GrammarlyGo is Making me GoCrazy

[Taylor]

In April 2023, Grammarly introduced an AI assistant for all Grammarly customers called GrammarlyGo.

I use Grammarly primarily for business communications and basic fiction editing. Opening a document with the new add-on surprised me at how opinionated it was. Not only does it edit, but it also suggests sentence structure. The most common suggestion is to flip my sentence order. It's annoying, but maybe there is some method to its madness.

I would love to hear opinions on this— Is there a rule that I am missing? Here are some examples:


Me: Just because it’s in demand, it doesn’t mean you must write it.

Grammarly Go: It doesn't mean you must write it, just because it's in demand.


Me: That’s your challenge as an author, writing in your natural voice.

Grammarly Go: Writing it in your natural voice is your challenge as an author.


Me: On such a significant topic, you would have to reference significant scientific data.

GrammarlyGo: You would have to reference significant scientific data on such a significant topic.


Me: I didn’t even know what POV was when I started writing it.

GrammarlyGo: When I started writing it, I didn't even know what POV was.


Me: After rehearsing my script for a recording session on Monday, I revised some of the lines.

GrammarlyGo: I revised some of the lines after rehearsing my script for a recording session on Monday.

 

[Sam]

I can only surmise that it's trying to avoid dangling participles, but none of those examples are.

No, there's no rule. It's just changing the order of the sentence. Both examples work fine.

 

[Blundertwit]

Perhaps it is trying to make you aware of equally valid alternatives, rather than suggest that you have used a sub-optimal order that should be changed. I’d imagine there is also some pressure on the developers to demonstrate that their upgraded software actually does something new so it is possibly wired to make constant enthusiastic suggestions regardless of the quality of the writing.

 

[Kent_Jacobs]

Me: Just because it’s in demand, it doesn’t mean you must write it.

Grammarly Go: It doesn't mean you must write it, just because it's in demand.

Grammarly Go's version does legitimise the second redundant 'it' and end on a stronger word, but I'd still want to reword it to cut down on the amount of 'it' repeats. Your sentence should have been 'Just because it's in demand doesn't mean you must write it.' See how Grammarly handles that sentence.


Me: That’s your challenge as an author, writing in your natural voice.

Grammarly Go: Writing it in your natural voice is your challenge as an author.

Your version is unnecessarily convoluted and disjointed. Grammarly's version is definitely better. Try testing Grammarly with 'Your challenge as an author is to write in your natural voice'.

Me: On such a significant topic, you would have to reference significant scientific data.

GrammarlyGo: You would have to reference significant scientific data on such a significant topic.

Similar to the above in that it's convoluted and disjointed. but it's not quite as awkward. Grammarly has improved it but hasn't dealt with the redundancy/repeat. 'You would have to reference scientific data on such a significant topic'.

Me: I didn’t even know what POV was when I started writing it.

GrammarlyGo: When I started writing it, I didn't even know what POV was.

The use of 'it' in your sentence suggests you actually did understand what POV was ... you were writing it. Grammarly hasn't taken this into consideration, and whilst it's offered a reasonably good sentence, it's gone overboard with the correction. 'I didn't even know what POV was when I started writing.' or Grammarly 'When I started writing, I didn't even know what POV was'. Both versions end on a weak word. In this case I'd opt for your version without 'it'.

Me: After rehearsing my script for a recording session on Monday, I revised some of the lines.

GrammarlyGo: I revised some of the lines after rehearsing my script for a recording session on Monday.

Grammarly is having a laugh. It's arbitrarily switching independent clauses because it can. The more straightforward version is definitely better, but in the example above this one, Grammarly shows that's not what it's doing. It appears to be just offering an alternative sometimes. Here it's just put the main topic of the sentence first, which is 'revised', while also simplifying the construction. It would be interesting to see how it handles avoiding repeated words at the start of sentences. Would it prefer many sentences beginning with 'I' over switching some of the independent clauses?

 

[Moon Child]

Oh, love, why blame poor Grammarly? ?
I couldn't resist, sorry love ??

 

[Foxee]

Me: On such a significant topic, you would have to reference significant scientific data.

GrammarlyGo: You would have to reference significant scientific data on such a significant topic.

I write sentences like yours as well, without looking it up isn't that what grammar would call an inverted sentence? Nothing wrong with it that I can see but sometimes I do flip them back around like Grammarly is doing. It appears to want to kill the comma between the clauses but then the next example made me laugh after thinking that.

Me: I didn’t even know what POV was when I started writing it.

GrammarlyGo: When I started writing it, I didn't even know what POV was.

Okay, GrammarlyGo, now you're just being argumentative for the heck of it.

 

[Taylor]

Perhaps it is trying to make you aware of equally valid alternatives, rather than suggest that you have used a sub-optimal order that should be changed. I’d imagine there is also some pressure on the developers to demonstrate that their upgraded software actually does something new so it is possibly wired to make constant enthusiastic suggestions regardless of the quality of the writing.

I think you hit the nail on the head! Thanks for giving me the confidence to ignore it on these occasions. ?

 

[Taylor]

Me: Just because it’s in demand, it doesn’t mean you must write it.

Grammarly Go: It doesn't mean you must write it, just because it's in demand.

Grammarly Go's version does legitimise the second redundant 'it' and end on a stronger word, but I'd still want to reword it to cut down on the amount of 'it' repeats. Your sentence should have been 'Just because it's in demand doesn't mean you must write it.' See how Grammarly handles that sentence.


Me: That’s your challenge as an author, writing in your natural voice.

Grammarly Go: Writing it in your natural voice is your challenge as an author.

Your version is unnecessarily convoluted and disjointed. Grammarly's version is definitely better. Try testing Grammarly with 'Your challenge as an author is to write in your natural voice'.

Me: On such a significant topic, you would have to reference significant scientific data.

GrammarlyGo: You would have to reference significant scientific data on such a significant topic.

Similar to the above in that it's convoluted and disjointed. but it's not quite as awkward. Grammarly has improved it but hasn't dealt with the redundancy/repeat. 'You would have to reference scientific data on such a significant topic'.

Me: I didn’t even know what POV was when I started writing it.

GrammarlyGo: When I started writing it, I didn't even know what POV was.

The use of 'it' in your sentence suggests you actually did understand what POV was ... you were writing it. Grammarly hasn't taken this into consideration, and whilst it's offered a reasonably good sentence, it's gone overboard with the correction. 'I didn't even know what POV was when I started writing.' or Grammarly 'When I started writing, I didn't even know what POV was'. Both versions end on a weak word. In this case I'd opt for your version without 'it'.

Me: After rehearsing my script for a recording session on Monday, I revised some of the lines.

GrammarlyGo: I revised some of the lines after rehearsing my script for a recording session on Monday.

Grammarly is having a laugh. It's arbitrarily switching independent clauses because it can. The more straightforward version is definitely better, but in the example above this one, Grammarly shows that's not what it's doing. It appears to be just offering an alternative sometimes. Here it's just put the main topic of the sentence first, which is 'revised', while also simplifying the construction.

All your suggested sentences check out on Grammarly. ?

On the one example:

Me: I didn’t even know what POV was when I started writing it.

GrammarlyGo: When I started writing it, I didn't even know what POV was.

Good point about the pronoun! However, the "it" refers to my novel, which is the subject of the previous sentence. So, in that case, their's would be better because the pronoun should follow the noun it relates to.

It would be interesting to see how it handles avoiding repeated words at the start of sentences. Would it prefer many sentences beginning with 'I' over switching some of the independent clauses?

Good question! I tend to overuse inverted sentences when I write first-person to avoid too many "I" starts. I just tested it out by writing ten boring sentences starting with "I" and then ten more starting with "My." Grammarly's comment: "Everything's clear and polished." ?

So for anyone worried that AI will take over the creative process, rest assured.

 

[Taylor]

I write sentences like yours as well, without looking it up isn't that what grammar would call an inverted sentence? Nothing wrong with it that I can see but sometimes I do flip them back around like Grammarly is doing. It appears to want to kill the comma between the clauses but then the next example made me laugh after thinking that.

For me, the inverted sentence has more personality. For example, "That’s your challenge as an author, writing in your natural voice." It makes the reader stand up and take note, anticipating the challenge. It also sounds more like the way I talk.

But you're right; we must check to ensure we don't overuse them. I have had people point that out to me before.

Okay, GrammarlyGo, now you're just being argumentative for the heck of it.

@Kent figured this one out. It's because the "it" doesn't refer to the POV; it relates to the subject, the "novel" of the previous sentence. So we'll pat it on the back for that one! ?

 

[Foxee]

@Kent figured this one out. It's because the "it" doesn't refer to the POV; it relates to the subject, the "novel" of the previous sentence. So we'll pat it on the back for that one! ?

I refuse to make excuses for the grammar-bot!

 

[JBF]

I was told once that I need Grammer-lee.

….I’m gonna chalk this up as a bullet dodged. ?

 

[Amelia Liana]

It sounds to me you're fighting with style and an AI. I'm biased so say go with style always. AI has no style. Style makes an author. Good grammar just makes a book.

There are stylish sentences I have to sometimes read over twice. Do you know what I think? I think that's a damn stylish sentence. Even if I have to go over it again. And there's a shit ton of words I read in novels not in my vocabulary. Do you think I just drop the book and find a dictionary laying under a pile of junk to look up a single word? No. I think, that's a damn interesting word, I like to see it. Never heard it. That's her style. Using downtrodden a lot. I'm an American. I put it into context and keep reading without slowing down.

Keep your style, Taylor. Be stylish. Styleless AI will soon take over everything, so might as well get it all out now. To err, to tumble, to unique, to mistake, to finesse, to swag is only something a human can do. That's what makes it beautiful.

 

[Kent_Jacobs]

I dreamed a dream in time gone by
When hope was high and life worth living
I dreamed that love would never die
I dreamed that God would be forgiving

Then I was young and unafraid
And dreams were made and used and wasted
There was no ransom to be paid
No song unsung, no wine untasted

But the tigers come at night
With their voices soft as thunder
As they tear your hope apart
As they turn your dream to shaaa ... aaaa ... aaaa ... aaaa ... AAAME!

Rules are important. Your style's impact depends on them.

But you have to be the tiger, not Grammarly.

 

[SapereAude]

1st example: Taylot right, Grammarly wrong.

2nd example: Grammarly might be better, depending on the context ... but probably not.

3rd example: See #2

4th example: Taylor right, Grammarly wrong. Plus, Grammarly just told you to do what it told you NOT to do in #2, #3, and #5.

5th example: See #2.

 

[Ladyserpentine]

It seems like you're examples are very colloquial, which might be preferable depending on the type of document. For example:

That’s your challenge as an author, writing in your natural voice.

This sounds like something you would actually say to an aspiring writer as a means of encouragement. The Grammarly version is more like something you might read in an instruction manual. Technical and straightforward.

Just because it’s in demand, it doesn’t mean you must write it.

Again, this is how people speak, but the Grammarly correction sounds more technical.
In general, I prefer your examples because they sound more human. But if I were reading an instruction manual, I'd probably go for the Grammarly corrections.

If I were to make some edits while still keeping the more colloquial tone, I might suggest:
"That's your challenge as an author: to write in your natural voice."
And
"Just because it's in demand doesn't mean you must write it."

I vaguely recall some rule from my high school English class about direct sentence construction as opposed to starting with a qualifier, but it seems like one of those outdated rules that only computers seem to care about.

I wouldn't worry abou using Grammarly's suggestions for anything beyond technical writing. But you might consider some small tweaks on the sentences it flagged.

 

[Foxee]

It's interesting (and a little bit horrifying) how Grammarly and it's AI buddies have changed the conversation we are having in this thread. Plenty of threads exist where author rewrites sentences various ways to see which is best and while 'grammatically correct' enters into the conversation, it's usually secondary. The primary aim is to find out how well the sentence can be written to do what it is intended to do...and still be correct. Or correct-ish in some rule-bending cases.

In that case, taking Taylor's second example sentence and rewriting it different ways looks a bit like this:

• That’s your challenge as an author, writing in your natural voice.
• Your challenge as an author is to write in your natural voice.
• As an author, writing in your natural voice can be challenging/be a challenge.
• Authors invariably find writing in their natural voice to be a challenge.
• ZOMG, guys, writing in your natural voice is a pain in the butt!
• Authors discover that writing in their natural voice is a challenge!

But instead of throwing around nearly endless ways to write sentences that serve voice, pacing, or other necessary art-form things, GrammarlyGo has trimmed our choices down to Right/Wrong? Helpful if I'm about to write something that could sound awkward or be taken badly in a business letter but doesn't do much for the music and craft of prose.

I'm not saying it's not a useful tool but it could really flatten the tone and voice of writing if it's always considered the best choice.

 

[JBF]

I'm not saying it's not a useful tool but it could really flatten the tone and voice of writing if it's always considered the best choice.

You’ll consume your Artificially Intelligent gruel and you’ll like it.