Spell Check

   Spelling checkers on computer word processing systems are very useful tools, but like any tool, a spell check program is only as good as the user.
   Such a program runs through the text and flags any word it does not recognize. But it does not consider the context of the sentence, which is to say an individual word may be spelled correctly, but be the wrong word.
   For example, there are three ways to spell rain/rein/reign. But without knowing the content of the rest of the phrase, there is no way of knowing which word should be used. In addition, the human eye often sees what the brain knows should be there, and that's how typographical errors and misspellings get into print.
   Moreover, the program cannot account for missing words that may be essential to conveying the meaning and context of a sentence.
   A big fuss was made recently when it was discovered that the poster celebrating the inauguration of Donald Trump as president had an error, mistakenly using "to" when "too" was the appropriate word.
   Spell check would not -- and in fact did not -- catch the error, and the poster went on sale by the government.
   Another example appeared in a local newspaper when the writer typed the phrase "free reign," referring to someone who has the ability to act freely. It had nothing to do with monarchs. The origin of the phrase comes from riding, where a person gives a horse "free rein" to go where the animal pleases.
   So what's the answer? Every writer should proof read his or her own copy, but no one should be the only one to proof read the copy.
   In addition, editors and proof readers must focus on each word as well as the context in which it is used, always remembering that the eye sees what the brain knows is supposed to be there.
   Moreover, editors and proof readers have different duties. Editors read the text for context, content, approach and meaning as well as accuracy. Proof readers focus more on grammar, punctuation, style and spelling.
   Most of these elements of writing and editing have fairly standard goals. One, however, varies according to region and the personal preferences of the editor in charge. And that, fellow ink-stained wretches, is style.
   One example would be numbers and percentages. Which is correct, four percent, 4 per cent, 4 pct. or 4%? All are acceptable, but the one to use is the one decided on by the editor in charge. Is there logic to that? Yes, especially when a writer mixes four percent with 4.5% and 4 2/3 per cent. Pick one, and apply it to all sets. A good practice with percentages is to use numerals and decimals in every instance, if only for the sake of consistency of usage.
   Another example would be whether spellcheck and proofread should be one word or two.
   As four spill cheque, these sent while pass though a spiel chick pogrom, since each weird wood be recognize by the computer. Yet, a dozen words in that sentence are inappropriately spelled. In fact, the program on this machine flagged one of the words that is indeed correctly spelled. It just happens to be the wrong word.
   Find the  dozen inappropriate words, and you qualify to bee an editor.
   If you don't get stung first.