You know, I just noticed. My spell checker doesn’t know about hypercorrecting. Is that a recent dictionary addition? Surely, DailyWritingTips is reluctant to *invent* new words . . {exhibit mild angst and gnashing of teeth, wondering how to express the writer’s sardonic dismay over the lemma of whether to celebrate the birth of a new word, or to lament over yet another loophole in expressing thoughts clearly in proper . . excuse me . . in standard English}

My Chamber dictionary clearly lists hypercholesterolaemia (n., a condition characterized by abnormally high levels of blood cholesterol).

Hypercorrection n. a correction made in the mistaken belief that nonstandard linguistic usage is being this avoided, eg the erroneous use of I in the place of me in phrases such as ‘between you and I’.

Hypercorrect adj. over correct; very critical; due to or showing hypercorrection. Would hypercorrecting then be verbing an adverb? Since hypercorrection is a mistake, a change made in the mistaken belief that an error is being corrected, is hypercorrecting creating an error or introducing mistakes, or some of each at near random?

I had thought I understood this post.

I wonder … are all women created equal?

For example, to decide whether “equal” or “equally” is appropriate, I might consider these sentences:

All men are created smart (adjective, describes “men,” makes sense)
All men are created smartly (adverb, describes “created,” weird)

All men are created short (adjective, describes “men,” makes sense)
All men are created shortly (adverb, describes “created,” weird)

Based on these variations, I can see that the adjective “equal” makes sense as used in the original sentence: “all men are created equal.” Jefferson is describing the men, not the action of creating.

In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson posits that all men are equal, and that they are equal because they were created that way. But the sense is that men are equal.

In not all apps are created equally, equal could easily be used instead of equal, and the phrase would have a similar orientation. But as it is presented, the phrase focuses on the creation of apps, that apps come to be through varying creating processes – and that the creating processes aren’t equal. That apps are individual and only vaguely share some community is implied, not that all apps are equal, or to be treated as equal.

Jefferson introduces the concept of a classless nation and form of government, where each citizen is equal to each and every other citizen before the law and before the government. And, for Jefferson, there is one and only one form, or act, of creating.

So I can see good sense in the way this particular phrase is used. That for Jefferson one creation, where in the other senses there are varied creating processes.