Pages in topic:   [1 2] >
Which is better: Hunspell or Microsoft Office Spellcheck with Wordfast?
Thread poster: Giuseppe Bellone

Giuseppe Bellone
Italy
Local time: 03:19
Member (2009)
English to Italian
+ ...
Feb 27, 2011

In Wordfast 2.4.1 we have the option:

Hunspell or Microsoft Office Spellcheck.

Is there any big difference? Which is better in your experience? Or isn't there much difference?
Thank you.icon_smile.gif

MisterBeppe


 

Samuel Murray  Identity Verified
Netherlands
Local time: 03:19
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
Can't comment specifically Feb 27, 2011

MisterBeppe wrote:
In Wordfast 2.4.1 we have the option:
Hunspell or Microsoft Office Spellcheck.
Is there any big difference?


I've never really used spell-checking in WFP, so I can't help with that specific query (i.e. which one is easier to use in WFP), but I can tell you that I often spell-check documents in both Microsoft Word's and LibreOffice's (Hunspell) spellcheckers, because they have different strengths and weaknesses.

For rarer languages, the Hunspell dictionary might be more simplistic, but for languages with active language communities, the Hunspell dictionary might be more up to date. There may even be more than one Hunspell dictionary to choose from, in some languages (developed by different companies).

For Italian, there seems to be two different Hunspell dictionaries to choose from:
http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/en/project/dict-it
http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/en/project/Dict_it_IT


 

Giuseppe Bellone
Italy
Local time: 03:19
Member (2009)
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Thank Samuel, I simply forgot... Feb 27, 2011

... to tell that my laguages are: English, French and Italian.
Sorry, I forgot, and I kow that in certain languages there are differences.
Thanks a lot for your answer.
MisterBeppe


 

madak  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 02:19
Swedish to English
+ ...
Could be because Swedish is a "rare" language Feb 27, 2011

Samuel Murray wrote:

For rarer languages, the Hunspell dictionary might be more simplistic, but for languages with active language communities, the Hunspell dictionary might be more up to date. There may even be more than one Hunspell dictionary to choose from, in some languages (developed by different companies).



Or because compounds are written together. For Swedish, Hunspell is pretty useless as it doesn't appear to be able to handle compounds such as "köksfönster" (kitchen window), but has no problem with "kök" and "fönster".

I don't use WF, but have found this a problem when using MemoQ as the only realtime spellchecking uses HS.


 

Giuseppe Bellone
Italy
Local time: 03:19
Member (2009)
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Is Hunspell updated regularly then? Feb 27, 2011

Is this what you mean or perhaps I misunderstand something?
Thanks.icon_smile.gif


 

Alex Lago  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 03:19
Member (2009)
English to Spanish
+ ...
MS Word Feb 28, 2011

In my experience the MS Word spell checker for my languages (Spanish & English) is much better than the Hunspell.

However I don't recommend using MS Word directly within Wordfast as it takes ages and is a very slow process. I have discovered it is in fact a lot quicker (4 or 5 times quicker for me) to spell check the file directly in Word using the Preview in Word feature of Wordfast. I then spell check in Word and if Word finds any errors I go to Wordfast an correct them, this is in fact a lot quicker than doing it all in Wordfast


 

Giuseppe Bellone
Italy
Local time: 03:19
Member (2009)
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Thanks Alex Feb 28, 2011

... for your opinion

 

esperantisto  Identity Verified
Local time: 04:19
Member (2006)
English to Russian
+ ...
Depends on the language, I guess Mar 1, 2011

As for Russian, Hunspell is good and Microsoft’s spellcheck is crap.

For example, Hunspell will suggest the correct spelling for
Code:
гидорэлктростанция


and Microsoft will fail.

Besides, Hunspell dictionaries are plain text files that you can easily modify to your needs. Or even create your own dictionary from zero if you wish.


 

Giuseppe Bellone
Italy
Local time: 03:19
Member (2009)
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Thanks Esperantisto Mar 1, 2011

I see. I only use Italian, French and English.
I thank you very much for your comment.
Have a nice day.
MisterBeppe


 

Marina Aleyeva  Identity Verified
Ukraine
Local time: 04:19
English to Russian
+ ...
My experience, too Mar 1, 2011

Alex Lago wrote:
I don't recommend using MS Word directly within Wordfast as it takes ages and is a very slow process. I have discovered it is in fact a lot quicker (4 or 5 times quicker for me) to spell check the file directly in Word using the Preview in Word feature of Wordfast. I then spell check in Word and if Word finds any errors I go to Wordfast an correct them, this is in fact a lot quicker than doing it all in Wordfast

This has been my experience, too. Microsoft Office Spellchecker takes ages to check directly in WF Pro, even on small files.

And I wonder if it actually uses custom.dic files? I have built up 9 different custom.dic's over the years. Not being able to plug them in would be a disadvantage.

[Edited at 2011-03-01 13:19 GMT]


 

Giuseppe Bellone
Italy
Local time: 03:19
Member (2009)
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Thanks Marina. Mar 1, 2011

I'll let Hunspell do the job then! Have a nice day.icon_smile.gif

 

Andrey Gunko  Identity Verified
Ukraine
Local time: 04:19
Member (2013)
English to Ukrainian
+ ...
Hunspell rules Feb 10, 2014

Hunspell is better IMHO. The reasons can be seen here http://www.maierhofer.de/en/open-source/nhunspell-net-spell-checker.aspx
As to Slavic languages, like Russian and Ukrainian Hunspell is really better than Microsoft spell checker.

[Edited at 2014-02-10 21:33 GMT]


 

Giuseppe Bellone
Italy
Local time: 03:19
Member (2009)
English to Italian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Thanks Andrey Feb 11, 2014

Thank you very much for your suggestion.

Best regards,

Giuseppe


 

neilmac  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 03:19
Spanish to English
+ ...
WFC + MS Word Feb 13, 2014

I use WF Classic and Word, preferably in an XP framework. I only spellcheck the finished drafts after cleaning up and have never had any issues. I don't really see the point of spellchecking an unfinished draft.

 

Samuel Murray  Identity Verified
Netherlands
Local time: 03:19
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
@Andrey Feb 13, 2014

Andrey Gunko wrote:
Hunspell is better IMHO. The reasons can be seen here.


Where on that page are the reasons listed, Andrey?


 
Pages in topic:   [1 2] >


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Which is better: Hunspell or Microsoft Office Spellcheck with Wordfast?

Advanced search


Translation news related to Wordfast





SDL Trados Studio 2019 Freelance
The leading translation software used by over 250,000 translators.

SDL Trados Studio 2019 has evolved to bring translators a brand new experience. Designed with user experience at its core, Studio 2019 transforms how new users get up and running, helps experienced users make the most of the powerful features, ensures new

More info »
Protemos translation business management system
Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!

The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.

More info »



Forums
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search