Just to throw this out for future changes. I use lingq to read sports articles, and things on politics which on any given day contain lots of different names of lots of different people, and in the case of Polish sometimes the same name declined 3 or 4 different ways. I just think it would be useful to be able to select something in a similar way to a lingq and make it so it doesn’t go into the known words total.
I think my known words total is cluttered with different declinations of bench players who only played 5 minutes of whichever game I’m reading about. Anyway just throwing that out there, I know you guys are busy…
To do this would require getting a list of the total number of words in each language and comparing each new “known word” to this list every time. i doubt if the benefit is worth it. Do not take your Known Words total too seriously. It is just an order of magnitude. The more the better. I doubt if this clutter amounts to even 1%.
I’m with Steve. Proper names, numbers et.c. do change. You don’t have to save every inflection of a name (even English has several possible forms: Johnson, Johnson’s, Johnsons, Johnsons’), but for me, I sometimes don’t even realize that it is another form of an already known (or at least saved) word, due to position in the sentence, capitalization and so on.
nah, that’s not what I’m talking about. I know the clutter isn’t huge, it was just an idea but I just mean being able to select a word for example George Bush or Georgea Busha like it would be declined in the possesive in Polish so the system knew not to count it in the totals. When I lingq a new word it’s not counted in the known words total and it goes into my vocab lists. I’m just saying what if there was a lingq that just made it so it didn’t count it in any way.
You’re right though that it’s not a big deal, I was just throwing it out there…
I (think I) don’t save words if the meaning is obvious (incl. genitives, datives et.c.), but sometimes I don’t realize it immediately, and for that particular reason I think that they really are other words even though we’ll never find them in a dictionary.
The system can’t do the thinking for us, it just calculates unique items. Since the vocabulary of a language is in constant change (new words are added, others become obsolete) I fail to see how LingQ would be totally up to date, 24/7, 365 days a year.
I think you guys are totally missing what I’m saying. I gotta re-read what I wrote.
Now I see. You would like to highlight a word and remove it from any word count, known, new, learned etc. I do not think we are going to spend any time on that for now. I do not think all the Bushas in your known word count amount to much. The known word count is not that accurate. It is a rough number.
Yeah, yeah. I know it’s nothing urgent, or even a big deal, it’s just every player and every politician in every article often with multiple declensions gets counted as known word Rep Johnny Do Good from Arkansas and the bench player had a good dunk but will be working at Wal Mart in a year all get counted. Especially while reading about the EU elections that are going on, politicians from countries that aren’t in my normal reading are raising the levels.
Again not a big deal, just something I noticed while lingqing.
It’s an interesting idea. Essentially, you would like to exclude certain terms from your statistics as you read the text. That is something we can look at in the future but difficult now since the system considers words from a systemwide perspective and not just limited to your account. This means we couldn’t exclude a word in a lesson only from your account.
Not even if you were to manually highlight the word and click the “ignore” button?
I’m sure it can be done but is not something we are going to look at any time soon.