Hulq logo

HULQ, which stands for "Harmonized Universal Language Quality," is crafted with the understanding that linguistic accuracy and diversity should not be compromised. We're on a mission to bridge language gaps and ensure digital inclusivity. It’s our proprietary technology, fine-tuned to support an impressive range of more than 150 locales, including those traditionally left out of the digital conversation like Burmese, Oromo, Guaraní, and Palauan. HULQ is redefining spellchecking.

As of April 2024, lexiQA's HULQ supports spellcheck in 152 locales (more locales are continuously added; see Under development):

Locales

Currently supported

152 locales

Afrikaans with 2 locales
Albanian with 1 locale
Arabic with 16 locales
Assamese with 1 locale
Azerbaijani with 1 locale
Belarusian with 1 locale
Bengali with 2 locales
Bosnian with 1 locale
Bulgarian with 1 locale
Burmese with 1 locale
Catalan with 1 locale
Croatian with 2 locales
Czech with 1 locale
Danish with 1 locale
Dutch with 2 locales
English with 10 locales
Estonian with 1 locale
Finnish with 1 locale
French with 4 locales
Georgian with 1 locale
German with 4 locales
Greek with 1 locale
Guaraní with 1 locale
Gujarati with 1 locale
Hausa with 6 locales
Hebrew with 1 locale
Hindi with 1 locale
Hungarian with 1 locale
Indonesian with 1 locale
Italian with 2 locales
Javanese with 1 locale
Kannada with 1 locale
Korean with 1 locale
Kurmanji with 1 locale
Kyrgyz with 1 locale
Latvian with 1 locale
Lithuanian with 1 locale
Macedonian with 1 locale
Malay with 1 locale
Malayalam with 1 locale
Marathi with 1 locale
Nepali with 1 locale
Norwegian with 1 locale
Odia (Oriya) with 1 locale
Oromo with 1 locale
Palauan with 1 locale
Persian with 1 locale
Polish with 1 locale
Portuguese with 2 locales
Punjabi with 1 locale
Romanian with 1 locale
Russian with 1 locale
Serbian with 12 locales
Sinhala with 1 locale
Slovak with 1 locale
Slovene with 1 locale
Spanish with 20 locales
Swahili with 4 locales
Swedish with 1 locale
Tagalog with 2 locales
Tamil with 4 locales
Telugu with 1 locale
Thai with 1 locale
Turkish with 1 locale
Ukrainian with 1 locale
Urdu with 2 locales
Uzbek with 1 locale
Vietnamese with 1 locale

Under development

77 locales

Amharic with 1 locale
Apache with 1 locale
Armenian (West) with 1 locale
Aymara with 3 locales
Bambara with 1 locale
Basque with 1 locale
Bikolano with 1 locale
Bislama with 1 locale
Blackfoot with 1 locale
Cambodian with 1 locale
Cebuano with 1 locale
Chamorro with 1 locale
Chewa with 2 locales
Chulupi with 1 locale
Chuukese with 1 locale
Ecuador with 1 locale
Efik with 1 locale
Fante with 1 locale
Fijian with 1 locale
Fiji Hindi with 1 locale
Fon with 3 locales
Hawaiian with 1 locale
Hiligaynon with 1 locale
Hmong with 2 locales
Icelandic with 1 locale
Igbo with 1 locale
Ilokano with 1 locale
Kamba with 3 locales
Kaqchikel with 1 locale
Karen with 1 locale
Kekchi with 2 locales
Kinyarwanda with 2 locales
Kiribati with 1 locale
Kisii with 1 locale
Kosraean with 1 locale
Kuna with 1 locale
Lao with 1 locale
Lingala with 2 locales
Malagasy with 1 locale
Maltese with 1 locale
Mam with 2 locales
Maori with 1 locale
Marshallese with 1 locale
Maya with 1 locale
Mongolian with 1 locale
Motu with 1 locale
Navajo with 1 locale
Ndebele with 1 locale
Niuean with 1 locale
Northern Sotho with 1 locale
Pampango with 1 locale
Pangasinan with 1 locale
Papiamento with 1 locale
Pohnpeian with 1 locale
Quechua Bolivia with 1 locale
Quechua Peru with 1 locale
Quiché with 2 locales
Rarotongan with 1 locale
Samoan with 1 locale
Shona with 2 locales
Southern Sotho with 2 locales
Stoney Nakoda with 1 locale
Swati with 2 locales
Tahitian with 1 locale
Tok Pisin with 1 locale
Tongan with 1 locale
Tshiluba with 1 locale
Tswana with 2 locales
Tuvaluan with 1 locale
Twi with 1 locale
Tzotzil with 1 locale
Waray with 1 locale
Welsh with 1 locale
Xhosa with 3 locales
Yapese with 1 locale
Yoruba with 1 locale
Zulu with 2 locales

Notes

In our selection of locales for the list, Chinese and Japanese locales have been notably omitted. This decision stems not from a lack of quality assurance mechanisms but from the unique nature of these languages, which do not accommodate the concept of spellchecking as traditionally understood in alphabetic languages. Unlike languages with alphabetic writing systems, where spellchecking tools can compare input words against a dictionary to identify and correct misspellings, Chinese and Japanese utilize logographic writing systems. These systems are based on characters that represent words or morphemes (the smallest meaningful units in a language), rather than sounds. Consequently, the concept of "spelling" does not apply in the same way.

However, this does not mean that content in Chinese and Japanese goes unchecked. Instead of relying on spellcheck algorithms, we employ specialized quality assurance (QA) algorithms designed to address the specific challenges posed by these languages. See the QA section for more.

Last Updated:
Contributors: yevangelou