply if at all they do.

Yes, I am getting irritable, because you continue to misstate the most
elementary facts of English grammar.

Bottom line: Both the words "download" and "software" needs fixing in
Grammar in W2003
Grammar checkers don't operate on words. They operate on grammar.

Yeah so? What I meant is that the grammar implementation in W2003 that
involves these words are not perfect in my opinion.

Any linguist knows that computerized grammar checkers are basically
failures. Human language is far too complex for any computer to
handle. (Yet humans master their own language by the time they're
about three years old.)

You had not previously brought up the word "download," and I most
definitely do not want to know what your problem with it is.

Who said I wanted *you* to know what my problem is - This is a public
thread where others can read and understand about W2003 grammar
issues. I am not asking *you* in particular about any problem with the
word "download" in W2003 grammar.

You were rude to Suzanne, one of the nicest people anywhere, and then
you ignored her second reply, so she wisely withdrew from the thread,
leaving it to me, who am known to be able to be rude to people who
provoke rudeness.

If you really wanted to say that "software" is a mass or uncountable
noun you could have given an authoritative link like this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun
I am not interested in *YOUR* opinion about English grammar or whether
Word 2003 grammar is correct or not, as you yourself may have English
as second language.

Your arrogance is unbelievable.

Maybe you should save your attacks for the people who took your (or
your parents') money for teaching you English, and failing so utterly.

[L. Mohan Arun]

This Software pieces is great
These pieces of Software is great
You now completely change the topic, because the subject of the verb
is no longer "software," but "pieces"; of course the verb (as well as
the determinter "these") must be plural, and if "Word2003 grammar"
does not recognize that, then it's a pretty basic flaw in "Word2003
grammar."

No this is not a different topic - take a look at the topic again -
"Quirk in W2003 grammar" related to the keyword "software". So in your
opinion it is "pretty basic flaw". Not mine. I think it is a flaw
nonetheless.

It is blindly taking "software" as singular even though I have
qualified it with "pieces". So it IS something to do with W2003
grammar with the word "software"
You have not understood English grammar. What it should be reacting to
is not "software" at all, because "software" is not the subject of the
verb; "pieces" is.

You have an attitude problem with non-English speakers that clouds
your objective judgement, if you have any. The word "pieces" by itself
is recognized as plural correctly, but when used with the "software"
combination it creates a problem. So "software" is still the problem.

I have to say that you seem to be getting irritable with this thread
because you are indulging on a direct personal attack rather than
being an objective contributor. If this thread irritates you, then why
you are posting at all? Let others reply if at all they do.

Yes, I am getting irritable, because you continue to misstate the most
elementary facts of English grammar.

yeah so, there are millions of people worldwide who have mistaken
assumptions in worldwide forum threads or newsgroup threads like this.
But you are the single person I have ever come across that indulged in
a direct attack and I would attribute it to your attitude about non-
English speakers who are using English.

You had not previously brought up the word "download," and I most
definitely do not want to know what your problem with it is.

Who said I wanted *you* to know what my problem is - This is a public
thread where others can read and understand about W2003 grammar
issues. I am not asking *you* in particular about any problem with the
word "download" in W2003 grammar.

You were rude to Suzanne, one of the nicest people anywhere, and
then
you ignored her second reply, so she wisely withdrew from the thread,
leaving it to me, who am known to be able to be rude to people who
provoke rudeness.

Are you out of your mind? I have not been rude to anybody in any
thread. Please clean your glasses from 40 years use and read through
the thread again from top to bottom for any hint of rudeness on my
part. It is *you* who are being rude to me, not the other way around.
If you can help, help. Otherwise please find somewhere else to post
about your irritations. And I have not "ignored her second reply"
because you replied after her, and I have replied concerning *your*
post. I have not provoked any rudeness - if you are rude to me on a
public thread, I can be rude too.

If you really wanted to say that "software" is a mass or uncountable
noun you could have given an authoritative link like this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun
I am not interested in *YOUR* opinion about English grammar or whether
Word 2003 grammar is correct or not, as you yourself may have English
as second language.

Your arrogance is unbelievable.

Maybe you should save your attacks for the people who took your (or
your parents') money for teaching you English, and failing so utterly.

Again, you are *crazy* and *with attitude problem* for saying "my
arrogance is unbelievable". It is who you are being arrogant with me.
And I can say that I do better English than some of the native English
speakers and writers.

[grammatim[_2_]]

On Feb 14, 1:25*pm, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:

And I can say that I do better English than some of the native English
speakers and writers.

Sorry, what is "I do better English"?

[L. Mohan Arun]

I am sick and tired of the irritable and provoking replies in this
thread so my grammar has slipped up. This thread is not about my
grammar, it is about Word 2003 grammar.

More issues with Word 2003 grammar
These downloads is super-fast and free.

- Grammar error not recognized even though "download" is not a mass
noun.

The movie file downloads happens very fast

- No grammar issue recognized but it should be "happen very fast"

[Graham Mayor]

Fortunately we are not all as perfect as 'grammatim', but ultimately you are
correct that Word's grammar checker (like all other grammar checkers) has
limitations. Given the complexity and changing nature of the English
language, I doubt that there will ever be a grammar checker that will be
flawless. It is one of those things that you must learn to live with ... or
simply turn it off and use your own judgement.

--

Graham Mayor - Word MVP

My web site www.gmayor.com
Word MVP web site http://word.mvps.org



L. Mohan Arun wrote:
I am sick and tired of the irritable and provoking replies in this
thread so my grammar has slipped up. This thread is not about my
grammar, it is about Word 2003 grammar.

More issues with Word 2003 grammar
These downloads is super-fast and free.

- Grammar error not recognized even though "download" is not a mass
noun.

The movie file downloads happens very fast

- No grammar issue recognized but it should be "happen very fast"

[Tony Jollans]

it should be "happen very fast"

Actually it should be "happen very quickly" ;-)

The grammar checker is far from perfect and, whilst it will probably improve
over time, is likely to remain so. In general, it struggles with constructs
of the sort you are using as examples, which can't easily be parsed.

Not knowing quite how to interpret the sentence, Word has to make some
guesses. Given that the sentence has several possible nouns, several
possible verbs, no obvious adjectives, and appears somewhat odd on the
surface, my *guess* is that it assumes "movie" to be an adjective,
downloads" to be the verb, and "happens" to be a noun, which assumptions
allow it to consider the sentence to be valid.

Yes, it happens to be wrong, but we all make mistakes, one of which would be
relying on machine interpretations of language.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"L. Mohan Arun" wrote in message
...
I am sick and tired of the irritable and provoking replies in this
thread so my grammar has slipped up. This thread is not about my
grammar, it is about Word 2003 grammar.

More issues with Word 2003 grammar
These downloads is super-fast and free.

- Grammar error not recognized even though "download" is not a mass
noun.

The movie file downloads happens very fast

- No grammar issue recognized but it should be "happen very fast"

[grammatim[_2_]]

On Feb 15, 1:38*am, "Graham Mayor" wrote:
Fortunately we are not all as perfect as 'grammatim', but ultimately you are
correct that Word's grammar checker (like all other grammar checkers) has
limitations. Given the complexity and changing nature of the English
language, I doubt that there will ever be a grammar checker that will be
flawless. It is one of those things that you must learn to live with ... or
simply turn it off and use your own judgement.

It has nothing to do with "perfection." It has to do with two simple
facts. (1) Computers are not competent to judge the grammar of human
languages, and (2) L. Mohan Arun is not competent to assert what is
and what is not a grammatical sentence of English (witness his
repeated insistence that "software" can legitimately take a plural
verb).

This thread from the start has had nothing to do with using Word.

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb, but I don't see how any
grammar checker could parse "happens" as a noun since there is no way it
could be used as such. I suspect the issue is of not recognizing "download"
as a possible noun (only as a verb), which means it is making the verb agree
with "movie" or "file" (or "movie file").

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
it should be "happen very fast"

Actually it should be "happen very quickly" ;-)

The grammar checker is far from perfect and, whilst it will probably
improve over time, is likely to remain so. In general, it struggles with
constructs of the sort you are using as examples, which can't easily be
parsed.

Not knowing quite how to interpret the sentence, Word has to make some
guesses. Given that the sentence has several possible nouns, several
possible verbs, no obvious adjectives, and appears somewhat odd on the
surface, my *guess* is that it assumes "movie" to be an adjective,
downloads" to be the verb, and "happens" to be a noun, which assumptions
allow it to consider the sentence to be valid.

Yes, it happens to be wrong, but we all make mistakes, one of which would
be relying on machine interpretations of language.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"L. Mohan Arun" wrote in message
...
I am sick and tired of the irritable and provoking replies in this
thread so my grammar has slipped up. This thread is not about my
grammar, it is about Word 2003 grammar.

More issues with Word 2003 grammar
These downloads is super-fast and free.

- Grammar error not recognized even though "download" is not a mass
noun.

The movie file downloads happens very fast

- No grammar issue recognized but it should be "happen very fast"

[Tony Jollans]

There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb

That doesn't mean that it is correct here. Perhaps it's a difference between
English and American, and I will concede that such usage of "fast" is not
uncommon, but it jars horribly with me.

I suspect the issue is of not recognizing "download" as a possible noun
(only as a verb), which means it is making the verb agree with "movie" or
"file" (or "movie file").

I agree, and I was only guessing at how a machine might think; it's probably
given up the fight by the time it's got as far as "happens", but if it is
recognising (or treating) "downloads" as a verb, what can it think "happens"
might be, that wouldn't give rise to a grammar error of some sort?

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in message
...
There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb, but I don't see how any
grammar checker could parse "happens" as a noun since there is no way it
could be used as such. I suspect the issue is of not recognizing
"download" as a possible noun (only as a verb), which means it is making
the verb agree with "movie" or "file" (or "movie file").

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
it should be "happen very fast"

Actually it should be "happen very quickly" ;-)

The grammar checker is far from perfect and, whilst it will probably
improve over time, is likely to remain so. In general, it struggles with
constructs of the sort you are using as examples, which can't easily be
parsed.

Not knowing quite how to interpret the sentence, Word has to make some
guesses. Given that the sentence has several possible nouns, several
possible verbs, no obvious adjectives, and appears somewhat odd on the
surface, my *guess* is that it assumes "movie" to be an adjective,
downloads" to be the verb, and "happens" to be a noun, which assumptions
allow it to consider the sentence to be valid.

Yes, it happens to be wrong, but we all make mistakes, one of which would
be relying on machine interpretations of language.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"L. Mohan Arun" wrote in message
...
I am sick and tired of the irritable and provoking replies in this
thread so my grammar has slipped up. This thread is not about my
grammar, it is about Word 2003 grammar.

More issues with Word 2003 grammar
These downloads is super-fast and free.

- Grammar error not recognized even though "download" is not a mass
noun.

The movie file downloads happens very fast

- No grammar issue recognized but it should be "happen very fast"

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Will you accept the authority of the Oxford Dictionary?
http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexper...uster/a/adverb

Interestingly,
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&f...as+adverb&aqi=
turns up quite a few sites that use "fast" as an *example* of an adverb. The
fact that it doesn't end in -ly doesn't make it only an adjective any more
than ending in -ly makes "leisurely," "friendly," or "lonely" an adverb.
Many adverbs don't end in -ly, and some have the same form as an adjective.
See "Adjective and adverb with the same form" at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/le...rnitv217.shtml
(note: a BBC Web site, not U.S.). More at
http://www.fortunecity.com/bally/dur.../gramch25.html

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb

That doesn't mean that it is correct here. Perhaps it's a difference
between English and American, and I will concede that such usage of "fast"
is not uncommon, but it jars horribly with me.

I suspect the issue is of not recognizing "download" as a possible noun
(only as a verb), which means it is making the verb agree with "movie" or
"file" (or "movie file").

I agree, and I was only guessing at how a machine might think; it's
probably given up the fight by the time it's got as far as "happens", but
if it is recognising (or treating) "downloads" as a verb, what can it
think "happens" might be, that wouldn't give rise to a grammar error of
some sort?

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in message
...
There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb, but I don't see how any
grammar checker could parse "happens" as a noun since there is no way it
could be used as such. I suspect the issue is of not recognizing
"download" as a possible noun (only as a verb), which means it is making
the verb agree with "movie" or "file" (or "movie file").

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
it should be "happen very fast"

Actually it should be "happen very quickly" ;-)

The grammar checker is far from perfect and, whilst it will probably
improve over time, is likely to remain so. In general, it struggles with
constructs of the sort you are using as examples, which can't easily be
parsed.

Not knowing quite how to interpret the sentence, Word has to make some
guesses. Given that the sentence has several possible nouns, several
possible verbs, no obvious adjectives, and appears somewhat odd on the
surface, my *guess* is that it assumes "movie" to be an adjective,
downloads" to be the verb, and "happens" to be a noun, which assumptions
allow it to consider the sentence to be valid.

Yes, it happens to be wrong, but we all make mistakes, one of which
would be relying on machine interpretations of language.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"L. Mohan Arun" wrote in message
...
I am sick and tired of the irritable and provoking replies in this
thread so my grammar has slipped up. This thread is not about my
grammar, it is about Word 2003 grammar.

More issues with Word 2003 grammar
These downloads is super-fast and free.

- Grammar error not recognized even though "download" is not a mass
noun.

The movie file downloads happens very fast

- No grammar issue recognized but it should be "happen very fast"

[Tony Jollans]

I never suggested it wasn't - or couldn't be - an adverb; I merely think
it's the wrong adverb in context.

I do not like, and would not normally use, "he ran fast", whatever the OED
says. I might use "... need to drive so fast". The difference is so subtle
that it seems only I can see it g.

I must, of course, bow to the OED, and accept it as being correct.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in message
...
Will you accept the authority of the Oxford Dictionary?
http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexper...uster/a/adverb

Interestingly,
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&f...as+adverb&aqi=
turns up quite a few sites that use "fast" as an *example* of an adverb.
The fact that it doesn't end in -ly doesn't make it only an adjective any
more than ending in -ly makes "leisurely," "friendly," or "lonely" an
adverb. Many adverbs don't end in -ly, and some have the same form as an
adjective. See "Adjective and adverb with the same form" at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/le...rnitv217.shtml
(note: a BBC Web site, not U.S.). More at
http://www.fortunecity.com/bally/dur.../gramch25.html

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb

That doesn't mean that it is correct here. Perhaps it's a difference
between English and American, and I will concede that such usage of
"fast" is not uncommon, but it jars horribly with me.

I suspect the issue is of not recognizing "download" as a possible noun
(only as a verb), which means it is making the verb agree with "movie"
or "file" (or "movie file").

I agree, and I was only guessing at how a machine might think; it's
probably given up the fight by the time it's got as far as "happens", but
if it is recognising (or treating) "downloads" as a verb, what can it
think "happens" might be, that wouldn't give rise to a grammar error of
some sort?

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in message
...
There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb, but I don't see how any
grammar checker could parse "happens" as a noun since there is no way it
could be used as such. I suspect the issue is of not recognizing
"download" as a possible noun (only as a verb), which means it is making
the verb agree with "movie" or "file" (or "movie file").

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
it should be "happen very fast"

Actually it should be "happen very quickly" ;-)

The grammar checker is far from perfect and, whilst it will probably
improve over time, is likely to remain so. In general, it struggles
with constructs of the sort you are using as examples, which can't
easily be parsed.

Not knowing quite how to interpret the sentence, Word has to make some
guesses. Given that the sentence has several possible nouns, several
possible verbs, no obvious adjectives, and appears somewhat odd on the
surface, my *guess* is that it assumes "movie" to be an adjective,
downloads" to be the verb, and "happens" to be a noun, which
assumptions allow it to consider the sentence to be valid.

Yes, it happens to be wrong, but we all make mistakes, one of which
would be relying on machine interpretations of language.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"L. Mohan Arun" wrote in message
...
I am sick and tired of the irritable and provoking replies in this
thread so my grammar has slipped up. This thread is not about my
grammar, it is about Word 2003 grammar.

More issues with Word 2003 grammar
These downloads is super-fast and free.

- Grammar error not recognized even though "download" is not a mass
noun.

The movie file downloads happens very fast

- No grammar issue recognized but it should be "happen very fast"

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Okay, I will accept that you are making a distinction of usage rather than
grammar, and I'll bow to that since context certainly does determine the
suitability of given words.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
I never suggested it wasn't - or couldn't be - an adverb; I merely think
it's the wrong adverb in context.

I do not like, and would not normally use, "he ran fast", whatever the OED
says. I might use "... need to drive so fast". The difference is so subtle
that it seems only I can see it g.

I must, of course, bow to the OED, and accept it as being correct.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in message
...
Will you accept the authority of the Oxford Dictionary?
http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexper...uster/a/adverb

Interestingly,
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&f...as+adverb&aqi=
turns up quite a few sites that use "fast" as an *example* of an adverb.
The fact that it doesn't end in -ly doesn't make it only an adjective any
more than ending in -ly makes "leisurely," "friendly," or "lonely" an
adverb. Many adverbs don't end in -ly, and some have the same form as an
adjective. See "Adjective and adverb with the same form" at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/le...rnitv217.shtml
(note: a BBC Web site, not U.S.). More at
http://www.fortunecity.com/bally/dur.../gramch25.html

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb

That doesn't mean that it is correct here. Perhaps it's a difference
between English and American, and I will concede that such usage of
"fast" is not uncommon, but it jars horribly with me.

I suspect the issue is of not recognizing "download" as a possible noun
(only as a verb), which means it is making the verb agree with "movie"
or "file" (or "movie file").

I agree, and I was only guessing at how a machine might think; it's
probably given up the fight by the time it's got as far as "happens",
but if it is recognising (or treating) "downloads" as a verb, what can
it think "happens" might be, that wouldn't give rise to a grammar error
of some sort?

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in message
...
There's nothing wrong with "fast" as an adverb, but I don't see how any
grammar checker could parse "happens" as a noun since there is no way
it could be used as such. I suspect the issue is of not recognizing
"download" as a possible noun (only as a verb), which means it is
making the verb agree with "movie" or "file" (or "movie file").

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
it should be "happen very fast"

Actually it should be "happen very quickly" ;-)

The grammar checker is far from perfect and, whilst it will probably
improve over time, is likely to remain so. In general, it struggles
with constructs of the sort you are using as examples, which can't
easily be parsed.

Not knowing quite how to interpret the sentence, Word has to make some
guesses. Given that the sentence has several possible nouns, several
possible verbs, no obvious adjectives, and appears somewhat odd on the
surface, my *guess* is that it assumes "movie" to be an adjective,
downloads" to be the verb, and "happens" to be a noun, which
assumptions allow it to consider the sentence to be valid.

Yes, it happens to be wrong, but we all make mistakes, one of which
would be relying on machine interpretations of language.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"L. Mohan Arun" wrote in message
...
I am sick and tired of the irritable and provoking replies in this
thread so my grammar has slipped up. This thread is not about my
grammar, it is about Word 2003 grammar.

More issues with Word 2003 grammar
These downloads is super-fast and free.

- Grammar error not recognized even though "download" is not a mass
noun.

The movie file downloads happens very fast

- No grammar issue recognized but it should be "happen very fast"

[grammatim[_2_]]

Which of these does either of you prefer:

"Who was faster, Bannister or Coe?"
"Who was quicker, Bannister or Coe?"

(You don't need to be able to say _why_ you prefer one or the other,
only that one of them "feels" better than the other -- or not.)

On Feb 15, 4:03*pm, "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
Okay, I will accept that you are making a distinction of usage rather than
grammar, and I'll bow to that since context certainly does determine the
suitability of given words.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USAhttp://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in l...

I never suggested it wasn't - or couldn't be - an adverb; I merely think
it's the wrong adverb in context.

I do not like, and would not normally use, "he ran fast", whatever the OED
says. I might use "... need to drive so fast". The difference is so subtle
that it seems only I can see it g.

I must, of course, bow to the OED, and accept it as being correct.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

But there it's a matter of adjectives, not adverbs. I personally have no
objection to "he ran fast," so you'll have to take this up with Tony.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"grammatim" wrote in message
...
Which of these does either of you prefer:

"Who was faster, Bannister or Coe?"
"Who was quicker, Bannister or Coe?"

(You don't need to be able to say _why_ you prefer one or the other,
only that one of them "feels" better than the other -- or not.)

On Feb 15, 4:03 pm, "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
Okay, I will accept that you are making a distinction of usage rather than
grammar, and I'll bow to that since context certainly does determine the
suitability of given words.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USAhttp://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in
l...

I never suggested it wasn't - or couldn't be - an adverb; I merely think
it's the wrong adverb in context.

I do not like, and would not normally use, "he ran fast", whatever the
OED
says. I might use "... need to drive so fast". The difference is so
subtle
that it seems only I can see it g.

I must, of course, bow to the OED, and accept it as being correct.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

[Tony Jollans]

As Suzanne says, these are adjectives, but there is still a difference; in
isolation, I prefer the first, although either could be acceptable,
dependent upon the wider context.

I might need to sleep on it before expressing a cogent defence, though :-)

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"grammatim" wrote in message
...
Which of these does either of you prefer:

"Who was faster, Bannister or Coe?"
"Who was quicker, Bannister or Coe?"

(You don't need to be able to say _why_ you prefer one or the other,
only that one of them "feels" better than the other -- or not.)

On Feb 15, 4:03 pm, "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
Okay, I will accept that you are making a distinction of usage rather than
grammar, and I'll bow to that since context certainly does determine the
suitability of given words.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USAhttp://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in
l...

I never suggested it wasn't - or couldn't be - an adverb; I merely think
it's the wrong adverb in context.

I do not like, and would not normally use, "he ran fast", whatever the
OED
says. I might use "... need to drive so fast". The difference is so
subtle
that it seems only I can see it g.

I must, of course, bow to the OED, and accept it as being correct.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

[grammatim[_2_]]

Part of my point is that the difference between "fast" and "quickly"
in the initial sentence doesn't turn on part of speech, but on lexical
choice; part of my point is to show how a tiny linguistics experiment
can help clear up the question about the initial sentence by looking
at the data from a different angle.

On Feb 15, 5:57*pm, "Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com
wrote:
As Suzanne says, these are adjectives, but there is still a difference; in
isolation, I prefer the first, although either could be acceptable,
dependent upon the wider context.

I might need to sleep on it before expressing a cogent defence, though :-)

--
Enjoy,
Tony

*www.WordArticles.com

"grammatim" wrote in message

...
Which of these does either of you prefer:

"Who was faster, Bannister or Coe?"
"Who was quicker, Bannister or Coe?"

(You don't need to be able to say _why_ you prefer one or the other,
only that one of them "feels" better than the other -- or not.)

On Feb 15, 4:03 pm, "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:



Okay, I will accept that you are making a distinction of usage rather than
grammar, and I'll bow to that since context certainly does determine the
suitability of given words.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USAhttp://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in
l...

I never suggested it wasn't - or couldn't be - an adverb; I merely think
it's the wrong adverb in context.

I do not like, and would not normally use, "he ran fast", whatever the
OED
says. I might use "... need to drive so fast". The difference is so
subtle
that it seems only I can see it g.

I must, of course, bow to the OED, and accept it as being correct.

--
Enjoy,
Tony-

[Tony Jollans]

Part of my point is that the difference between "fast" and "quickly"
in the initial sentence doesn't turn on part of speech, but on lexical
choice;

I completely agree. When I first posted it, I didn't give it a lot of
thought; it wasn't the main point, and I did add a smiley; it was just
something that seemed correct to me.

Both you and Suzanne are better linguists than I, and I wouldn't argue
(much) in my own defence, but, having slept on it, I think the difference
between "fast" and "quickly" is related to whether one is describing a
completed action, similar to the difference between the imperfect and
perfect tenses.

part of my point is to show how a tiny linguistics experiment
can help clear up the question about the initial sentence by looking
at the data from a different angle.

I agree completely here too! I am reminded of Enoch Powell, an English
politician of thirty or so years ago, who, when asked about his precise
speech, replied that he translated everything into latin before saying it,
and if it wouldn't translate, it must be wrong. I don't think I would dream
of doing anything like that, even if I could, but it would certainly be a
way of looking from a different angle.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"grammatim" wrote in message
...
Part of my point is that the difference between "fast" and "quickly"
in the initial sentence doesn't turn on part of speech, but on lexical
choice; part of my point is to show how a tiny linguistics experiment
can help clear up the question about the initial sentence by looking
at the data from a different angle.

On Feb 15, 5:57 pm, "Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com
wrote:
As Suzanne says, these are adjectives, but there is still a difference; in
isolation, I prefer the first, although either could be acceptable,
dependent upon the wider context.

I might need to sleep on it before expressing a cogent defence, though :-)

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"grammatim" wrote in message

...
Which of these does either of you prefer:

"Who was faster, Bannister or Coe?"
"Who was quicker, Bannister or Coe?"

(You don't need to be able to say _why_ you prefer one or the other,
only that one of them "feels" better than the other -- or not.)

On Feb 15, 4:03 pm, "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:



Okay, I will accept that you are making a distinction of usage rather
than
grammar, and I'll bow to that since context certainly does determine the
suitability of given words.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USAhttp://word.mvps.org

"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in
l...

I never suggested it wasn't - or couldn't be - an adverb; I merely
think
it's the wrong adverb in context.

I do not like, and would not normally use, "he ran fast", whatever the
OED
says. I might use "... need to drive so fast". The difference is so
subtle
that it seems only I can see it g.

I must, of course, bow to the OED, and accept it as being correct.

--
Enjoy,
Tony-

[Gordon Bentley-Mix]

For once, Peter, I agree with you completely on all points. (And I mean that
sincerely.)
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

Uninvited email contact will be marked as SPAM and ignored. Please post all
follow-ups to the newsgroup.


"grammatim" wrote:

On Feb 13, 2:49 am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:
Disagree - IT IS a problem with W2003 grammar. And I still say
software is a term that needs to be plural not singular. Or both.
It is not a matter for "disagreement." It is a matter of the way the
English language is spoken. You do not get to decide to change
English.

I am not saying to change English - I am not interested in that. The
purpose of this discussion is that I think "software" can be both
singular or plural in meaning. The purpose of this posting is not
about usage of English, but about Word 2003 grammar. You can take a
look at the thread subject before you post any more of your answers or
please dont answer at all.

You are correct that "software" can be either singular or plural in
meaning. You are incorrect in supposing that the verb number agreees
with the meaning of the word rather than the form of the word.

I am a native speaker of English, I have a graduate degree in
linguistics, and I have worked as an editor for nearly forty years.

On this one particular point, "Word2003 grammar" is correct.

Specifically I am saying that both these sentences with the word
"software" are NOT getting flagged as errors in W2003 grammar

This Software pieces is great
These pieces of Software is great

You now completely change the topic, because the subject of the verb
is no longer "software," but "pieces"; of course the verb (as well as
the determinter "these") must be plural, and if "Word2003 grammar"
does not recognize that, then it's a pretty basic flaw in "Word2003
grammar."

It is blindly taking "software" as singular even though I have
qualified it with "pieces". So it IS something to do with W2003
grammar with the word "software"

You have not understood English grammar. What it should be reacting to
is not "software" at all, because "software" is not the subject of the
verb; "pieces" is.

To prove this type this in w 2003
"There are other softwares for doing this."
"Softwares" term is flagged as error - right click - you will find
"software" as an option. Select that and it now complains about the
"are".

Have you bothered to look in your English grammar book for the concept
"mass noun"? How is it possible that you studied English as a Second
Language and were never taught about mass nouns vs. count nouns?
Regarding those two errors, the computer is absolutely correct.

I have to say that you seem to be getting irritable with this thread
because you are indulging on a direct personal attack rather than
being an objective contributor. If this thread irritates you, then why
you are posting at all? Let others reply if at all they do.

Yes, I am getting irritable, because you continue to misstate the most
elementary facts of English grammar.

Bottom line: Both the words "download" and "software" needs fixing in
Grammar in W2003
Grammar checkers don't operate on words. They operate on grammar.

Yeah so? What I meant is that the grammar implementation in W2003 that
involves these words are not perfect in my opinion.

Any linguist knows that computerized grammar checkers are basically
failures. Human language is far too complex for any computer to
handle. (Yet humans master their own language by the time they're
about three years old.)

You had not previously brought up the word "download," and I most
definitely do not want to know what your problem with it is.

Who said I wanted *you* to know what my problem is - This is a public
thread where others can read and understand about W2003 grammar
issues. I am not asking *you* in particular about any problem with the
word "download" in W2003 grammar.

You were rude to Suzanne, one of the nicest people anywhere, and then
you ignored her second reply, so she wisely withdrew from the thread,
leaving it to me, who am known to be able to be rude to people who
provoke rudeness.

If you really wanted to say that "software" is a mass or uncountable
noun you could have given an authoritative link like this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun
I am not interested in *YOUR* opinion about English grammar or whether
Word 2003 grammar is correct or not, as you yourself may have English
as second language.

Your arrogance is unbelievable.

Maybe you should save your attacks for the people who took your (or
your parents') money for teaching you English, and failing so utterly.

[grammatim[_2_]]

Thanks! In the sprinters question, I like "faster" better than
"quicker." What do you say?

On Feb 16, 5:28*am, Gordon Bentley-Mix gordon(dot)bentleymix(at)gmail
(dot)com wrote:
For once, Peter, I agree with you completely on all points. (And I mean that
sincerely.)
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

Uninvited email contact will be marked as SPAM and ignored. Please post all
follow-ups to the newsgroup.



"grammatim" wrote:
On Feb 13, 2:49 am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:
Disagree - IT IS a problem with W2003 grammar. And I still say
software is a term that needs to be plural not singular. Or both.
It is not a matter for "disagreement." It is a matter of the way the
English language is spoken. You do not get to decide to change
English.

I am not saying to change English - I am not interested in that. The
purpose of this discussion is that I think "software" can be both
singular or plural in meaning. The purpose of this posting is not
about usage of English, but about Word 2003 grammar. You can take a
look at the thread subject before you post any more of your answers or
please dont answer at all.

You are correct that "software" can be either singular or plural in
meaning. You are incorrect in supposing that the verb number agreees
with the meaning of the word rather than the form of the word.

I am a native speaker of English, I have a graduate degree in
linguistics, and I have worked as an editor for nearly forty years.

On this one particular point, "Word2003 grammar" is correct.

Specifically I am saying that both these sentences with the word
"software" are NOT getting flagged as errors in W2003 grammar

This Software pieces is great
These pieces of Software is great

You now completely change the topic, because the subject of the verb
is no longer "software," but "pieces"; of course the verb (as well as
the determinter "these") must be plural, and if "Word2003 grammar"
does not recognize that, then it's a pretty basic flaw in "Word2003
grammar."

It is blindly taking "software" as singular even though I have
qualified it with "pieces". So it IS something to do with W2003
grammar with the word "software"

You have not understood English grammar. What it should be reacting to
is not "software" at all, because "software" is not the subject of the
verb; "pieces" is.

To prove this type this in w 2003
"There are other softwares for doing this."
"Softwares" term is flagged as error - right click - you will find
"software" as an option. Select that and it now complains about the
"are".

Have you bothered to look in your English grammar book for the concept
"mass noun"? How is it possible that you studied English as a Second
Language and were never taught about mass nouns vs. count nouns?
Regarding those two errors, the computer is absolutely correct.

I have to say that you seem to be getting irritable with this thread
because you are indulging on a direct personal attack rather than
being an objective contributor. If this thread irritates you, then why
you are posting at all? Let others reply if at all they do.

Yes, I am getting irritable, because you continue to misstate the most
elementary facts of English grammar.

Bottom line: Both the words "download" and "software" needs fixing in
Grammar in W2003
Grammar checkers don't operate on words. They operate on grammar.

Yeah so? What I meant is that the grammar implementation in W2003 that
involves these words are not perfect in my opinion.

Any linguist knows that computerized grammar checkers are basically
failures. Human language is far too complex for any computer to
handle. (Yet humans master their own language by the time they're
about three years old.)

You had not previously brought up the word "download," and I most
definitely do not want to know what your problem with it is.

Who said I wanted *you* to know what my problem is - This is a public
thread where others can read and understand about W2003 grammar
issues. I am not asking *you* in particular about any problem with the
word "download" in W2003 grammar.

You were rude to Suzanne, one of the nicest people anywhere, and then
you ignored her second reply, so she wisely withdrew from the thread,
leaving it to me, who am known to be able to be rude to people who
provoke rudeness.

If you really wanted to say that "software" is a mass or uncountable
noun you could have given an authoritative link like this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun
I am not interested in *YOUR* opinion about English grammar or whether
Word 2003 grammar is correct or not, as you yourself may have English
as second language.

Your arrogance is unbelievable.

Maybe you should save your attacks for the people who took your (or
your parents') money for teaching you English, and failing so utterly.-

[Gordon Bentley-Mix]

Peter,

In my mind there is an extremely fine but important difference between
"fast" and "quick". Fast is related to top speed, whereas quick has more to
do with agility or acceleration.Therefore, while the two sentences are highly
similar, they are not identical.

As for my preference, it depends on what information is being requested. If
the question is about who had the greater maximum speed, then "faster" is the
logical choice. However, if the question is about who could reach a certain
speed soonest, then "quicker" wins. (Pun intended ;-P)

For example, the Bugatti Veyron is billed as being the fastest production
car in the world by virtue of its top speed approaching 300 km/h. However,
there are several production cars which reach 100 km/h in less time and,
therefore, are quicker.

Similarly, something like a Lotus Esprit could probably traverse a winding,
hilly route in less time than a Veyron, and in this instance, I would
classify the Esprit as quicker - although the Veyron is indisputably faster.

Don't you just *love* English? The subtleties are spectacular! No wonder
non-native speakers - no matter how well schooled - find it so difficult, and
software - no matter how well designed - struggles so much.

(Hmm... "software struggles"... is that correct? Word seems to think so.eg)
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

Uninvited email contact will be marked as SPAM and ignored. Please post all
follow-ups to the newsgroup.


"grammatim" wrote:

Thanks! In the sprinters question, I like "faster" better than
"quicker." What do you say?

On Feb 16, 5:28 am, Gordon Bentley-Mix gordon(dot)bentleymix(at)gmail
(dot)com wrote:
For once, Peter, I agree with you completely on all points. (And I mean that
sincerely.)
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

Uninvited email contact will be marked as SPAM and ignored. Please post all
follow-ups to the newsgroup.



"grammatim" wrote:
On Feb 13, 2:49 am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:
Disagree - IT IS a problem with W2003 grammar. And I still say
software is a term that needs to be plural not singular. Or both.
It is not a matter for "disagreement." It is a matter of the way the
English language is spoken. You do not get to decide to change
English.

I am not saying to change English - I am not interested in that. The
purpose of this discussion is that I think "software" can be both
singular or plural in meaning. The purpose of this posting is not
about usage of English, but about Word 2003 grammar. You can take a
look at the thread subject before you post any more of your answers or
please dont answer at all.

You are correct that "software" can be either singular or plural in
meaning. You are incorrect in supposing that the verb number agreees
with the meaning of the word rather than the form of the word.

I am a native speaker of English, I have a graduate degree in
linguistics, and I have worked as an editor for nearly forty years.

On this one particular point, "Word2003 grammar" is correct.

Specifically I am saying that both these sentences with the word
"software" are NOT getting flagged as errors in W2003 grammar

This Software pieces is great
These pieces of Software is great

You now completely change the topic, because the subject of the verb
is no longer "software," but "pieces"; of course the verb (as well as
the determinter "these") must be plural, and if "Word2003 grammar"
does not recognize that, then it's a pretty basic flaw in "Word2003
grammar."

It is blindly taking "software" as singular even though I have
qualified it with "pieces". So it IS something to do with W2003
grammar with the word "software"

You have not understood English grammar. What it should be reacting to
is not "software" at all, because "software" is not the subject of the
verb; "pieces" is.

To prove this type this in w 2003
"There are other softwares for doing this."
"Softwares" term is flagged as error - right click - you will find
"software" as an option. Select that and it now complains about the
"are".

Have you bothered to look in your English grammar book for the concept
"mass noun"? How is it possible that you studied English as a Second
Language and were never taught about mass nouns vs. count nouns?
Regarding those two errors, the computer is absolutely correct.

I have to say that you seem to be getting irritable with this thread
because you are indulging on a direct personal attack rather than
being an objective contributor. If this thread irritates you, then why
you are posting at all? Let others reply if at all they do.

Yes, I am getting irritable, because you continue to misstate the most
elementary facts of English grammar.

Bottom line: Both the words "download" and "software" needs fixing in
Grammar in W2003
Grammar checkers don't operate on words. They operate on grammar.

Yeah so? What I meant is that the grammar implementation in W2003 that
involves these words are not perfect in my opinion.

Any linguist knows that computerized grammar checkers are basically
failures. Human language is far too complex for any computer to
handle. (Yet humans master their own language by the time they're
about three years old.)

You had not previously brought up the word "download," and I most
definitely do not want to know what your problem with it is.

Who said I wanted *you* to know what my problem is - This is a public
thread where others can read and understand about W2003 grammar
issues. I am not asking *you* in particular about any problem with the
word "download" in W2003 grammar.

You were rude to Suzanne, one of the nicest people anywhere, and then
you ignored her second reply, so she wisely withdrew from the thread,
leaving it to me, who am known to be able to be rude to people who
provoke rudeness.

If you really wanted to say that "software" is a mass or uncountable
noun you could have given an authoritative link like this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun
I am not interested in *YOUR* opinion about English grammar or whether
Word 2003 grammar is correct or not, as you yourself may have English
as second language.

Your arrogance is unbelievable.

Maybe you should save your attacks for the people who took your (or
your parents') money for teaching you English, and failing so utterly.-

[grammatim[_2_]]

That's exactly the distinction I arrived at for "fast" vs. "quick
(ly)." It also fits Tony's intuition about something that "happens
quickly" rather than "happens fast" -- I wonder whether he could be
persuaded to come back and reconsider his rejection of "he ran fast."

On Feb 16, 3:43*pm, Gordon Bentley-Mix gordon(dot)bentleymix(at)gmail
(dot)com wrote:
Peter,

In my mind there is an extremely fine but important difference between
"fast" and "quick". Fast is related to top speed, whereas quick has more to
do with agility or acceleration.Therefore, while the two sentences are highly
similar, they are not identical.

As for my preference, it depends on what information is being requested. If
the question is about who had the greater maximum speed, then "faster" is the
logical choice. However, if the question is about who could reach a certain
speed soonest, then "quicker" wins. (Pun intended ;-P)

For example, the Bugatti Veyron is billed as being the fastest production
car in the world by virtue of its top speed approaching 300 km/h. However,
there are several production cars which reach 100 km/h in less time and,
therefore, are quicker.

Similarly, something like a Lotus Esprit could probably traverse a winding,
hilly route in less time than a Veyron, and in this instance, I would
classify the Esprit as quicker - although the Veyron is indisputably faster.

Don't you just *love* English? The subtleties are spectacular! No wonder
non-native speakers - no matter how well schooled - find it so difficult, and
software - no matter how well designed - struggles so much.

(Hmm... "software struggles"... is that correct? Word seems to think so.eg)
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

[Gordon Bentley-Mix]

You can but ask. However, I suspect that Tony's preference is biased more by
cultural factors than anything else. It's been my experience that Americans
are quite happy with "fast" in most contexts, while Brits (and their
antipodean cousins) prefer "quickly". The latter sounds 'plummy', the former
'scummy'. ;-D
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

Uninvited email contact will be marked as SPAM and ignored. Please post all
follow-ups to the newsgroup.


"grammatim" wrote:

That's exactly the distinction I arrived at for "fast" vs. "quick
(ly)." It also fits Tony's intuition about something that "happens
quickly" rather than "happens fast" -- I wonder whether he could be
persuaded to come back and reconsider his rejection of "he ran fast."

On Feb 16, 3:43 pm, Gordon Bentley-Mix gordon(dot)bentleymix(at)gmail
(dot)com wrote:
Peter,

In my mind there is an extremely fine but important difference between
"fast" and "quick". Fast is related to top speed, whereas quick has more to
do with agility or acceleration.Therefore, while the two sentences are highly
similar, they are not identical.

As for my preference, it depends on what information is being requested. If
the question is about who had the greater maximum speed, then "faster" is the
logical choice. However, if the question is about who could reach a certain
speed soonest, then "quicker" wins. (Pun intended ;-P)

For example, the Bugatti Veyron is billed as being the fastest production
car in the world by virtue of its top speed approaching 300 km/h. However,
there are several production cars which reach 100 km/h in less time and,
therefore, are quicker.

Similarly, something like a Lotus Esprit could probably traverse a winding,
hilly route in less time than a Veyron, and in this instance, I would
classify the Esprit as quicker - although the Veyron is indisputably faster.

Don't you just *love* English? The subtleties are spectacular! No wonder
non-native speakers - no matter how well schooled - find it so difficult, and
software - no matter how well designed - struggles so much.

(Hmm... "software struggles"... is that correct? Word seems to think so.eg)
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

[Tony Jollans]

As for my preference, it depends on what information is being requested.
If
the question is about who had the greater maximum speed, then "faster" is
the
logical choice. However, if the question is about who could reach a
certain
speed soonest, then "quicker" wins. (Pun intended ;-P)

Using the car example, the Bugatti is a fast car because it has a high top
speed; it is faster than the Lotus because it has a higher top speed than
the Lotus. Because of its capability it can be driven fast, and it can be
driven faster than the Lotus. These have been, and remain, facts:
imperfectly (grammatically). The Lotus was driven (or could have been
driven) more quickly up a mountain road, while the Bugatti was (or could
have been) driven more quickly over a long straight road; these are complete
actions, grammatically perfect.

Now, the people. Coe did run a mile in a shorter time than Bannister ever
did, and, so, could be said to be the faster runner - he (showed he) had the
capacity to reach a higher top speed. Both could run (as close as English
gets to a present imperfect) fast, but Coe could run faster. Considering
individual events in which either of them took part, however, I would say
that Coe ran (perfect) more quickly.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"grammatim" wrote in message
...
That's exactly the distinction I arrived at for "fast" vs. "quick
(ly)." It also fits Tony's intuition about something that "happens
quickly" rather than "happens fast" -- I wonder whether he could be
persuaded to come back and reconsider his rejection of "he ran fast."

On Feb 16, 3:43 pm, Gordon Bentley-Mix gordon(dot)bentleymix(at)gmail
(dot)com wrote:
Peter,

In my mind there is an extremely fine but important difference between
"fast" and "quick". Fast is related to top speed, whereas quick has more
to
do with agility or acceleration.Therefore, while the two sentences are
highly
similar, they are not identical.

As for my preference, it depends on what information is being requested.
If
the question is about who had the greater maximum speed, then "faster" is
the
logical choice. However, if the question is about who could reach a
certain
speed soonest, then "quicker" wins. (Pun intended ;-P)

For example, the Bugatti Veyron is billed as being the fastest production
car in the world by virtue of its top speed approaching 300 km/h. However,
there are several production cars which reach 100 km/h in less time and,
therefore, are quicker.

Similarly, something like a Lotus Esprit could probably traverse a
winding,
hilly route in less time than a Veyron, and in this instance, I would
classify the Esprit as quicker - although the Veyron is indisputably
faster.

Don't you just *love* English? The subtleties are spectacular! No wonder
non-native speakers - no matter how well schooled - find it so difficult,
and
software - no matter how well designed - struggles so much.

(Hmm... "software struggles"... is that correct? Word seems to think
so.eg)
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

[Gordon Bentley-Mix[_2_]]

Beautiful mate!
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

Uninvited email contact will be marked as SPAM and ignored. Please post all
follow-ups to the newsgroup.


"Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com wrote in message
...
As for my preference, it depends on what information is being requested.
If
the question is about who had the greater maximum speed, then "faster" is
the
logical choice. However, if the question is about who could reach a
certain
speed soonest, then "quicker" wins. (Pun intended ;-P)

Using the car example, the Bugatti is a fast car because it has a high top
speed; it is faster than the Lotus because it has a higher top speed than
the Lotus. Because of its capability it can be driven fast, and it can be
driven faster than the Lotus. These have been, and remain, facts:
imperfectly (grammatically). The Lotus was driven (or could have been
driven) more quickly up a mountain road, while the Bugatti was (or could
have been) driven more quickly over a long straight road; these are
complete actions, grammatically perfect.

Now, the people. Coe did run a mile in a shorter time than Bannister ever
did, and, so, could be said to be the faster runner - he (showed he) had
the capacity to reach a higher top speed. Both could run (as close as
English gets to a present imperfect) fast, but Coe could run faster.
Considering individual events in which either of them took part, however,
I would say that Coe ran (perfect) more quickly.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"grammatim" wrote in message
...
That's exactly the distinction I arrived at for "fast" vs. "quick
(ly)." It also fits Tony's intuition about something that "happens
quickly" rather than "happens fast" -- I wonder whether he could be
persuaded to come back and reconsider his rejection of "he ran fast."

On Feb 16, 3:43 pm, Gordon Bentley-Mix gordon(dot)bentleymix(at)gmail
(dot)com wrote:
Peter,

In my mind there is an extremely fine but important difference between
"fast" and "quick". Fast is related to top speed, whereas quick has more
to
do with agility or acceleration.Therefore, while the two sentences are
highly
similar, they are not identical.

As for my preference, it depends on what information is being requested.
If
the question is about who had the greater maximum speed, then "faster" is
the
logical choice. However, if the question is about who could reach a
certain
speed soonest, then "quicker" wins. (Pun intended ;-P)

For example, the Bugatti Veyron is billed as being the fastest production
car in the world by virtue of its top speed approaching 300 km/h.
However,
there are several production cars which reach 100 km/h in less time and,
therefore, are quicker.

Similarly, something like a Lotus Esprit could probably traverse a
winding,
hilly route in less time than a Veyron, and in this instance, I would
classify the Esprit as quicker - although the Veyron is indisputably
faster.

Don't you just *love* English? The subtleties are spectacular! No wonder
non-native speakers - no matter how well schooled - find it so difficult,
and
software - no matter how well designed - struggles so much.

(Hmm... "software struggles"... is that correct? Word seems to think
so.eg)
--
Cheers!

Gordon Bentley-Mix
Word MVP

[L. Mohan Arun]

In response to the irritating "grammatim"

"(2) L. Mohan Arun is not competent to assert what is
and what is not a grammatical sentence of English (witness his
repeated insistence that "software" can legitimately take a plural
verb)."

I never asked you to assess my competence and your self-made judgement
is uncalled for. And *you* are not competent either, unless you can
prove your qualifications.

"This thread from the start has had nothing to do with using Word. "

Again, very irritating, because it is about Word grammar.
i have tons more quirks in Word grammar which I havent had time to
report. I am not saying the grammar checker is perfect, which may be a
difficult goal to achieve. But I am pointing out specific instances
which can be taken into consideration in refining the grammar checker
in Word further.

[L. Mohan Arun]

In response to the irritating "grammatim"

"(2) L. Mohan Arun is not competent to assert what is
and what is not a grammatical sentence of English (witness his
repeated insistence that "software" can legitimately take a plural
verb)."

I never asked you to assess my competence and your self-made judgement
is uncalled for. And *you* are not competent either, unless you can
prove your qualifications.

"This thread from the start has had nothing to do with using Word. "

Again, very irritating, because it is about Word grammar.
i have tons more quirks in Word grammar which I havent had time to
report. I am not saying the grammar checker is perfect, which may be a
difficult goal to achieve. But I am pointing out specific instances
which can be taken into consideration in refining the grammar checker
in Word further.

[L. Mohan Arun]

Test cases

You can contrast this to other web design software - they are several
hundreds of megabytes in size.

-No error is being pointed out by Word. I am referring to "other
software" so software is plural in the sense used here. So how do you
explain Word accepts software as plural here?

If you like watching Sandra Bullock play the role of the eccentric
stalker then you must

- Why is play being pointed out as a grammar error? If I change it to
playing then it accepts. I dont see anything wrong with 'play'

The default code generated by the SiteMasher Pro tool works with all
browsers.

- The whole sentence gets flagged. If I remove the word "default" then
it accepts. Cant see what is wrong with the use of default here.

If this description made you want to watch this movie, then well and
good.

- Why is good being flagged?
Reference http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/le...arnitv36.shtml

Other popular software that are known to produce CFG files for storing
configuration data include the following.

- Since I am referring to "other software" software needs to be plural
in sense here.
If I replace 'are' with 'is' it doesn’t sound right.

This software covers the gamut of functions ranging from planning to
reporting.
- Why is "reporting" getting flagged?

The download is less than 5 MB in size and not several hundred
megabytes in size as the other architecture design software usually
are.

- Here Word accepts "are" for software?

All the features found in the paid "build your website" tools and html
editor software are available in the free X web site design tool.

- Here, the "are" is for the features, but is being flagged by Word
2003. If I remove "and html editor software" then it will accept the
'are".

But XCart32 shopping cart has a nil or very low learning curve if at
all, because it is very easy to use and simplistic and flexible too.

- If I remove "very" then it would accept.

.. I had hoped that the 2008-2009 academic year would see the
introduction of the on-line essay submission process.

- Why is "year" flagged?

Simply drag and drop the required page elements on to the web page you
are building, and ShopTopPro then automatically creates the web page
code necessary.

- Why is "creates" flagged?

When you have completed the cart creation process and have done all
the web pages you need, then you can save and transfer all the files o
the Host who will host the website for a nominal hosting charge.

-"All the" is getting flagged - Now I know there is "o" instead of the
"to" – but that’s not the point. Remove the "d" in the word
"completed" and word would accept "all the files".

, the campus library allows students access to university owned
computers

- Why is "students" getting flagged? It is not possessive here.

[grammatim[_2_]]

On Mar 21, 4:36*am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:
Test cases

You can contrast this to other web design software - they are several
hundreds of megabytes in size.

-No error is being pointed out by Word. I am referring to "other
software" so software is plural in the sense used here. So how do you
explain Word accepts software as plural here?

These are two separate sentences, and the difficulty here is that
"they" has no antecedent, because there is no plural noun preceding it
in the excerpt shown.

Neither of the sentences you typed there is ungrammatical, but they do
not form a coherent whole.

If you like watching Sandra Bullock play the role of the eccentric
stalker then you must

- * * * Why is play being pointed out as a grammar error? If I change it to
playing then it accepts. I dont see anything wrong with 'play'

There is nothing wrong with "play" in that sentence fragment. As I
told you before, computer grammar checkers are not infallible, and you
should not be relying on them as your only editor.

The default code generated by the SiteMasher Pro tool works with all
browsers.

- * * * The whole sentence gets flagged. If I remove the word "default" then
it accepts. Cant see what is wrong with the use of default here.

There is nothing wrong with that sentence.

If this description made you want to watch this movie, then well and
good.

- * * * Why is good being flagged?

Because the grammar checker is unfamiliar with the cliche' "well and
good."

Referencehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/lea...

Other popular software that are known to produce CFG files for storing
configuration data include the following.

- * * * Since I am referring to "other software" software needs to be plural
in sense here.
If I replace 'are' with 'is' it doesn’t sound right.

The "are" needs to change to "is." "Software" is a mass noun and does
not have a plural form and does not take plural concord -- whether or
not it is notionally (semantically) referring to one or more than one
program.

This software covers the gamut of functions ranging from planning to
reporting.
- * * * Why is "reporting" getting flagged?

Because computer grammar checkers are not infallible, and you should
not be relying on them as your only editor. Perhaps it expects that
the only form of verb that appears after "to" is the infinitive, but
that's obviously not correct.

The download is less than 5 MB in size and not several hundred
megabytes in size as the other architecture design software usually
are.

- * * * Here Word accepts "are" for software?

Perhaps because the sentence is fairly complex and it lost track of
the subject of the verb.
Computer grammar checkers are not infallible, and you should not be
relying on them as your only editor.

All the features found in the paid "build your website" tools and html
editor software are available in the free X web site design tool.

- * * * Here, the "are" is for the features, but is being flagged by Word
2003. If I remove "and html editor software" then it will accept the
'are".

Computer grammar checkers are not infallible, and you should not be
relying on them as your only editor. Here it _may_ be reflecting the
solution to the difficult problem of what to do with a conjoined
subject where one conjunct is singular and the other is plural: some
say to make the verb agree with whichever conjunct is closest to the
verb, i.e. the second one. But the better advice is to rewrite the
sentence to avoid the problem. However, here the original sentence is
ok, because the two conjuncts are not the subject of the verb, but the
object of the preposition. It would be clearer if you repeated "in"
after "and.".

But XCart32 shopping cart has a nil or very low learning curve if at
all, because it is very easy to use and simplistic and flexible too.

- * * * If I remove "very" then it would accept.

There should be "the" before "XCart32," I don't know what "if at all"
goes with, and "simplistic" is the wrong word (unless you intend to
insult the product) -- it should be "simple."

. I had hoped that the 2008-2009 academic year would see the
introduction of the on-line essay submission process.

- * * * Why is "year" flagged?

Because computer grammar checkers are not infallible, and you should
not be relying on them as your only editor.

Simply drag and drop the required page elements on to the web page you
are building, and ShopTopPro then automatically creates the web page
code necessary.

- * * * Why is "creates" flagged?

Because computer grammar checkers are not infallible, and you should
not be relying on them as your only editor.

It should be "onto," not "on to," and "necessary" should be before
"web page."

When you have completed the cart creation process and have done all
the web pages you need, then you can save and transfer all the files o
the Host who will host the website for a nominal hosting charge.

-"All the" is getting flagged - Now I know there is "o" instead of the
"to" – but that’s not the point. Remove the "d" in the word
"completed" and word would accept "all the files".

In some varieties of English (not mine), "all of the" is used rather
than "all the." Note that it occurs twice in this sentence.

You absolutely cannot remove the d from "completed" -- you can change
"have completed" to "complete."

, the campus library allows students access to university owned
computers

- * * * Why is "students" getting flagged? It is not possessive here.

Because computer grammar checkers are not infallible, and you should
not be relying on them as your only editor.

[grammatim[_2_]]

On Mar 21, 4:06*am, "L. Mohan Arun" wrote:
In response to the irritating "grammatim"

"(2) L. Mohan Arun is not competent to assert what is
and what is not a grammatical sentence of English (witness his
repeated insistence that "software" can legitimately take a plural
verb)."

I never asked you to assess my competence and your self-made judgement
is uncalled for. And *you* are not competent either, unless you can
prove your qualifications.

If you set yourself up as writing in English for publication, then you
must demonstrate competence in writing the language.

What would you consider "proof" of my qualifications? A copy of my
birth certificate, showing that I was born in New York City more than
half a century ago? Copies of mail addressed to me to show that I have
never lived outside the United States? School and university
transcripts? My c.v. showing hundreds of publications in linguistics?

"This thread from the start has had nothing to do with using Word. "

Again, very irritating, because it is about Word grammar.

This newsgroup is about how to use Word. It is not about the
intricacies of English grammar, or the poor quality of computer
grammar checkers.

i have tons more quirks in Word grammar which I havent had time to
report. I am not saying the grammar checker is perfect, which may be a
difficult goal to achieve. But I am pointing out specific instances
which can be taken into consideration in refining the grammar checker
in Word further.

Then you should be complaining to the Microsoft Corporation, not to a
newsgroup of Word users.