8 replies to this topic

[mal4mac]

Problem: I want to write about Fred's widgets, but want to capture the searchers who type in "Fred widgets", because no one searches for "Fred's widgets".

Am I write in thinking Google ignores punctuation? Does "Fred: Widgets" look the same as "Fred Widgets" to Google? I might be able to turn "Fred: Widgets" into a title.

I could also have sentences like "I like Fred. Widgets made by him really rock."

Can anyone recommend other tricks to avoid 's?

[1dmf]

it's an interesting one, as I often wonder what punctuation visitors might use.

You say no-one searches for "fred's widgets" , but why not?

If they are wigets belonging to fred that is gramatically correct, so you should use it!

But what does G! do with that when entered, does it 'exact match' first then partial/broad, does it drop the grammer and then broad match.

Does it assume typo and search for plural? or drop the apostophe and anything after it?

Does it assume the apostophe is to indicate missing letters, isn't , hasn't , wouldn't etc..

Personally I feel the SE's should adhere to correct grammer, but that could be a problem for many foreigners who use english, because as you will notice with many 'english as a second language' users it's grammer which is the hardest part to master when learning English.

But if plurals are not seen the same as singular, then the noun Fred is different to the something belonging to Fred! one assumes.

But assuming anything is always dangerous -

[Randy]

As a general statement, yes you're correct that Google ignores punctuation. So yes you can structure your copy as you've laid out.

[1dmf]

Randy,

Do you think an SE will ever accurately deal with the gramatical nuances that are English.

I guess not as even to this day MS can't distingish correctly between American & English.....

Stop trying to spell everything I type with a bloody Zed!

[Randy]

Well, let's look at it pragmatically 1dmf. (I love these fun exercises!)

First off, computers are only as good or as bad as their human programmers. That's a given.

How many years have we silly humans been roaming around the surface of this interesting little ball of space debris we call Earth? No matter what creationism theory you believe, it's safe to say it's lots of years. Exponentially more years than computers have been around.

Are we humans, who are supposedly smarter and definitely more intuitive than the machines we program able to accurately deal with the grammatical* usage of any form of the English language?

Umm... No. Which is also the answer to your question.

* - Yes I deliberately spelled it with two m's, because the double m version is more accepted these days, as being derived from the root word grammar, that I've also seen spelled as gramar, grammer, gramer and probably a few other ways that escape the memory right this second.

[1dmf]

yeah , i guess I can't even speek proper, so why should I expect the SE's.

Right as always Randy

[mal4mac]

it's an interesting one, as I often wonder what punctuation visitors might use.

You say no-one searches for "fred's widgets" , but why not?

I was being a bit hyperbolic. Some people do, but not enough to matter that much. I did use that form once on the page to see if I could get that phrase as well.

If they are wigets belonging to fred that is gramatically correct, so you should use it!

I only want to put serious thought to phrases people are searching for in large numbers.

Personally I feel the SE's should adhere to correct grammer,

The syntax of "Fred widgets" is fine. The semantics may be wrong, but Google's algorithm doesn't do semantics very well.

but that could be a problem for many foreigners who use english, because as you will notice with many 'english as a second language' users it's grammer which is the hardest part to master when learning English.

That's their problem, not Google's. You might expect Google someday to "get" proper English semantics, but asking it to "get" franglais is a bit much. Foreigners writing websites in English should employ a British copywriter, or an American if they are happy to use a variant :-)

[copywriter]

I hate to be a bubble burster (is that a word?), but Google does not ignore all punctuation across the board. It is selective. Why? I have no idea.

If you go to Google and test it (which is always the easiest thing to do), you'll see that SERPs are different for [women's shoes] and [womens shoes] and [women shoes]. Same goes for [children's clothes] and [childrens clothes] and [children clothes]. Actually, the singular versions are entirely different search terms so they would rightfully have different results.

[1dmf]

lol - nice one Karon, so the SE's are getting better at punctuation and grammer, it's the searchers who aren't