[en] EN_REDUNDANCY_REPLACE false positives and comments

[MikeUnwalla]

Here are some comments about some of the results in https://internal1.languagetool.org/regression-tests/20191001/result_en_20191001.html.

False positives:

• [ ] Message: 'high time' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'time' high time: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/high%20time

• [ ] Message: 'hurry up' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'hurry' You'd better hurry up. In BrE, phrasal verbs such as 'hurry up' are very common. For formal texts, 'hurry' is better, but to say "It is preferable to say 'hurry'" is not really correct. It is a style preference, depending on the genre.

• [ ] Message: 'date back' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'date' Suggestion: date is not correct: ...n Gerzean pottery resembling Egyptian hieroglyphs date back to c. 4000 BC, suggesting a still earlier possibl... date and date back have different meanings: https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/date.

• [ ] Message: 'have got' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'got' Suggestion 'got' is not correct for these examples: Had you run all the way, you'd have got there in time. If he had carried the map with him, he wouldn't have got lost.

• [ ] Message: 'fall down' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'fall' Suggestion 'fall' is not correct: Another step, and you will fall down the precipice.

• [ ] Message: 'over with' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'over' Suggestion 'over' is not correct: First of all, you should talk it over with your parents.

• [ ] Message: 'little baby' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'baby' Suggestion 'little' is not redundant. Some babies are fat, some are thin, some are big, and some are little. Look at the cute little baby sleeping in the cradle.

Comments:

• [ ] Message: 'but nevertheless' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'but' You could also say 'nevertheless'.

• [ ] In BrE, 'lag behind' is more usual: ...ucation system has improved in recent decades, it lags behind in achievement compared to other states. https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/lag

• [ ] Message: 'time period' is a redundancy. It is preferable to say 'period' In some contexts, 'time' is better: Period is better: ... of the tax revenues in the January–August 2008 time period were generated from value-added taxes (VAT). Either 'time' or 'period': ... international terrorism arose during this time period with the widespread distribution of dynamite. Time is better: ...ung people from other countries within a specific time period.

I know that you have put much effort into the EN_REDUNDANCY_REPLACE rules. But, one of my tasks as maintainer is to make sure that there are not too many many false positives. Could you please take some time to improve the rules?

[TiagoSantos81]

I know that you have put much effort into the EN_REDUNDANCY_REPLACE rules. But, one of my tasks as maintainer is to make sure that there are not too many many false positives. Could you please take some time to improve the rules?

Creating the rules that are a conversion from AtD takes about an hour. Not really that much and anyone that works in grammar checkers knows that. The extra effort is the time it takes to appease requests for further improvement - while several other rules don't follow such strict criteria - and knowing that these recommendation do not follow the usability principal. Tools like Ludwig.guru do exist (and yes, redundancy used for emphasis) because they allow writers to know what is the common way to say something.

Grammar checkers are used to know what the prescriptive current of a language advices. In extremis, without the prescriptive part, one is well-served with pidgin. This is so self-evident that anyone not following this is certainly not doing what is intended to be doing here, and certainly not what the users think they are doing.

Finally, I place a question, that is easily exemplified, if a grammar checker should be so careful as it has been shown in these last few rules, why do these type of rules are being further developed on the LT-premium. Exemplified by https://github.com/languagetool-org/languagetool/commit/718acbba73b030fbee0f9d1731e56f109f471c27#r35187895

tiff 10 days ago • Member Here's a rule that Mike wrote for LanguageToolPlus:

        <rule id="CIRCLE_AROUND" name="circle around (circle)" default="off">
            <antipattern>
                <token chunk="E-NP-singular">circle</token>
            </antipattern>
            <antipattern>
                <token chunk="E-NP-plural">circles</token>
            </antipattern>
            <pattern>
                <token postag_regexp="yes" postag="VB.*" inflected="yes">circle</token>
                <token>around</token>
            </pattern>
            <message>This phrase is redundant. Consider writing <suggestion>\1</suggestion>.</message>
            <short>Redundant phrase</short>
            <example correction="circled">The aircraft <marker>circled around</marker> the airport.</example>
            <example>The aircraft <marker>circled</marker> the airport.</example>
            <example>Draw a circle around the dot.</example>
            <example>Draw circles around the dot.</example>
        </rule>

Sumarizing, if something indeed needs some extra patterns, do them in new rule, not on the old and well-proven ones.

PS - If I found that it was a good use of my time to find exceptions to every single rule in any entry off these lists, I would. It is not hard and any imaginative user can also do it. But I guess most people try to spend their time with more appealing gimmicks.