Hello!
While I was sleeping this came to mind:
Is it different to write “chocar com” from “chocar contra”?
“choquei com a parede”
Not 100% sure.
Not sure either, but verbal regency rules are on the plans. If you confirm that with an URL, please, share the rule so it can be added.
This is also a great rule, within the same category (verbal regency), so likewise.
Can we make this the new [pt] thread, and place all [pt] rule contributions/discussions here?
Having a single thread, makes everything tidier and easier to reference. I feel discouraged when searching for old threads in the dozens of posts this forum has, so potencially good ideas get lost this way.
Sure, @tiagosantos.
Could you just change the topic subject by clicking in the pencil so that people know this is the topic?
Or maybe only the person who creates the topic can edit its name? If so, which name should be given?
Thanks!
It has to be you.
[pt] Portuguese rule contribution
[pt] Portuguese rule discussion
or anything else you see fit.
Done!
Many thanks.
Possible rule:
DEPOIS DE/APÓS + VERB 3rd PERSON + À/AO → suggest VERB INFINITIVE
Hello @tiagosantos
I was reading this article:
http://sicnoticias.sapo.pt/mundo/2017-01-30-Viver-no-espaco-altera-os-genes-revela-estudo-da-NASA-sobre-gemeos-astronautas
They wrote:
Houve, já se sabe, alterações que no entanto foram revertidas, como foi o caso de Scott Kelly ter crescido 3,81 centímetros, mas depois de regressa à Terra voltou à altura que tinha.
“depois de REGRESSA à” should suggest “REGRESSAR” in infinite.
Great possible rule, eh? I have seen several persons committing this mistake.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
>Marco A.G.Pinto
------------------------
DONE
[spoiler]
[quote=“marcoagpinto, post:4, topic:1340”]
For what I can think:[1] a [2] = [1] à [2]
[1]hojeamanhãsegundasegunda-feiraterçaterça-feiraquartaquarta-feiraquintaquinta-feirasextasexta-feirasábadodomingo
[2]tardenoite
[/quote][/spoiler]
All added to the list. Keep’em coming.
Since the Dicionários Natura is not releasing updated versions of the dictionaries I though on moving on with my own dictionary releases in GitHub. The catch is, I need someone to review it.
My changes are only derivations (prefixes and sufixes), and they are based in general morphological rules. I have reviewed them summarily, but they require extra checking.
If you cooperate on this task, I will push the first version as a new GitHub project later this week. First step is only plurals and only AO90.
Sure,
I will test it with my thesis + dissertation + book 
I have a deep interest in the prereform pt_PT speller as I still write without the AO90.
Is there a way to make it official?
I mean, to transfer the maintenance from Minho University to you, and use it in OpenOffice + LibreOffice?
I could search for the e-mails I sent to Minho University years ago suggesting many hundreds of words, none of which were added.
A couple of years ago or so, I was in Freenode annoying the LibreOffice guys to accept both pre and post reform pt_PT spellers and they said there was already a code to differentiate both (or something like that) in the official languages somewhere site where there are the standards.
Maybe it could be possible to release both, pre+post, in the same OXT and LO allow to choose between them? Or maybe that would need to be improved in LO 5.4?
Awesome. Many thanks. It is not a easy task.
Do not get me wrong, Marco. I do not wish to fork the project, nor take that extra responsability, but I believe that having the improvements tested here before integration in the “mainstream” would be a win-win situation. LibreOffice could also use it later, after sufficient triage (one release cycle, maybe).
This is great.
One thing that may be easier is to convince them to push a pre-AO90 dictionary to pt-AO.
Although they already have the locale, they do not have a dictionary pre-installed for Angola, and it is equivalent. Another win-win situation.
To make Timar understand the subject, point him here and to this link that may help:
http://svepotranslations.se/?p=809
Toggle solutions will not be easy.
Released. I made it an integrated extension and with hyphenator, thesaurus and both dictionary versions. Try it here:
It has changed roughly 30k dictionary entries, so some may need a fix. Extensive review is required before integration in LO, but I believe that in a week we can integrate in LanguageTool for wide usage testing.
For testing convenience, I added a Firefox dictionary add-on. Only Pos-AO90.
https://github.com/TiagoSantos81/PortugueseLibreOfficeExtension/raw/master/FirefoxDictionary.xpi
Tiago, I still haven’t had the time to check anything.
Could you do a Firefox add-on pre-AO90?
It would have to be set as a pt-AO locale to avoid reporting conflict. The pre-AO version is also more conservative. It is limited to improvements in gender and number variations.
Good enough?
Any news on this, or on LibreOffice add-on testing?
NOTE: All feedback is welcome. This thread is not an “internal discussion” so all users testing the new dictionary version are welcome to provide constructive criticism.
Sorry… I spent the day coding to fix some issues in the PhD project (software).
Moments ago I installed the OXT in LO 5.3 and here are most of the words that appear as typos in the thesis (most probably already suggested by me to Minho University) (notice that I used M$ Word 2016 pre-AO to write it):
- Jorge Canelhas
- co-orientado
- Teresa Baptista
- Isabel Pita
- SeaMonkey
- Edma
- Ortins de Bettencourt
- Assembly Z80
- shareware
- freeware
- Commodore
- PCs
- hobby
- para Windows, Linux e Mac
- beta-tester
- desenvolvedor + desenvolvedores
- Hunspell
- SeaMonkey
- far-se-á
- disruptir
- hacking
- autoproclamada
- insurgências
- sobrelotados
- botnets
- zombies
- multiagente
- polímata
- XYZ
- subnacionais
- Osama Bin Laden
- destabilizando
- Sadam Hussein
- franchisings
- proibitivos
- hackers
- cracks
- crackers
- Khadafi
- sobrelotadas
- raides aéreos
- Análise Bayesiana
- grupal
- interorganizacional
- know-how
- sememas
- interrelacionadas
- difundível
- ataques DoS/DDoS
- interconectividade
- interconectados
- SPAM (check if it can be written in lowercase)
- token + tokens
- hash
- interrelacionam
- experienciámos
- cluster
- inspiracional
- feedback
- robots + robot
- pseudo-inteligência
- co-fundador
- superinteligência
- pseudocódigo
- GUI (Interface gráfico)
- pixéis (não sei se leva acento)
- semiautónomos
- impassáveis
- aleatoriedade
- circunjacente
- impassável
- passável
- baseamo-nos
- ID
- gadget + gadgets
- recomputado
- DirectX
- Pentium (processador)
- SSD (disco)
- CPU
- rastreamento
- background
- screenshot
- lossless
- co-senos
- subopções
- reset
- AutoCAD
- pixelização
- Excel
- cache
- browser + browsers
- Bin Laden
Here are most of the words that appear as typos… again, notice that some may be pre-AO.
As you can see, even I didn’t want to, I had to use M$ Office because the pt_PT speller doesn’t recognise tons of words.
@tiagosantos
I have also tons of false positive grammar suggestions reported by LanguageTool, which I will make a list when I have some more free time.
Thanks for dedicating all this effort and time to the projects.
Well, those are words not included. Not actual dictionary errors. The revision has to be on false negatives, i.e. word derivations included that are incorrect.
Using your examples. If ‘rastreamenta’ (feminin of rastreamento) was considered correct, that would be a dicionary error.
Moreover, most words are foreign words or proper names (foreign or rare). See our replacement tables or the VOP for more information. If you really require them, you can add them to spelling.txt here on LT. Most are barbarisms that you should avoid, and that have no place in a proofreader. See:
Sure. Just try to show the “regular one”. We have daily regression testing, so we can avoid odd test cases like the ones in:
agreement issues with proper names, and false negatives in brands.
Dedidate your time to finish your PhD. I already have people looking into it. Thanks.
Pushed:
For usage examples, see:
Please, keep these thread for all portuguese matters. It is much easier to reference.