I don't know if any such stuff is at all available but my gut feeling is that in the matters as delicate as grammar one is best advised to rely on his or her knowledge in grammar. If you honestly believe that your grammar falls short of the standard, then don't rely on any software for it. You'd better try to remove grammatical deficiencies to become more confident and less vulnerable to common grammatical errors.
I don't know if any such stuff is at all available but my gut feeling is that in the matters as delicate as grammar one is best advised to rely on his or her knowledge in grammar. If you honestly believe that your grammar falls short of the standard, then don't rely on any software for it. You'd better try to remove grammatical deficiencies to become more confident and less vulnerable to common grammatical errors.
True but to remove those deficiencies one must refer to and study the basics of grammar so that one can improve his grammar skills and that must happen with full efforts and willingly.
"I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally." - W. C. Fields :)
I don't know if any such stuff is at all available but my gut feeling is that in the matters as delicate as grammar one is best advised to rely on his or her knowledge in grammar. If you honestly believe that your grammar falls short of the standard, then don't rely on any software for it. You'd better try to remove grammatical deficiencies to become more confident and less vulnerable to common grammatical errors.
True but to remove those deficiencies one must refer to and study the basics of grammar so that one can improve his grammar skills and that must happen with full efforts and willingly.
I have suggested that in being emphatic on removal of deficiencies by opting for the right kind of response on the part of the concerned persons.
Humans have invented loads of things that are termed as 'auto'. However, behind every 'auto' there is a 'man'. What I mean to say is, no software can ever match the manually checking. Believe in yourself and as Kalyani said, you can do some study to master proofreading.
Humans have invented loads of things that are termed as 'auto'. However, behind every 'auto' there is a 'man'. What I mean to say is, no software can ever match the manually checking. Believe in yourself and as Kalyani said, you can do some study to master proofreading.
True...there is no alternative to self study and hard work on your own part. What I have seen as a normal tendency is that most people do not want to take efforts to improve their own skills but expect that since the editors get some remuneration, they should proof read their articles properly, but they forget that editors' js not to proofread it completely but only make sure that the content is right, presentation is proper and make some changes where inevitable errors may have occurred, and Not to proofread the entire article.
"I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally." - W. C. Fields :)
