Grammar Checkers Have 𝗚̶𝗼̶𝘁̶ No Rhythm

By Bob Deakin

More Commas Please!

They mean well, but don’t have souls. I’ve tried ‘em all: Grammarly, Quilbot, Scrbbr, GPT, etc. I write so much that I like little red flags like teachers and editors used to make. I get deep into my head and sometimes fail to see the words wrapped around the message.

Do I still use grammar checkers (AI writing assistants)? Yes, as a warning light. For long-form documents I use Word and click grammar check when I’m done, but never use their suggested changes either. It gives me comfort, however, knowing I let another entity give it the once over.

What are grammar checkers good for? I wouldn’t say absolutely nothing. If you’re not fluent in a particular language I see value. Like training wheels, they give you freedom before taking it away. 

Grammar Checkers Have Guilty Feet

Back to soul. I like rhythm. Grammar checkers have guilty feet. They love commas more than rock stars love weed. Tell a musician to pause every three seconds and see what happens.   

I ration words and use contractions. Grammar checkers have all the time in the world for every ‘do not’ and ‘are not.’ I’ve already lost the beat.

Another thing: I don’t need to insert a ‘that’ before every subject. The reader is smart enough to realize where I’m going. Whose voice is it anyway?

I sound torqued off, don’t I. That’s a rhetorical question, Grammarly. 

I assume the reader would prefer a slow jam over an organ grinder. I express my disenchantment not to entertain but to inspire. A grammar checker should correct errors, not regulate taste. 

How do I adjust the settings to do that?

Upgrade to premium.

###