Giusi wrote:

> It seems to me lately, like the past 15 years, that editing text has
> been left to the machines and so far they don't understand the
> differences of
> language. It's irritating at best. In this case it's actionable.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8627335.stm

Heh. Spell check and/or predictive text functions do often come up with
some really dumb suggestions, and IMO, the original typo must have been
something like "peope" to go from "pepper" to "people".

However, I'd also place blame on the (human) proofreader in this case -
I mean nobody's perfect, but this turned out to be a rather expensive
and highly embarrassing mistake for the publisher concerned. Have a
feeling this particular proofreader got lazy and only proofread the
method/instructions of the recipes, because (s)he thought (wrongly)
that the ingredients lists could not possibly have any mistakes (or it
didn't really matter if they did)...

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy