Last year I was approached by a proof reader offering me their services (assisted by a special app which speeded up the process). As a sample of what they and their app could do, they pointed out a couple of errors which they believed they’d found.<\/p>\n
Now I think this service could genuinely be useful to people who have great difficulty writing accurate English, and on sites where accuracy really matters, so I don’t wish to disparage it. I’m willing to pass on details of this proof-reader on request. But their services aren’t needed here. Here is my reply (which went unanswered!):<\/p>\n
Thank you for pointing out typos found by your app on my web site, (www.virginiaknight.org.uk\/vhkssinging) and for offering your services as a proof reader.<\/p>\n
<\/em>Arrangments was indeed a typo, and I’ve corrected it. But <\/em>hostes is correct. It’s part of a Latin sentence meaning ‘Lord, how many are my enemies’, and the title of a stunningly beautiful and dramatic anthem by Purcell (as it’s a title, I italicised it). As someone with a PhD in Classics I am very unlikely to make mistakes when quoting Latin (which my blog frequently does, because much of the music I sing is in Latin).<\/p>\n My blog is written for the entertainment of myself and others, rather than for profit, and my regular readers are willing to tolerate a few mistakes along the way. I frequently revisit what I wrote and correct or amend it at a later date – I’m currently doing this in conjunction with adding tags to the entries. So I don’t think I will take advantage of your offer, but pass on the message to others.<\/em>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Last year I was approached by a proof reader offering me their services (assisted by a special app which speeded up the process). As a sample of what they and their app could do, they pointed out a couple of … Continue reading