-es, -ies, -ed endings.

[A.D.]

Hello, fellow Plover users!

I'm really getting the hang of and enjoying Plover and my modded Sidewinder.  I feel like the touch of it is a bit more natural to me, since I have been typing on one keyboard or another for a very long time.

As I'm going along with Plover, however, I've noticed that certain word endings are not translating properly - equipped translates equiped, for example,   Also, the dictionary doesn't seem to differentiate between -s and -es endings, which I know my old CAT program, Total Eclipse, did as a "smart" function.

I poked around the cheat sheets and on the forums, to no avail.  Anyone else have this issue?  How did you resolve it?

Thanks!

A.D.

[Hesky Fisher]

Hi,

Plover uses specific commands to do smart suffixes: {^s} for plural, {^ed} and {^ing}

Are you using those and still not seeing proper suffixes?

Hesky

A.D.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Plover" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ploversteno...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[A.D.]

All of those are present in my dictionary.  However, perhaps I'm defining them incorrectly? I have:

"-G": "{^ing}"

"-S": "{^s}"
"-D": "{^ed}"

[Mirabai Knight]

This is a known issue: https://github.com/plover/plover/issues/45

[A.D.]

Ah, gotcha. I have many inflected endings defined with one stroke already. Just wanted to make sure it wasn't a PEBKAC error. ;)

It's fairly easy to work around with a spell check, but as a transcriptionist I have sure learned to be wary of that thing.

Thanks for all your hard work!

A.D.

[Hesky Fisher]

I'll look into improving this.

[Hesky Fisher]

OK, I've figured out how to improve this.

If you'd like to try it out please use this version of plover:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dnlu411njlmv56k/plover.exe

Note that this version is experimental so please make sure to backup your dictionary before using it.

[A.D.]

You guys are amazing.  I feel bad.  I really wasn't trying to demand or even ask for any sort of change. 

To show my gratitude, I shall attempt to beta-test it.

So far:
Some key I am hitting in the process of normal writing is triggering my num lock key, which stops Plover from translating.  It just triggered now when I tried to write out E/KWEUP/-D, one of the words that was giving me issues last night.  To be sure this isn't a user error,  I stroked out the word several times.  Sometimes it trips my Num Lock key; sometimes it doesn't.

Also, I was attempting to use Plover to type out this message - "trips" still translated into "tripes."

I hope this helps in some small way.

[Hesky Fisher]

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 4:57 PM, A.D. <nyanpop...@gmail.com> wrote:

You guys are amazing.  I feel bad.  I really wasn't trying to demand or even ask for any sort of change. 

No problem. I want plover be as good as it can be.

 

To show my gratitude, I shall attempt to beta-test it.

Thanks :)

 

So far:
Some key I am hitting in the process of normal writing is triggering my num lock key, which stops Plover from translating.  It just triggered now when I tried to write out E/KWEUP/-D, one of the words that was giving me issues last night.  To be sure this isn't a user error,  I stroked out the word several times.  Sometimes it trips my Num Lock key; sometimes it doesn't.

I am trying to figure out what could be causing this. Do you have any strokes mapped to the num lock key in your dictionary?

 

Also, what happens when num lock gets toggled? How does it interfere with plover working?

Also, I was attempting to use Plover to type out this message - "trips" still translated into "tripes."

I can't reproduce that. I created the following dictionary:

{

"T": "trip",

"S": "{^s}"

}

Then when I type T/S I get "trips".

 

I hope this helps in some small way.

Testing and feedback is great.

[A.D.]

So far:
Some key I am hitting in the process of normal writing is triggering my num lock key, which stops Plover from translating.  It just triggered now when I tried to write out E/KWEUP/-D, one of the words that was giving me issues last night.  To be sure this isn't a user error,  I stroked out the word several times.  Sometimes it trips my Num Lock key; sometimes it doesn't.

I am trying to figure out what could be causing this. Do you have any strokes mapped to the num lock key in your dictionary?

I am almost 100 percent certain I have no strokes mapped to that key.  I think what may have been the problem was that I redownloaded your experimental version of Plover without deleting/replacing all of the old files in the Appdata folder (running Windows, btw... I didn't really specify this and probably should have...)  Once I did this, the problem seemed to have vanished.  However, E/KWEUP/-D is now sometimes translating properly, and at other times still coming out as"equiped."  This is not the case for E/KWEUP/-S, which always translates as "equipes."  Perhaps I

 

Also, what happens when num lock gets toggled? How does it interfere with plover working?

Num Lock simply stops Plover from translating anything at all.  It returns to normal keyboard output.  Once you trip it again, Plover works fine.

Also, I was attempting to use Plover to type out this message - "trips" still translated into "tripes."

I can't reproduce that. I created the following dictionary:

{

"T": "trip",

"S": "{^s}"

}

Then when I type T/S I get "trips".

I'll make note that you can do that.  I am still working on mastering the syntax of the Plover dictionary.

 

I hope this helps in some small way.

Testing and feedback is great.

I would love to contribute to this project in any way I can. :) Being able to output steno from a keyboard instead of my clunky, half-broken, old-school Stentura is amazing.  Instead of wrestling with the tripod and cords and having to hunch over the setup when I'm alternating between steno and QWERTY input, this lovely Sidewinder now rests on a rollout surface beneath the desk.  Want it out of the way?  Just roll it back in.  The quality of life improvement in that regard is great.

[Hesky Fisher]

Hi A.D.,

It's very odd that you are getting equipes and equiped. Are you using the default plover dictionary? If not, would you be willing to send me your dictionary?

Plover keeps a log of strokes and translations that may be useful in figuring out what's going on. This file is called plover.log and should be in the same directory as the default dictionary.

If you can get plover to output the wrong thing then, as soon as you notice the error, please stop plover (so nothing more gets written to the log) and send me that log file. If you want to look at it yourself just look at the end of the file and your most recent strokes should be there (though it is not straight forward to read).

Hesky

--

[A.D.]

Sending both the log file and the dictionary.  Feel free to do whatever you please as you dissect the dictionary!  Heck, I don't even care if you want to upload it somewhere for new steno users to adopt as their own.  Not that it's that great, but it does have many years' worth of additions and modifications, and if someone finds it useful, all the power to them.

[Hesky Fisher]

Based on the log I realized that I wasn't handling capitalized words properly when applying suffixes. Thank you! I believe I've fixed it: https://www.dropbox.com/s/dnlu411njlmv56k/plover.exe 

If you have a chance, please give it another try and let me know.

Thanks for your offer regarding the dictionary. I may do something like that.

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:53 PM, A.D. <nyanpop...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sending both the log file and the dictionary.  Feel free to do whatever you please as you dissect the dictionary!  Heck, I don't even care if you want to upload it somewhere for new steno users to adopt as their own.  Not that it's that great, but it does have many years' worth of additions and modifications, and if someone finds it useful, all the power to them.

[A.D.]

So far, so good.  I've run through Mirabai's list of known spelling errors at https://github.com/plover/plover/issues/45.

It looks like the only ones on the list that did not translate properly were:
Believable
Reproducible
Achievable
(Maybe the above three are an issue with my own dictionary?  I'm not sure.)
Limiter

I am going to keep plugging words in for a while and see if anything crops up.

The others are now working nicely!  This is great.  I am excited, especially since In a couple of weeks I am returning to home-based transcription work.  I will be sure to keep tabs if issues come up during "field testing." ;)

[A.D.]

I hope that I am not spamming this thread too much.  If you'd prefer, I can send anything I might find in an e-mail.

I also uncovered that words like batten, smitten, gotten, bitten, written, flaxen, and waxen (The last two are rarely used, but someday you may need them!) do not properly translate.  I don't know how other theories write these words, but in StenEd we are supposed to come back with a final N.  I checked my dictionary and the suffix is defined as thus:

"-PB": "{^en}"

and is still not translating.  Not sure if this is a known Plover issue or my own dictionary's problem.

[Mirabai Knight]

No, this has been a great thread to follow! Honestly, the improper
suffix orthography has been a big stumbling block in the way of me
switching from Eclipse and using Plover full time, so I'm ecstatic
that we've made so much progress on it in such a short time. I think
this is a Plover issue and not a dictionary issue. Dunno about the
double Ts, but with double Xs, I think the problem is that X is
counted as a consonant by Plover's orthography algorithm and doubled
accordingly, even though I don't think there are any English words
that contain double Xs. Am I wrong?

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Plover" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to ploversteno...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

--
Mirabai Knight, CCP, RPR, CBC
StenoKnight CART Services
917 576 4989
m...@stenoknight.com
http://stenoknight.com

[A.D.]

Can't think of any double-X words off the top of my head.  You very well come across them as loan words from other languages, though.  English doesn't have the double J, but undoubtedly you'll write "hajj" sometime in your steno life.

A quick visit to the Oracle of the Googles revealed that there is the surname Foxx, probably best defined on its own, and Naxxar, a village in Malta. Will anyone EVER need the word Naxxar in their dictionary?  A good stenographer's answer to that should be something along the lines of, "Maybe not; but be ready in case you do."  :)

[Hesky Fisher]

Right now plover only has special logic for the following suffixes: s, ed, er, est, ing.

I'll look into adding support for: able, en

Are there any other suffixes that should be handled specially?

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:24 PM, A.D. <nyanpop...@gmail.com> wrote:

Can't think of any double-X words off the top of my head.  You very well come across them as loan words from other languages, though.  English doesn't have the double J, but undoubtedly you'll write "hajj" sometime in your steno life.

A quick visit to the Oracle of the Googles revealed that there is the surname Foxx, probably best defined on its own, and Naxxar, a village in Malta. Will anyone EVER need the word Naxxar in their dictionary?  A good stenographer's answer to that should be something along the lines of, "Maybe not; but be ready in case you do."  :)

[A.D.]

I don't know if it counts as a special suffix, but there is also the -BLT ending for words like "sustainability" that for some reason I can't get Plover to parse using {^ability}.  Off the top of my head I can't think if it undergoes any orthographic changes or not.  I think it does, with words like "eligibility."  Although most people already have that one defined, it's one of those suffixes that people sometimes add to words creatively, like "jumpability."

[Daniel Langlois]

Mirabai Knight: Honestly, the improper suffix orthography has been a big stumbling block in the way of me switching from Eclipse and using Plover full time, so I'm ecstatic that we've made so much progress on it in such a short time.

Hesky Fisher: 'Right now plover only has special logic for the following suffixes: s, ed, er, est, ing. I'll look into adding support for: able, en..Are there any other suffixes that should be handled specially?'

I'll add this quote: "Orthography: The science of spelling by the eye instead of the ear." (Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary)

In other words, the terms 'spelling' and 'orthography' seem to be largely synonymous. I'm a bit skeptical, of the idea of native support, special logic, in Plover, for any suffixes. I don't understand the idea of optimizing Plover for a single standard, in this respect. 

I mean, yes, surely, the modern, secular, international world is a world of English and its alphabet. And, furthermore, most people have English computers with English Keyboards. I only speak English, myself. However, that's because I am technologically behind the times. I fact, I recall seeing somehwere, a question about Plover support for special letters or diacritics (accents above/below letters like in French: é, â, etc.). 

 Something like 'a' and 'an', might be tempting to hardwire into Plover, I mean, of course, change an 'a' into an 'an', before a word that starts with a vowel, and I don't know, maybe this has been considered. But, hardwiring suffixes? You have to choose a theory--which means, that there is a question of appropriateness, or 'Which system do I think is best'. This may appear to have an answer--the answer, but, well, if there is in fact one standardized procedure of the writing system, which includes punctuation, capitalization, word breaks, emphasis, etc., that Plover will support, then I still am not sure why the dictionary can't handle spelling issues--the dictionary is configurable.

 ?

[Daniel Langlois]

I'm just learning steno, am quite new to the whole concept, of what key combinations do the various theories use for initial Z, shr-; 

final –th, -sh, -st, -nk, -nj, -nch, -rch, -mp, -ism, ending eeh sound. Etc. I'm in my theory review/reinforcement stage. I cannot write each word, almost intuitively, for realtime translation, at this point--I don't have a comprehensive grasp of my theory principles.

Looking into this a bit, I see that words like 'conceited' and 'conspired', are not there in the dictionary, although 'compacted', is. Which, it's KPABGD. I'm intrigued that this is not StenEd. From what admittedly little I know of Computer Compatible Stenograph Theory and Roberts/Walsh/Gonzales, it's not those either. Also not Phoenix Theory. 'Compounding' is there:

"KPOUPBD/-G": "compounding",<-- this is StenEd

"KPOUPBGD": "compounding",

'promotes' is there:

"PRO/PHOET/-S": "promotes",  <-- this is StenEd

"PRO/PHOETS": "promotes",    <-- this is CCST

"PROE/PHOETS": "promotes",  <-- this is RW/RT

"PROEPLTS": "promotes",

"PROEPLZ": "promotes",

'provokes' is there:

"PRO/SROEBG/-S": "provokes",<-- this is StenEd

"PRO/SROEBGS": "provokes",

"PROE/SROEBGS": "provokes",

'opposed' is there:

"OE/POEGS/-D": "opposed",

"OE/POES/-D": "opposed",

"OP/POEFD": "opposed",

"PO*EFD": "opposed",

"POE/POES/-D": "opposed",

'amazed' is there:

"A/PHAEUFD": "amazed",

"A/PHAEUZ/-D": "amazed",    <-- this is RWG

I guess that I'm curious if there is more method to this then I've teased out--I don't mean to be suggesting any changes in particular, just learning the system. I've looked at plover/orphography.py, which contains, for example, this:

    # == y ==

    # die+ing = dying

    (re.compile(r'^(.+)ie \^ ing$', re.I),

        r'\1ying'),

While in the dictionary there is this:

"TKAOEU/-G": "dying",       <-- this is StenEd/Phoenix/RWG

"TKAOEUG": "dying",

If I understand, there's some default native orthography, but you can override the behavior in the dictionary. And, for verbs ending with -ie, the default is to change the -ie to -y and and -ING. 

From the discussion here:

https://github.com/plover/plover/issues/45

stenoknight: So far we haven't figured out a rule to get around the "deter + -ed is deterred, but meter + -ed is metered" issue. My hunch is that English etymology and orthography is just too inconsistent to cover all the exceptions. Definitely some improved linguistics logic would help for neologisms and other edge cases, but I think a white list might be the only thing that can save us for most inflection errors..

samlh: I have a work-in-progress patch for all of the issues except the consonant doubling. The consonant doubling depends on whether the last syllable is stressed, so I think we'll need a dictionary file..

balshetzer: Now plover first looks up the word in the dictionary to find the proper form. If it doesn't have it then it uses the rule based approach.

And, if I follow this, the idea is not to multiply functions that implement English orthographic rules, but to leverage the dictionary. So,

I'm a bit late to this party..but this could turn into a thread about the status of the dictionary, for using it to cover the gamut of English structure. And, the next question, might be, can a json file include comments? This would be very useful when we look at the dictionary as a handwritten config file. StenEd strokes, for example, can be labelled as such. I see this thread denying that JSON can handle comments:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/ploversteno/json$20comments/ploversteno/dbGEnPui8X8/NSgLvhnUz5QJ

Dictionary comments

Jeremy K

11/21/11

A workaround for the inability to put comments in JSON is to have an extra field in each json entry dedicated to comments. But this means you need to store the JSON in a more structured format than a simple keystroke->spellout dictionary. I make some suggestions for a revised PLOVERDICT JSON structure. More detail follows, if that sounds appealing..

OTL:

what exactly are people hoping to gain by adding comments to the dictionary, and will that be worth the expense (probably tripling the size of the dictionary and using a les efficient list over a dictionary).

Now, you don't have to be using a less efficient list over a dictionary, this workaround is not the only approach. Let's take a step back. It is JSON parsers, that generally don't consider JSON with comments to be valid and parseable. However, there is an intended usage here, that you 'minify', as they say, before parsing. Like this: JSON.parse(JSON.minify(str));

Here: https://github.com/getify/JSON.minify/blob/master/minify_json.py

Is it a thing? 

On Friday, March 15, 2013 6:44:36 PM UTC-7, A.D. wrote:

[Mirabai Knight]

> Something like 'a' and 'an', might be tempting to hardwire into Plover, I
> mean, of course, change an 'a' into an 'an', before a word that starts with
> a vowel, and I don't know, maybe this has been considered. But, hardwiring
> suffixes? You have to choose a theory--which means, that there is a question
> of appropriateness, or 'Which system do I think is best'. This may appear to
> have an answer--the answer, but, well, if there is in fact one standardized
> procedure of the writing system, which includes punctuation, capitalization,
> word breaks, emphasis, etc., that Plover will support, then I still am not
> sure why the dictionary can't handle spelling issues--the dictionary is
> configurable.

You're conflating steno theory -- which is how you write a given
English word in steno -- with suffix handling, which is how you attach
an English suffix to an English word. They're two different things.
Yes, it's possible to make a steno dictionary which contains
explicitly defined inflectional forms of every possible English word
(which would add many hundreds of thousands of entries to the
dictionary), but that would be tedious, cumbersome, and unnecessary to
do, when a little bit of clever spellchecking on Plover's end can
accomplish the same end. Plus you have no idea how many people employ
neologisms, new inflected forms of root words that don't appear in any
dictionary. Having suffix spelling logic that handles those
inflections in a sensible way is really important.

As far as other languages are concerned, I think different flavors of
Plover are a fantastic idea. Some languages have extremely predictable
orthography; they can excise the checking-against-whitelist part of
Plover and not have to worry about running into exceptions. Some
languages might have to adapt Plover's orthography algorithm to handle
their own language's unpredictable suffix rules. But it's a useful
thing to have in place, and since the majority of Plover's users are
English speakers at the moment, I think it's a useful thing to focus
coding energy on. Definitely much more useful than spending an
equivalent amount of energy in producing the Ur-Dictionary of
Inflected Words with their corresponding steno definitions, which, as
you point out, would be locked down to a single theory and condemn all
users with other dictionaries and other theories to suffer from
misspelled suffixes unless they took the time to make their own
Ur-Dictionaries.

[Mirabai Knight]

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Daniel Langlois <danlan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm just learning steno, am quite new to the whole concept, of what key
> combinations do the various theories use for

In Plover:

initial Z -- usually s* in word parts, but STKPW* when spelling the
letter z, and occasionally in word parts as well when there's a
conflict.

shr- -- usually SHR. When there's a conflict with Sl-, the commoner
word will usually take the day. So SHRUG is "shrug" but SHR*UG is
"slug". That's somewhat arbitrary, but there aren't that many
conflicts of this nature.

final –th -- *T

-sh -- -RB

-st -- FT, or occasionally -*S if there's a conflict (such as in lift vs list).

-nk -- *NG

-nj -- NG, though when there's a conflict, such as in lung vs lunge vs
lunk, I'll use just J for -nj, or I'll do the word in two strokes.

-nch -- FRPB. The only conflict I can think of here is lurch versus
lunch, which I solve arbitrarily by writing lunch "LUNS".

-rch -- FRPB. See above.

-mp -- *PL

-ism -- IFM

ending eeh sound -- AOE, which is just a straight-up long vowel,
unless I'm missing something.

> Looking into this a bit, I see that words like 'conceited' and 'conspired',
> are not there in the dictionary, although 'compacted', is.

No, but conceit and conspire (KAUN/SAOET and KAUN/SPAOEUR) are. Using
the intial K as part of the word is a nice briefing principle, but
it's not always possible. When it's not, you can use the KAUN prefix.
The word "con" is KON.

> KPABGD. I'm intrigued that this is not StenEd. From what admittedly little I
> know of Computer Compatible Stenograph Theory and Roberts/Walsh/Gonzales,
> it's not those either. Also not Phoenix Theory.

The Plover dictionary is the NYCI (New York Career Institute)
dictionary, merged with the StenEd dictionary, plus tens of thousands
of my own entries, accumulated over the past eight years. NYCI theory
is closely based on StenEd, though it's not identical.

> 'promotes' is there:
> "PRO/PHOET/-S": "promotes", <-- this is StenEd
> "PRO/PHOETS": "promotes", <-- this is CCST
> "PROE/PHOETS": "promotes", <-- this is RW/RT

In the theory I was taught, PRO/PHOET/-S and PRO/PHOETS are equally
valid. You can always write an inflected word in one stroke as long as
it doesn't create a conflict. But I started out on DigitalCAT, which
would automatically fold in -s, -ing, -er, and -ed if -S, -G, -R, or
-D are included in a defined word (a feature I've asked for in Plover:
https://github.com/plover/plover/issues/34), so I haven't explicitly
defined all inflected forms of words in the dictionary.

PROE/MOETS is an invalid legacy entry, because PROE by itself is
"pro", the word, not "pro-", the prefix. That entry should be deleted.
Not sure where it came from; probably the root NYCI dictionary, which
had several inconsistencies.

> "PROEPLTS": "promotes",
> "PROEPLZ": "promotes",

Just two briefs. Dunno if I made them up or if they came with one of
the dictionaries.

> 'provokes' is there:
> "PRO/SROEBG/-S": "provokes",<-- this is StenEd
> "PRO/SROEBGS": "provokes",
> "PROE/SROEBGS": "provokes",

Again, the first two are equally valid. The third is invalid and
should be deleted to avoid potential word boundary errors, though in
this case it's less of a risk, because "vokes" by itself is not a
word. (Though, honestly, it's pretty hard to come up with a sentence
involving professional dust motes that makes any sense at all, so I'd
say they're both pretty low risk, which is why they're still in the
dictionary after eight years; they never caused a problem, so I never
noticed them.)

> 'opposed' is there:
> "OE/POEGS/-D": "opposed",
> "OE/POES/-D": "opposed",
> "OP/POEFD": "opposed",
> "PO*EFD": "opposed",
> "POE/POES/-D": "opposed",

The first and last are defined misstrokes. The second and third are
equally valid by my theory. The fourth is a brief.

> 'amazed' is there:
> "A/PHAEUFD": "amazed",
> "A/PHAEUZ/-D": "amazed", <-- this is RWG
>

Again, both are totally valid according to NYCI theory.

> While in the dictionary there is this:
> "TKAOEU/-G": "dying", <-- this is StenEd/Phoenix/RWG
> "TKAOEUG": "dying",
>

The suffix orthography only applies to multistroke words (at least
until we implement that suffix-folding feature I mentioned above). So
since TKAOEUG is defined explicitly, it doesn't come under the
orthography logic. But TKAOEU/G does.

> If I understand, there's some default native orthography, but you can
> override the behavior in the dictionary. And, for verbs ending with -ie, the
> default is to change the -ie to -y and and -ING.

Yup, exactly. The dictionary's explicit definitions always have to
take priority over Plover's guessing. They're just for the cases when
there isn't anything explicit to follow. So, for example, if the rule
is generally to remove a vowel at the end of the word before adding
-ing, we can override that so that

DAO*EU/-G

is correctly translated as "dyeing" rather than "dying". That's one of
those tricky exceptions you're always running up against in English.

> And, if I follow this, the idea is not to multiply functions that implement
> English orthographic rules, but to leverage the dictionary. So,
> I'm a bit late to this party..but this could turn into a thread about the
> status of the dictionary, for using it to cover the gamut of English
> structure. And, the next question, might be, can a json file include
> comments? This would be very useful when we look at the dictionary as a
> handwritten config file. StenEd strokes, for example, can be labelled as
> such. I see this thread denying that JSON can handle comments:

No, because the Plover default dictionary is only a starting point. I
want Plover to be compatible with all sorts of dictionaries and all
sorts of theories. And if someone enters a new word in their
dictionary that's not in the Plover dictionary -- remineralize, for
example, which came up in Dental School today -- I want it to behave
properly in all its inflected forms, without having to explicitly
define remineralizing, remineralization, remineralizer, remineralized,
et cetera.

With respect to dictionary comments, I'm keeping an open mind (and
it's something that we might implement in Robert's dictionary manager
at some point), but I don't think that writing which theory a
particular word came from would add anything in terms of usability.

[Daniel Langlois]

Thanks for your reply on the orthography stuff--I'll be referring to this. The cheat sheet has beginning sounds and ending sounds, I didn't notice if it (or the Steno 101 lessons) gets into adding inflected endings onto root words, and second-stroke inflected endings. 

Also, I now see that one can't create a whole-word entry to handle every spelling issue. Still, comments in dict.json might, 

turn out to have some value in some cases. And, I might toss out another idea: For the new manage dictionary functionality, which allows inserting new entries,there could be a default dictionary, distributed w/Plover, and a personal dictionary.  The default dictionary contains the some 140,000+ entries, while your personal directory holds *your* personal strokes and definitions. 

[Snowy Wilderness]

Really great idea, this default/personal dictionary dichotomy...

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Plover" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ploversteno...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--

Yours Truly,

Johnny Sagan aka Snowy Wilderness

[Hesky Fisher]

This is captured (more generally) here: https://github.com/plover/plover/issues/42

I think this feature will be available pretty soon.