# Help me beat some sense into Microsoft Word's grammar check **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 3, 2009, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763 "2009-09-03T16:59:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2009, 10:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/21 "2009-09-04T10:43:29Z")
> [@Hippy\_Hollow](#): > > If I see one more red squiggle underlining “faculty are” I’m going to kick Word’s ass. I use so many non-English words in my writing that I have turned off the automatic spell-checker. When I am DONE writing, then I go through the whole document once, ignoring some non-mistakes, and adding others to the dictionary. But that won’t help with the grammar-checker, where, to my knowledge, you can only tell if to stop checking a rule in its entirely, not specific instances of the rule, which is what you’d want here. That’s why I was very intrigued by the suggestion to edit MSGR3EN.LEX. I tried opening it in Notepad, but it doesn’t seem to be a plain text file. It seems to lots of odd code bytes in there. I’m using Word 2002. Any suggestions? Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![JustThinkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@JustThinkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JustThinkin)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2009, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/22 "2009-09-04T12:22:44Z")
> [@Hippy\_Hollow](#): > > I admit that my grammar brain is not engaged, but here’s what I mean: > > “Faculty” in essence means “faculty members.” So I might say: > > Faculty are able to engage in research, teaching, and service. > > Word wants me to say: > > Faculty is able to engage in research, teaching, and service. > > or > > Faculties are able to engage in research, teaching, and service. Just bypass the whole problem by using a more direct verb that doesn’t depend on number: Faculty may engage. . . Faculty might engage. . . Faculty can engage. . . “Is able to” is deadwood – more words than you really need to express the idea. IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Hippy\_Hollow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hippy_hollow/32/4841_2.png) [@Hippy\_Hollow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hippy_Hollow)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2009, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/23 "2009-09-04T14:03:33Z")
> [@Reply](#): > > Another alternative is to edit Word’s dictionary/grammar file directly (in C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Proof\MSGR3EN.LEX) and overwrite all instances of “faculty” that you find. Word will just forget that word for both spelling and grammar, and you can use it however you want without affecting other words or grammar checks. You can still keep subject-verb agreement on, in other words. > > If you don’t have a text editor handy, you can download my [edited MSGR3EN.LEX file](http://drop.io/9w0h5h5/asset/msgr3en-lex) and replace yours (but back yours up first in case you run into any future problems). The only difference is that I replaced all instances of “faculty”, as described. This… is freakin’ awesome. I have a Mac though. I’ll have to do some rummaging in the pkg to see if there’s a similar file… ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2009, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/24 "2009-09-04T14:43:11Z")
When it comes to Word, I definitely second turning the grammar checker off entirely. It just isn’t smart enough to keep it active all the time. > [@JustThinkin](#): > > “Is able to” is deadwood – more words than you really need to express the idea. Yes, but if you ever join a faculty, you’ll notice that your salary and status are tied directly to number of words, not the meaning they contain. The head of the department is invariably the person who can write a three-page memo that boils down to “Does anyone have ideas for a memo?” 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![JustThinkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@JustThinkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JustThinkin)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2009, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/25 "2009-09-04T15:52:05Z")
> [@dracoi](#): > > [snip] > Yes, but if you ever join a faculty, you’ll notice that your salary and status are tied directly to number of words, not the meaning they contain. The head of the department is invariably the person who can write a three-page memo that boils down to “Does anyone have ideas for a memo?” 🙂 And this, my friend, is why even the thought of an academic career gives me the heebie-jeebies! ::shudder:: ---
**Author:** ![Reply](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/reply/32/15952_2.png) [@Reply](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reply)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2009, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/26 "2009-09-05T01:10:06Z")
> [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](#): > > I think it’s useful to get over the lines. To simply mentally ignore them, going into edit Word’s data files just so you don’t have to see squiggly lines seems like more trouble than it’s worth. It’s not like they show up when it’s printed out. 😃 But finding new ways to mess up Word is more fun 🙂 > [@Keeve](#): > > That’s why I was very intrigued by the suggestion to edit MSGR3EN.LEX. I tried opening it in Notepad, but it doesn’t seem to be a plain text file. It seems to lots of odd code bytes in there. I’m using Word 2002. Any suggestions? Thanks! It’s not a plain text file, but it does have plaintext words here and there (at least for Word 2007… I’m not sure about 2002). I’d suggest using a text editor like [UltraEdit](http://www.ultraedit.com/) in hex editing mode if you want to tinker around in there, but please be sure to back up your file first. Also, you might want to replace the string with something of equal length so the filesize doesn’t change, just in case Word has some sort of file integrity checking (I don’t know if it does). > [@Hippy\_Hollow](#): > > This… is freakin’ awesome. I have a Mac though. I’ll have to do some rummaging in the pkg to see if there’s a similar file… Aw, sorry. I don’t have a Mac handy right now, but I might later tonight. I’ll look into it then if I can. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/27 "2009-09-06T04:09:50Z")
While chiming in to agree that “faculty” is a singular collective noun in American English, I will point out that its use as a synonym for “professor” is a minor example of _jargon_ – a non-standard usage that is standard within a group, especially a group defined by a common profession. Many fields are loaded with words that mean one thing to those in the field, and something completely different to everyone else. Most speakers of jargon switch freely between the two, depending on who they’re talking to and what they’re talking about, but some cling to their jargon even when talking to people who clearly have no idea what is being said. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/28 "2009-09-06T12:23:40Z")
Another person checking in to confirm that it is singular in American English. It’s like “the crowd” or “the audience” or other such words. They represent a single body of people, and are therefore singular. “The crowd was large.” “The audience is laughing.” “The faculty has great credentials.” ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/29 "2009-09-06T16:01:23Z")
Moving from anecdote to Chicago: > [@](#): > > **§5.8 Mass nouns** > > A mass noun (sometimes called a noncount noun or a collective noun) is one that denotes something uncountable, either because it is abstract {cowardice} {evidence} or because it refers to an indeterminate aggregation of people or things { **the faculty** } {the bourgeoisie}. As the subject of a sentence, a mass noun usually takes a singular verb {the litigation is varied}. But in a collective sense, it may take either a singular or a plural verb form {the ruling majority is unlikely to share power} {the majority of voters are satisfied}. A singular verb emphasizes the group; a plural verb emphasizes the individual members. If a collective noun appears throughout a piece of writing, use one verb form consistently. ---
**Author:** ![Alex\_Dubinsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dbc845/32.png) [@Alex\_Dubinsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alex_Dubinsky)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/30 "2009-09-06T16:39:37Z")
> [@Hippy\_Hollow](#): > > But when you say “faculty,” as in, “Several faculty are finding it difficult to balance their scholarship and service roles,” it’s synonymous with “professors.” I think that’s non-standard. “You’re a faculty, I’m a faculty” sounds like jargon, not english. So it’s not a British-vs-American thing, it’s a “faculty is now a noun meaning professor, and its plural form is the same as its singular.” ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/31 "2009-09-06T17:17:46Z")
> [@JustThinkin](#): > > And this, my friend, is why even the thought of an academic career gives me the heebie-jeebies! ::shudder:: You needn’t worry, because what **dracoi** said is just another one of those stereotypes that is actually false far more often than it is true. > [@Liberal](#): > > Another person checking in to confirm that it is singular in American English. > > It’s like “the crowd” or “the audience” or other such words. They represent a single body of people, and are therefore singular. > > “The crowd was large.” > > “The audience is laughing.” > > “The faculty has great credentials.” First, as **Rhythmdvl** ’s _Chicago Manual of Style_ quote demonstrates, even usage guides say that treating mass nouns as plural is perfectly acceptable in many instances. In his _Dictionary of Modern American Usage_, Bryan Garner says: > [@](#): > > The main consideration in skillfully handling [collective nouns] is consistency in the use of a singular or plural verb. If, in the beginning of an essay, the phrasing is _the faculty was_, then every reference to _faculty_ as a noun should be singular throughout the whole. On the other hand, a writer who wishes to emphasize the individual persons more than the body of persons may decide to write _the faculty were_, though _members of the faculty were_ is preferable because it’s more accurate. > > p. 133 Also, moving beyond formal usage, as someone who hangs around academics a lot, and who is currently serving as an adjunct faculty member at a university, i can assure you that using the word _faculty_ with a plural verb is extremely common among those who use it the most often. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/32 "2009-09-06T18:50:25Z")
Personally, the only use I’ve ever had for word processor grammar checks is as comic relief, at the end of a long, stressful writing assignment. I once managed to even get one into an infinite loop, where if you made the change it suggested, it promptly suggested that you change it back to what it was before. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2009, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/33 "2009-09-09T00:08:44Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > First, as **Rhythmdvl** ’s _Chicago Manual of Style_ quote demonstrates, even usage guides say that treating mass nouns as plural is perfectly acceptable in many instances. With greatest respect, mhendo, I wouldn’t use the phrase “\*many \*instances”. It is okay in some particular instances. And from the examples Chicago gave, it seems to have something to do with an affect of the prepositional object. We all know that it should have no effect, but there ya go. > [@](#): > > In his _Dictionary of Modern American Usage_, Bryan Garner says:Also, moving beyond formal usage, as someone who hangs around academics a lot, and who is currently serving as an adjunct faculty member at a university, i can assure you that using the word _faculty_ with a plural verb is extremely common among those who use it the most often. Yeah, granted. However, adademia at that level is such a minority of the population that I’m not sure it qualifies beyond mere anecdotalism. ETA: I say that as a descriptivist. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2009, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/34 "2009-09-09T00:19:25Z")
A minority of the population as a whole, perhaps, but then, academia also refers to “faculty” much more often than the population as a whole. The proportion of times the word “faculty” is used by academia must surely be non-negligible. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2009, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/35 "2009-09-11T21:26:16Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > A minority of the population as a whole, perhaps, but then, academia also refers to “faculty” much more often than the population as a whole. The proportion of times the word “faculty” is used by academia must surely be non-negligible. While that may be true (depending on whether “academia” includes students), it is seldom that prescriptivism — e.g., I think someone cited Chicago — assigns some rule of grammar to people of a particular profession or circumstance while assigning a different rule to everybody else. Therefore, your point, even if well taken, may be moot. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2009, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/36 "2009-09-11T22:42:20Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > …rule of grammar… I believe the issue at hand is one of usage rather than grammar, which is a bit squishier. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2009, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763/37 "2009-09-12T00:16:07Z")
Usage, then. Same same. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-beat-some-sense-into-microsoft-words-grammar-check/508763.md?page=1)