Re: Is the Gnu diction Package is bison and flex Candidate=

[Hans (Req man)]

Hans Aberg schreef:
> > example 1: be able to
> > =========
> >
> > Identifier            Beginner    Instances            Advised user 
> > action
> > ----------            --------    ---------            
> > -------------------
> > to be able to         Yes         be able to           (weak definition)
> From the description above, it looks as though the program suggests 
> that is a beginner error. 
Correct.
> So what does the program do?
It is used as a batch program to check English, German and Dutch texts. 
I use it to check the texts on my websites (after removing HTML tags 
with a sed script). Style produces readability marks, and diction flags 
questionable phrases (on beginners level and experienced). It is of 
course up to the user whether he wants to change anything in his text.
>   Hans Aberg
In Dutch it is easily possible to put many intermediate phrases between 
two words that belong to each other. In Dutch is is called a 'tang' (in 
English; tongs) construction. Simple example: De door de Minister van 
Sociale Zaken aangekondigde memo. 'De' and 'memo' belong to each other, 
and are separated by one phrase (bijwoordelijke bepaling). If you want 
people to be able to read and understand your texts this construction is 
considered bad writing style.

In order to come to an achievable goal I considered this to difficult to 
start with. So I took two examples from the current English diction 
phrase checks. My first level of ambition is to check a sentence for the 
existence of a certain phrase. And if possible I do not want to spell 
out every possibility all the time. As you demonstrated yourself it is 
easy to find new instances all the time.

If we were able to introduce the verb 'to be' with all its different 
instances, and reuse that all the time that would help enormously. 
Because now if we take another phrase with the verb to be, like 'to be 
capable to', the same thing starts over again. A second step could be 
that if a phrase consists of two sub phrases <to be><able> also the 
different sequence <able><to be> could be found.

Does this clarification helps? Is this goal achievable with the help of 
flex and bison?

Kind regards,
Hans Lodder