Passive Word Highlighter

Status
Not open for further replies.

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
12,799
Reaction score
2,500
Location
West Michigan
Encouraged by the response to the Word Frequency Finder, I've written another program to help writers.

The Passive Word Highlighter contains a program to highlight passive, misused, or over-used words and phrases in a document.

It is often difficult for a writer to see words that are misused or used too frequently. Many of us use "was" or "that" with so little thought that the words become almost invisible and nearly impossible to edit.

Consider the following words: is, isn't, am, are, aren't, was, wasn't, were, will, would, won't, has, had, have, be, been, do, don't, did, didn't, does, doesn't, seem, seems, exist, exists, appears, make, makes, show, shows, occur, occurs, get, got, went, put, some, many, most, that, very, extremely, totally, completely, wholly, utterly, quite, rather, slightly, fairly, somewhat, and suddenly.

These words either indicate passive sentences or are just plain boring. Often, they are necessary, but more often, they can be replaced with something more evocative.

So how can this program help? You give it a list of words you want to check, and it replaces each instance in your document with the same word but formatted in a color of your choice (red, blue, or green). For instance, you can find every instance of "was" and replace it with "was" (formatted in red). Suddenly, your manuscript is a forest of red, blue and green, making these boring words and phrases instantly obvious. Then you can decide which instances should be replaced with a more appropriate word and which to keep.

You can find this program on my website here:
http://www.rogerjcarlson.com/WritingHelp/TechTips.html

I would appreciate any comment, suggestion, and especially problem reports.

Thanks.
 

BlueTexas

Back from self-exile land.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,159
Reaction score
220
Location
Aledo, TX
Ohhh...cool! I think this will be useful for my own use as well as my current dilhemma. Thanks!!
 

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
12,799
Reaction score
2,500
Location
West Michigan
tjwriter said:
This is off topic, but I noticed it from your site. The section titled "The Craft" has the old link for AW on. It's still set to the ezboard site.
Whups! I'll fix it right away. Thanks.
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,313
Passuve

No time to test this one tonight, but I have it downloaded. I'll give it a go tomorrow. Sounds like a good idea, to me. Might even be a good idea to use your word list as a base, and add other words from there.
 

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
12,799
Reaction score
2,500
Location
West Michigan
maestrowork said:
Great! Just remember to keep a back-up before you run this tool. :)
You know, I could probably save the document to a different name before modifying it. That way it would automatically be creating a backup. In fact, the program would run against the backup rather than the original.

Hmmmm....I'll look into it.

Good idea! Thanks.
 

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
12,799
Reaction score
2,500
Location
West Michigan
Roger J Carlson said:
You know, I could probably save the document to a different name before modifying it. That way it would automatically be creating a backup. In fact, the program would run against the backup rather than the original.

Hmmmm....I'll look into it.

Good idea! Thanks.
Well, I did it. The Passive Word Highlighter now allows you to choose to make the highlighting to the original OR to a copy of the original.

I've also reduced the filesize for both this and the Word Frequency Counter.
 

pandora9

Registered
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Messages
27
Reaction score
4
Hi

I guess these macros don't work on a mac? Shame, they look really useful.
 

Sage

Our Lady of Parentheticals
Super Moderator
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
69,180
Reaction score
34,359
Age
46
Location
Cheering you all on!
Roger, I'm just wondering, 'cuz I've never used macros..., what makes this different from using find/replace to highlight those words?
 

Fahim

Mad coder, lazy writer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
1,701
Reaction score
95
Location
Sri Lanka
Website
www.farook.org
Sage said:
Roger, I'm just wondering, 'cuz I've never used macros..., what makes this different from using find/replace to highlight those words?

One of the uses that macros are often put to is to make repetitive tasks easy. For instance, if you have a whole bunch of passive words/phrases that you want to highlight, you would have to click Find/Replace, type the word in and then click Replace All and then repeat the same action for ten or twenty or a hundred other words in the list. With the macro, you simply set up the word list, click a button and it does all the work for you :) So much more easier - at least for lazy people like me :p

[Edited to add the following]
There's a thread in Tech Help with a macro that I wrote which highlights a few other words besides passive ones. Heck Roger's got a couple of other macros over there that are really nifty as well :) In fact, I used Roger's word lists for my macro :)
 
Last edited:

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
12,799
Reaction score
2,500
Location
West Michigan
pandora9 said:
Hi

I guess these macros don't work on a mac? Shame, they look really useful.
Unfortunately, the utilities will not, as they make use of some programming that it built into Windows itself. However, if you use Word for Mac, you may be able to create your own.

On my website, http://www.rogerjcarlson.com/WritingHelp/TechTips.html, there is an article called "Using Word Macros to Improve Your Writing", which shows how to create your own macro. I don't know if it will work with Word for Mac, but it's worth a try.

If you use some other word processor, you may also be able to use a similar technique if that word processor has a macro recorder.
 

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
12,799
Reaction score
2,500
Location
West Michigan
Sage said:
Roger, I'm just wondering, 'cuz I've never used macros..., what makes this different from using find/replace to highlight those words?
At its very basic, a macro simply records keystokes that you can play back at the push of a button (or keystroke combination). This can be useful for many different repetitive actions. In fact, you can create your own macro to highlight passive words (or any other kind of words you want) as I describe in the article on my website as posted above. Many word processing programs have similar capabilities.

However, Microsoft took a bold step and upgraded their Macro Recorder into a full-bloodded programming language (Visual Basic for Applications or VBA). If you know how to program, you can create some extremely complex add-on applications and build them into Word itself. It is a much under-utilized but extremely useful functionality that, as far as I know, no other word processing program has.

While my utilities are beyond the "keystoke-recorder" stage, they still aren't built to the sophistication that I would like. Someday I'm going to bundle all of them into an "Add-in" that can be installed into Word. Now that would be useful.
 

Maryn

Not Any More
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
63,936
Reaction score
42,586
Location
Chair
Just a heads-up for the technically inept. I'm one of you, and I got this working without help. Not first try, mind you, but I did it, and that means you don't have to be a 'computer person' to copy it and make it work for you.

Maryn, knowing some people need that reassurance
 
Last edited:

Fahim

Mad coder, lazy writer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
1,701
Reaction score
95
Location
Sri Lanka
Website
www.farook.org
icerose said:
Dang it! All the good macros are for microsoft and not corel :(

I can't believe I'm saying this, but maybe it's time to switch? :p Actually, OpenOffice seems to have a pretty good macro language as well and there are quite a few macros for it out there. And it is free. So you might want to give that a try if you want to try something different :) Of course, given that I haven't actually coded any macros for OpenOffice and given that I hated the UI for OpenOffice, you might want to take what I say with a pinch of salt ... ;p
 

KarlaErikaCal

YA romance writer in love with love
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
12,480
Reaction score
1,887
Location
Chicago
Darn... it doesn't work for Office 2007... Is there a way around this?
 

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
12,799
Reaction score
2,500
Location
West Michigan
Darn... it doesn't work for Office 2007... Is there a way around this?
I haven't tested it in 2007 yet. It's on my to do list. I've got a feeling I'm going to have to re-write it from scratch. But you could write your own macro to do the same thing by using the macro recorder and modifying the recorded macro. I've got instructions for doing that on the webpage too in an article called Using Word Macros to Improve Your Writing. The instructions are for Office 2000-2007, but the general process should still work the same.
 

Dustry Joe

Sockpuppet
Banned
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
214
Reaction score
17
That is absolutely insane. The idea that a WORD can be "passive" and in some way inferior to other words is something no writer should even give a second's credence to.

The list of words is REALLY crazy. "Suddenly" is passive????? And "invisible"?

Don't use "get" or "got"...probably the most powerful word in the English language? GET is passive????????????????????

There are a lot of junk programs out there preying on writers who think they can buy something to make them better. They can't.
 

Fahim

Mad coder, lazy writer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
1,701
Reaction score
95
Location
Sri Lanka
Website
www.farook.org
That is absolutely insane. The idea that a WORD can be "passive" and in some way inferior to other words is something no writer should even give a second's credence to.

Joe, your preferences are your own. Nobody is forcing you to try this macro or any other program. The list of words in the macro can be customized by the user and it doesn't have to be passive words - it can be often used words that sometimes writers tend to use too often. And nobody is "preying" on writers here since the program is absolutely FREE. If you don't like it, don't use it - it's as simple as that.
 

Dustry Joe

Sockpuppet
Banned
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
214
Reaction score
17
Joe, your preferences are your own.

Of course they are. Whose else would the be?
It was supposed to be a "passive" word filter and a list of words were given. That qualifies it as stupid. I don't know why you would take my saying so as anything else other than my saying it's stupid.

There are a lot of junk programs out there preying on writers who think they can buy something to make them better. They can't.

This statement stands and is very true. If the program you describe is free, then it doesn't prey on people's pocketbook, just their time and unrealistic aims. Wonderful. Use it if you like.
 

Fahim

Mad coder, lazy writer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
1,701
Reaction score
95
Location
Sri Lanka
Website
www.farook.org
Of course they are. Whose else would the be?
It was supposed to be a "passive" word filter and a list of words were given. That qualifies it as stupid. I don't know why you would take my saying so as anything else other than my saying it's stupid.

Because you saying something doesn't necessarily make it fact - it's just your opinion and while it might be your own opinion, you also might be deluded enough to believe whatever some other stupid schmuck told you. Not knowing you personally, I can't make a definite statement either way. I was simply pointing out the fact that there are always two (or more) sides to anything and you saying it's stupid and ridiculous and whatnot doesn't necessarily make it so. I just don't want somebody to read your opinion and make it their own and spread the word :p

This statement stands and is very true. If the program you describe is free, then it doesn't prey on people's pocketbook, just their time and unrealistic aims. Wonderful. Use it if you like.

Everybody doesn't have to have the same goals and aims as yourself. Somebody else might find it useful even if you don't, there is no need to deride something without even checking the full facts since you obviously did not know that the macro is free and is available here just because the author found it personally useful. If it's not for you, then move on :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.