A non-native speaker who works in English every day wrote the spec…
A non-native speaker who works in English every day wrote the spec himself four years ago — 'like Grammarly but for voice' — and the category still splits into scoring apps and chat partners, with nobody occupying the sentence he actually said.
What is the idea?
You record yourself for a minute — the standup you are about to give, the answer you keep fumbling in interviews — and get back three things: the grammar you got wrong, the collocations that read as non-native, and how someone would actually say it. A week of those becomes your own error card.
Why would anyone bother?
The writer's own framing: Grammarly made his writing improve fast because it showed him the mistake, not just the fix. Nothing does that for speech, so he repeats the same errors indefinitely — and he speaks English at work every day.
What is missing today?
Spoken-language products are either test simulators that hand you a band score, or conversation partners that keep the conversation going by never correcting you. Neither ever puts your sentence next to the native version of your sentence.
What makes this one different?
Refuse the meeting recorder. One button, sixty seconds, your own voice only, nothing leaves unless the user sends it — that dodges the whole consent problem the call-recording products carry, and it is also the only version a person will use daily. Cold start CN = 小红书 「英语 口语 纠错」「外企 英语」 tags and the comment panes under IELTS-speaking prep notes; EN = the 16 replies on that r/languagelearning post, plus r/EnglishLearning's correct-my-speaking threads.
What is the sharpest thing about it?
Continuous accented L2 speech transcribed accurately enough for sentence-level rewriting is recent. In 2022, when the post was written, the transcript itself was too noisy to build a correction on top of.
What could kill it?
Speech correction shades into accent judgement very fast, which is both alienating and the wrong target — plenty of the world's best English is heavily accented. And the general assistants can already do a decent version of this if you paste in a transcript, so the product has to be worth more than that habit.
Who pays, and for what?
Cheap monthly subscription in the price band people already pay for language apps; the natural upsell is the accumulated personal error card, not more minutes.
What is the main risk?
Self-limit hard: correct grammar and idiom, never rate accent, never issue a proficiency level. A tool that makes someone feel their voice is wrong will be deleted and deserves to be.
What did real people actually say?
Verbatim from the public sources linked above, not paraphrased: “I always use Grammarly when I write. Not only does it correct my texts, but I also see my mistakes and learn from the corrections… But the most challenging thing in mastering the language is, of course, speaking… no one corrects me and doesn't indicate the mistakes. So I end up repeating them and improving slowly.” — reddit-post “why is there no AI program that listens to your speech and analyzes your mistakes. Then, it would build a report with the most common ones and how to correct them.” — reddit-post
How much work is it?
about two weeks of work
Where does the evidence come from?
https://old.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/search?q=%22Why+is+there+no+AI+program+that+listens+to+your+English+speech%22&restrict_sr=on
← Both language sides asked for the same pantry app on the same day · A woman with dementia might still recognise the tune her father… →