Enhanced text analysis

Hi Scrivener Team,

Wouldn’t it be nice, to add-in some basic text analysis tools, like color marking of “word repeat”, “adverbs”, “passive writing” or “conjunctions”? One thing why people often have to move to another tool ist a missing grammar and a pretty basic spell check we get on the Mac (German language setting). Any help for improvement would be cheered by the community. :slight_smile:


(Y) :smiley: Yes, pleeeeeeease!

Came to the forum to ask the same question. I would so much love to have more text analysis than word counting.

Now I understand that much of this is language-specific and is a whole topic in itself. But some readability checks like word length, sentence length, etc. could be done with a bit of language-specific configuration (german is simply longer than english, for example, so it needs higher thresholds).

I wouldn’t be a great fan of this (just as I’m not a great fan of a not dissimilar suggestion here: [url]https://forum.literatureandlatte.com/t/prose-editing/36503/1]). I wouldn’t be against some of the suggestions Tom makes above, connected with readability (readability tools are I’m sure available off the shelf, though at a price), but I wouldn’t go very much further, particularly when English grammar and syntax are involved.

For several reasons: first, there’s the issue referred to by Tom of coping with different languages; second, in my experience most such tools don’t yet work well enough to be depended upon, especially where the English language is concerned (too many false results - how would such tools cope with, say, “referred to by Tom”? In this usage, is “to” a preposition? Or because it qualifies “referred” should it be in Thomas’s list of adverbs? etc etc); third, notwithstanding what I’ve just written, potential competitor-tools do exist outside Scrivener and for me when I was in business it was a rule to try “not to re-invent the wheel”; and fourth, although I’ve huge respect for the L&L team, I doubt very much indeed whether they could or would want to “roll their own”, and therefore they would have to buy in the capability - at a cost to every future purchaser of Scrivener. There is of course a possible halfway-house of enabling a Scrivener interface with one or more of the tools commercially available. But how would that differ from the formats (e.g. rtf) that Scrivener can currently compile to?