Back to LanguageTool Homepage - Privacy - Imprint

False positive: on going

Context: He depends on going in and out of Malaysia for his visa.

LT suggests “ongoing”.

I suggest resolving this by adding this to the pattern
<token regexp="yes">the|a|an</token>

Fixed (


Probably there was an editing error. There is no need to remove the already existing false positive prevention removing these lines:

2895 - <token>on<exception scope='previous' inflected="yes">insist</exception></token>
2900 - <example>She insisted on going for a drive.</example>

Hi @tiagosantos,

I removed the exception on line 2895 deliberately because it is redundant. I added a marker to line 2900 so that if a user clicks ‘More’ on the error in the GUI, the words ‘on going’ are highlighted in ‘She insisted on going for a drive.’ Old line 2900 is now 2907.

@dnaber and others. What is best practice? Leave redundant code in a rule or remove redundant code?

It was just an heads up, because those things happen to me all the time, and I appreciate being corrected when I am wrong.

<token postag_regexp="yes" postag="(NNS?)|(NN:.*)"><exception postag="RP"/><exception regexp="yes">today|tonight|tomorrow|yesterday</exception></token>

This is in fact a much wider solution.

Hard to tell in general, I think I’d tend to remove redundancies.

Thanks. I did not mean to seem ungrateful.Certainly, I like to be told when I make a mistake.