I'd just like to see a voice interface that has any attempt at natural error correction. We do this in a hundred ways in English, emphasis, meta-words, too man

I'd just like to see a voice interface that has any attempt at natural error correction. We do this in a hundred ways in English, emphasis, meta-words, too many to fold into a system. But with a little user prodding, I think you could cover enough of this ground to still sound almost natural. Asst.: Would you like me to read that back to you? User: Yes A: The click brown ox... U: The _quick_ brown _fox_... A: Ok. The the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy log. Is that correct? U: No. A: Which part [is incorrect]? U: The the quick A: The the quick. What should it be? U: The quick. A: The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy log. Is that correct? U: No. Lazy dog. A: Lazy log? U: No. Lazy dog. A: Spell "log." <Or "Spell" + recording of user's voice saying ambiguous word> U: D-O-G. A: Ah. The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog. Do I have it now? U: Yes. A: Say 'send' to send message. Agreed that voice systems are an incredibly hard problem, but I suspect rule-based natural language correction systems would go a long way.