Software vs. Human Editor

There are a lot of writing/editing software programs out there. This post is going to be talking about programs considered traditional/conventional artificial intelligence (AI). This differs from generative AI programs. Recently, many of these software programs have created generative AI components. I am not talking about these portions but about the traditional checks that review things like spelling and grammar. For my stance on generative AI, please check the blog post Conventional AI vs. Generative AI where I address this or check out the FAQs for a short answer.

Writing/editing programs are created with predetermined algorithms and rules to analyze against your writing. For example, they contain dictionaries and compare your words against this dictionary. They will point out when something doesn’t seem correct. We all make typos, after all, and spell check is there to help catch these errors.

Other technical parts of writing are more subjective. Do you remember the term “style guide” from school? There are many style guides, and these typically go by field. For instance, AP (Associated Press) is used for news and corporate material. MLA (Modern Language Association) is used for research and academic writing. CMOS (Chicago Manual of Style) is used for short stories and books in the US. Yes, the US, as other countries have their own guides!

Each style guide has preferences for things like commas, capitalization, titles, and more. While some software programs have developed ways to integrate a style guide based on your selection to make more informed choices, not all do. Even then, these guides provide guidance. While some rules are strict for readability (capitalize the first letter in a sentence and end the sentence with certain types of punctuation), others have wiggle room depending on factors such as publisher’s preference, author’s preference, readability, etc. Software programs cannot tell the difference. They may highlight something as an error, but without knowledge, a user may not know if it’s really an error to be fixed, if it works in the context, or if it is technically an error but preference allows for it anyway.

Here is an example (used with permission from author*).

The pyres are stacked to the brim with the dead but she cannot mourn them.

Editing software pointed out there should be a comma after “dead” and before “but,” which is correct. This “but” is called a coordinating conjunction in this context. It is combining two complete sentences together into one sentence.

The software also tagged this sentence as passive and suggested a change to active voice. It is passive, so this is also correct. But does it need to be changed? See the suggestions the program offered.

What the software missed completely, and only a human editor would catch, is as currently written, the sentence is stating the main character (“she”) cannot mourn the pyres. As in, the piles of wood. “The pyres” is the subject of this sentence as written and thus the focus of the character. What the author meant was the main character wasn’t able to mourn the dead stacked on the pyres. The final, corrected version is below.

The dead are stacked on endless pyres, but she cannot mourn them.

This sentence can be turned into active voice when done correctly.

She cannot mourn the dead stacked on endless pyres.

You’ll notice the software’s suggestions to make this sentence active voice

are making characters (although “she” wasn’t even a suggestion!) physically stack the bodies on the pyres. That’s not what should be happening here. The pyres were already stacked. The character is contemplating the scene set out before her and the people that had been lost.

Though there is a stigma against passive voice, both the final in passive voice and my version of active voice are correct. The choice largely is based on the intent of the author. In active voice, the subject switches to “she.” In the larger context of the paragraph (not provided), the focus is on how the main character is processing emotions of the scene. She is not making an active choice not to mourn the dead, she is coming to the realization she is incapable, and so for the emotion of the scene, passive voice works really well.

The editing software correctly caught the missing comma. However, it was not capable of understanding the intent or emotion of the scene. Due to this, it missed the subject of the sentence was originally incorrect and missed the reason the passive voice works better than active voice in this context. The suggestions to make the sentence into active voice would have completely changed the meaning of the sentence and not fit within the paragraph.

* This line is from the Clexa (The 100) fanfiction Deliverance by AM Carter. If you’re a fan of the show, consider checking it out here: https://www.amcarter.net