Non-word "accreditate" in /usr/dict/words
Andrew Burt
aburt at isis.UUCP
Fri Mar 11 15:54:24 AEST 1988
In article <1693 at desint.UUCP> geoff at desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) writes:
>...I stumbled across a non-word in my /usr/dict/words file.
Brings to mind a word that showed up on a list of five letter palindromes
(no, I wasn't bored, I was making a handout about regular expressions
with ^\(.\)\(.\).\2\1$ as an example):
rever
Now, I admit I did find it in the OED. But that was the only dictionary
of mine that listed it (of about a half dozen).
If I saw this in a document I'd assume it was a misspelling of "revert" or
"revere", etc.; and spell allows "revers" as a plural, which probably
should be "reverse".
This brings up an interesting question: Should /usr/dict/words list
words that are technically allowable (listed in some notable dictionary)
but are (a) very uncommon and (b) very close to likely misspellings of
far more common words -- at the expense of not catching what are
probably typos? To my mind, a spelling checker should flag words that
are correct over omitting incorrect words.
I can't see "but it makes the dictionary complete" argument being used
since many common words (in a Unix environment) are missing, such as
"filename", "pathname", "stdin",... (Maybe a -u(nix) option to spell is
in order... :-)
--
Andrew Burt isis!aburt
Fight Denver's pollution: Don't Breathe and Drive.
More information about the Comp.bugs.4bsd.ucb-fixes
mailing list