Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

hemingwayapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 335 posts

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#81

Post by syllogism »

vkb wrote: post #61

This is a very beautiful and logical interface, but it's the wrong approach, because it's a very developer-centric approach to writing. The problem with writing is you can't loop through it and find whether each sentence passes or throws an exception. A written work needs to be evaluated as a cohesive whole. That's what "bold and clear" writing means to me: a written piece of work that stands on its own and says what…

> Computers are not smart enough yet to understand why "Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta." is a complete, perfect paragraph. It doesn't have a verb and it looks like Lola is misspelled multiple times, so it doesn't pass the subset of grammar rules set up in the backend. But the meaning, the essence of the paragraph is clear.

Eh, this isn't so infeasible. Any wide-coverage, statistical grammar will have a TOP --> NP production, as well as the usual TOP --> S. i.e. the grammar must accept NP-only sentences; they're too common to reject as mistakes.

I think it's reasonable to have a linter that throws a warning for that sort of sentence though. By all means dismiss them. But it can help you catch things you didn't intend.

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#82

Post by OoTheNigerian »

Brilliant!

I am wondering if it may be better and/or more profitable to license the Hemingway algorithm to be used in the dozens of writing applications via a Chrome/browser app initially I would suppose (starting with Google Docs up to Poetica, Penflip, Draft etc.)

The value proposition I assume is the suggestions and recommendation. Focusing on that instead of customer acquisition/user interface design for another writing app may be more rewarding.

Great job all the same.

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#83

Post by tehwalrus »

pmichaud wrote: post #33
jawns wrote: post #5

You know what's fun? Pasting in text from Ernest Hemingway and seeing what he did wrong. But seriously, this is a nice, simple way to point out some general rules of thumb for improving writing, although I would love for it to be less proscriptive. Not every long sentence is a bad sentence, not every passive-voice sentence is a bad sentence, and not every adverb is a bad adverb. Oh, and by the way, the copy editor in…

The thing about pedantic snark (less/fewer), is that it loses its teeth when you're wrong. Even if you go in for prescriptive grammar, less and fewer were never strictly divided. The distinction actually came to us through one Mr. Baker's expressed preference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less#Historical_usage

This, and singular they[1], make me very happy indeed - all the people who "correct" my grammar are actually, themselves, wrong (or, at most, people waving an opinion in my face as if it were a fact.) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#84

Post by leephillips »

pmichaud wrote: post #33
jawns wrote: post #5

You know what's fun? Pasting in text from Ernest Hemingway and seeing what he did wrong. But seriously, this is a nice, simple way to point out some general rules of thumb for improving writing, although I would love for it to be less proscriptive. Not every long sentence is a bad sentence, not every passive-voice sentence is a bad sentence, and not every adverb is a bad adverb. Oh, and by the way, the copy editor in…

The thing about pedantic snark (less/fewer), is that it loses its teeth when you're wrong. Even if you go in for prescriptive grammar, less and fewer were never strictly divided. The distinction actually came to us through one Mr. Baker's expressed preference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less#Historical_usage

There appeared a wonderful article on just this topic on the Inky Fool website a few days ago: http://blog.inkyfool.com/2014/02/less-fewers.html

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#85

Post by leephillips »

mhurron wrote: post #79
aroman wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree! The Hemingway mode at seems to be geared (ironically) at technical writing. My English teacher wouldn't like it — it encourages simplification of language and minimization of word variation. Sometimes it's good to write like Austin...

That's what I noticed. It seemed to mark your writing higher the lower the reading grade level it was targeted at. I didn't realize that writing at a 5th grade level was the pinnacle of writing. What is with it's fear of adverbs?

Well, Vladimir Nabokov did describe Hemingway as "a writer of books for boys".

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#86

Post by normloman »

moron4hire wrote: post #15

There is nothing wrong with the passive voice.

It's not technically wrong, no. Nobody will accuse you of having bad grammar. But every good writing style manual warns against using it. Because the active voice is clear, bold, and more concise. There are only a few situations where writers should prefer the passive voice.

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#88

Post by acqq »

scotch_drinker wrote: post #75
acqq wrote: post #35

I believe the logic behind HemingwayApp is misguided: Hemingway the writer actually wrote long sentences and they were actually important in his writing. Passive is also important in good writing. You can't use machine metrics to force "good writing" you can only enforce mediocrity and the following some random rules "because the rules have to be followed." Likewise, I as a writer of the software would absolutely hat…

I think your point is that there are times when breaking the rules is a good thing. No one would argue with that. The problem is that most people have NO IDEA what the rules are for good writing. On top of that, it's easy to slip into overuse without realizing it. I'm a good writer and yet, one thing I'm terrible at is far too many adverbs. They aren't useful when overused. This app helps me see when I have relied to…

Who says that the rules from the app are even right? Anybody acually eveluated them on real books by known good writers? I want statistics: how often good writers are outside promoted rules?

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#89

Post by normloman »

mhurron wrote: post #79
aroman wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree! The Hemingway mode at seems to be geared (ironically) at technical writing. My English teacher wouldn't like it — it encourages simplification of language and minimization of word variation. Sometimes it's good to write like Austin...

That's what I noticed. It seemed to mark your writing higher the lower the reading grade level it was targeted at. I didn't realize that writing at a 5th grade level was the pinnacle of writing. What is with it's fear of adverbs?

Most amateur writers clutter their writing with unnecessary adverbs. Sometimes, a well placed adverb can add vividness to your writing. But most adverbs we throw around casually can be omitted without consequence.

Great writing rests on the foundation of bold verbs and nouns.

Re: Hemingway makes your writing bold and clear

#90

Post by diydsp »

pistle wrote: post #7

For presenting utilize as a wasteful term, I want to tearfully hug everyone involved in this. Please kill 'utilize.' We should reach out to stakeholders and incentivize the sunsetting of the leveraging of the word 'utilize' from all slide decks. Slide decks - the (not) new version of the tri-fold foam presentation board. It's the clear binder of our age.

Utilize has a rightful place in the English language. [1][2]

Just because so many people misuse it, doesn't mean it should be ghettoized.

Remember a few days ago when an article suggested that we may be shaping our lives according to the capability of machines and there were many naysayers? People nixing a perfectly useful word because a machine can easily recognize is a perfect example of us accomodating our ways to the capabilities of machines.

[1] http://grammarpartyblog.com/2012/01/17/use-versus-utilize/ [2] http://writing.wikinut.com/Writing-Tip%3A-Use-and-Utilize-ar...

Post reply on HN