What's wrong with this sentence?

I wrote:"For the time being, let's keep our communications less frequent."

I ran MS word's grammar and spelling tool:

It suggested: "reconsider it revising."

Thanks.

All right! The matter hear is your punctuation. "Let's" is an imperative and it always goes with an exclamation point. So you should really write: "For the time being, let's keep our communications less frequent!"

Thanks Wil for your help but it was still showing the same message. Anyways, it seems like it was not a perfect tool at all to use for looking out for language errors.

There never will be a perfect tool for ''looking out for language errors''! Natural language is for humans to understand, not for computers to understand! I don't use text processing with spell checkers. The editor in Windows is enough. If you want to find your spelling or your language errors, reread your texts several times, if possible in a few days, weeks, months after you've written it. Of course, this is not for everyday texts, but for writing novels etc. Also use LaTeX for typesetting your texts!

You need to get a feeling for the language, and that only can be achieved by reading much literature.

>>All right! The matter hear is your punctuation. "Let's" is an imperative and it always goes with an exclamation point. So you should really write: "For the time being, let's keep our communications less frequent!"<<

Umm, no. That simply is not true - there is no need for imperatives in English to be written with exclamation points, and normally, they should probably be written *without* thme.

That should be "them" above.

<<There never will be a perfect tool for ''looking out for language errors''!>>

I think that we will eventually have artificial intelligence which will meet and then surpass humans...

<< All right! The matter hear is your punctuation. "Let's" is an imperative and it always goes with an exclamation point. So you should really write: "For the time being, let's keep our communications less frequent!" >>

"Hear" should be "here". Also, this is very bad advice and I hope you're joking. Using a period with this sentence is fairly neutral; using an exclamation point sounds harsh, since it indicates a strong desire to make them less frequent (i.e., implying that there may be a problem with the other person).


As for the original sentence, I don't really see anything wrong with it. What did MS Word's grammar check actually say? "Reconsider it revising" isn't a grammatical sentence, so I don't imagine it said that. ("Consider revising", perhaps?) Usually there will be a button you can click and it will tell you why it thinks what you wrote is wrong.

But a grammar checking tool is indeed tricky to use well with a foreign language. MS Word's grammar checker is famous for making absurd suggestions, and I doubt anybody else makes a better grammar checker. So if you use it, when the grammar check suggests something, be sure to always check the reason it suggests the change, and make sure that the reason is relevant before you apply the change.

- Kef

Wil,

Sorry Charlie, but you got a long way to go. Shut up for now, and listen to native speakers.

<<But a grammar checking tool is indeed tricky to use well with a foreign language. MS Word's grammar checker is famous for making absurd suggestions, and I doubt anybody else makes a better grammar checker. So if you use it, when the grammar check suggests something, be sure to always check the reason it suggests the change, and make sure that the reason is relevant before you apply the change.

- Kef >>

So there isn't a real need for grammar checker. Someone who needs grammatical advice wouldn't get a reliable one. Wasn't it that he or she envoked it because there was something unclear?

Well, a grammar checker is meant to be a guide. It can help find and correct simple mistakes, like omission of articles and verbs that don't agree... simple mistakes like that are common enough in the writing of native speakers, and it is indeed faster and easier to find and correct errors using such a tool than to re-read your entire work to find them. Of course, in addition to finding more "errors" than are actually present, a grammar check tool might skip over some errors because they happen to look like legitimate constructions...

But yes, a user of a grammar check tool is expected to already be well acquainted with the grammar of the language. In particular, it's necessary to be able to understand and evaluate its advice. It isn't to be used as a crutch.

- Kef

furrykef,

rereading your entire work is part of the fun of writing! (I do think of some kind of novels etc., not so much of postings which must be made in a limited period of time until you have to leave an internet café or the money is used up.) I usually reread several times. To my mind, you need at least reread 20 times until it starts to get really good. Concerning the ommission of articles, how can a piece of software know when to place an article? I think that it depends of the intention of the author, which can't be emulated by an algorithm. (I'm no English native speaker, maybe it's possible in English.)

<<... a grammar check tool might skip over some errors because they happen to look like legitimate constructions... >>

That exactly is the problem. If your're unsure about spelling or grammar, you can't be sure of the advice given by that software. Than, it's most likely that you start using it as a crutch because it's convenient. If you are sure, you don't need it.

"For the time being, let's keep our communications less frequent."

This is grammatically correct but it sounds a little "off." I can't describe how, exactly... it sounds a little like you've glued two common English phrases together. I think it's the order of the clauses that makes it awkward. Unless you really want to use it, I'd recommend replacing it with some suggestions here:

"For now, let's not communicate as often."

"Let's not communicate for the time being."

"Let's keep our communication on a low note for a while."

a native:

Thanks for your input. Well, to be honest, my brain came up with such a structure so I didn't know whether it made sense or not completely. I had no clue whatsoever whether I had combined two common phrases together or not. I actually liked your last suggestion as it was more close to my intended meaning. So I'd go with it.