|
|
|
|
|
by trnglina
2234 days ago
|
|
I think it depends on how engrained the double-click highlight is for you. For me, I double-click by default, since I almost always want to select at a word boundary in English. As a result, when I need to select Chinese or Japanese text, I'm always annoyed when my double click (which, in my mind, should always select a word) selects a nonsensical sub-sentence instead, and I have to then re-select it manually. |
|
Now consider another anglophone arbitrarily; how likely does it seem to you that they would share the exact same set of expectations of the above with you? Because if they don't, then one of you is going to have their expectations violated.
Now give it a try: do the highlights match your expectations? (Moreover: are those expectations consistent with where you placed the word boundaries?)
If your expectations of what double-click highlight does for English is consistent with what actually happens when you double-click, it is deeply unlikely that the causality goes word boundary -> highlight expectation; if they do, it's more likely that double-click highlight has influenced your sense of word boundaries.
But it's even more likely that you your expectations of double-click highlight don't actually match up with your intuition for word boundaries, and you just have a pretty good model of how double-click highlight behaves independently of where you think the word boundaries are.
(The notion of word boundaries in this context is fraught anyway. Even setting aside the problem of compound words, the phonological word boundaries of Japanese don't match up with the lexicographical ones, in both directions.)