![]() ![]() #WORDRAKE AND BRIEFCATCH SERIAL#What else did BriefCatch catch? Surplus words, as in WordRake, and more: long sentences sentences written in the passive voice inconsistent Oxford or serial commas (again, nonjudgmentally) inconsistent quotation marks use of exact dates inconsistent articles ("the Plaintiff" versus "Plaintiff") capitalization of "court" opportunities to summarize block-quoted material "and/or" and of course, glitches such as misplaced commas (instead "takes a comma at the start of a sentence"). Six changes accepted and we're still on page 2. A few sentences later: "Summary judgment should be denied and this matter should proceed to trial." Vigilant for long words with shorter alternatives, BriefCatch suggests that "proceed to" ought to be "go on to" or "go to." I hesitate-the rhythm of proceed pleases me-but short words are sweeter. Flesh-and-blood editors (including myself) should be as respectful. #WORDRAKE AND BRIEFCATCH FULL#At the end of the sentence it makes another catch: "The document generally includes two spaces after a period or full stop, but here you have one." Wait, what? BriefCatch caught a deviation from my usual typing, delivered without judgment about whether one space or two spaces is correct. " Again: "Cut needless adverbs." Sure, Ross, fine. Two sentences later: "As there are sharp disputes about what actually happened. Ross is right, so I choose "change" (notably "change all" is not an option). And don't set the bar higher than you need to." For each issue, it proposed a standard menu: Change, ignore, ignore all, and next. ![]() But BriefCatch highlighted entirely and favor, admonishing, "Cut needless adverbs. Here's my first sentence: "Defendants' summary-judgment brief reads like a closing argument to a jury, taking disputed facts and drawing inferences entirely in Defendants' favor." WordRake passed that sentence without comment. Full disclosure: I'm a fan of Ross's work and have worked on projects with him naturally I wondered what it would be like to have his AI-double living in my very own version of Word.īriefCatch is made for lawyers and designed as a teaching tool once it's caught your mistakes, it walks you through them sentence by sentence, with commentary. BriefCatch was created by legal writing coach Ross Guberman, author of Point Made and Point Taken and founder of LegalWritingPro. #WORDRAKE AND BRIEFCATCH TRIAL#After a two-week free trial it costs $240/year. Next up is BriefCatch, available at (wait for it) BriefCatch. It also skews informal ("that is what they wrote down" becomes "they wrote down that") which may not be every writer's cup of eggnog. WordRake marks "that" for deletion far too often, in my opinion (but I'm a lawyer). WordRake doesn't always appreciate context: for "is consistent with," WordRake proposed a single option, "follows," which sometimes made sense and sometimes didn't. It prefers simple past tense verbs (which are short) to longer progressive or conditional verb tenses, which may elide nuance or create ambiguity (for example, the difference between "began reading" and "read"). ![]() It focuses relentlessly on word count, occasionally at slight cost to clarity. It will propose changes to quotations, so keep clear of the "accept all changes" option. WordRake is fast and no-nonsense: it hunted through a 15,000-word brief and had edits plated up and ready to serve in a matter of minutes-a great gift to those of us who suffer from both logorrhea and procrastination. WordRake discovered plenty of fat in my flabby sentences-"At the time" became "when," "a couple of" became "two," "more than" became "over," "take a look" became "look," "for the purpose of" became "to." Opening phrases ("At this point," "As it happened," "There is no dispute that") and adverbs were marked for termination with extreme prejudice. I sicced WordRake on my draft opposition brief and liked the results. It's designed to help all writers (not just lawyers) produce short, clear, readable sentences, which it does with speed and grace. You accept or reject those changes using Track Changes. It will proofread your writing (including Outlook emails!) and use Word's "Track Changes" function to propose edits. After a two-week free trial you may subscribe for one to three years, with the least expensive option (Word only, 1 year) at $129 and the most expensive (Word + Outlook for 3 years) totaling $399. Readers, may I introduce WordRake and BriefCatch, two plug-ins for Microsoft Word.įirst, WordRake, available at. ![]() This year Santa dropped off an immense summary judgment brief just in time for the holidays-a great excuse to stay indoors and a chance to test out some technological assists for busy writers. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |