diff --git a/doc/automake.texi b/doc/automake.texi
index c0ace40..2c5dcfa 100644
--- a/doc/automake.texi
+++ b/doc/automake.texi
@@ -9841,10 +9841,10 @@ version of the tools.
 @section Why doesn't Automake support wildcards?
 @cindex wildcards
 
-Developers are lazy.  They often would like to use wildcards in
address@hidden, so they don't need to remember they have to
-update @file{Makefile.am}s every time they add, delete, or rename a
-file.
+Developers are lazy.  They would often like to use wildcards in
address@hidden, so that they would not need to remember to
+update @file{Makefile.am}s every time they add, delete, or rename
+a file.
 
 There are several objections to this:
 @itemize
@@ -9858,27 +9858,22 @@ because you forgot to add a file in @file{Makefile.am}, it will help
 you remember to @samp{cvs add} it.
 
 @item
-Using wildcards makes easy to distribute files by mistake.  For
+Using wildcards makes it easy to distribute files by mistake.  For
 instance, some code a developer is experimenting with (a test case,
-say) but that should not be part of the distribution.
+say) that should not be part of the distribution.
 
 @item
 Using wildcards it's easy to omit some files by mistake.  For
-instance, one developer creates a new file, uses it at many places,
-but forget to commit it.  Another developer then checkout the
-incomplete project and is able to run `make dist' successfully,
-even though a file is missing.
-
address@hidden
-Listing files, you control *exactly* what you distribute.
-If some file that should be distributed is missing from your
-tree, @samp{make dist} will complain.  Besides, you don't distribute
-more than what you listed.
+instance, one developer creates a new file, uses it in many places,
+but forgets to commit it.  Another developer then checks out the
+incomplete project and is able to run @samp{make dist} successfully,
+even though a file is missing. By listing files, @samp{make dist}
address@hidden complain.
 
 @item
-Finally it's really hard to @file{forget} adding a file to
address@hidden, because if you don't add it, it doesn't get
-compiled nor installed, so you can't even test it.
+Finally, it's really hard to @emph{forget} to add a file to
address@hidden: files that are not listed in @file{Makefile.am} are
+not compiled or installed, so you can't even test them.
 @end itemize
 
 Still, these are philosophical objections, and as such you may disagree,
@@ -9891,16 +9886,16 @@ not portable to other @command{make} implementations.
 
 The only way Automake could support @command{$(wildcard ...)} is by
 expending @command{$(wildcard ...)} when @command{automake} is run.
-Resulting @file{Makefile.in}s would be portable since they would
+The resulting @file{Makefile.in}s would be portable since they would
 list all files and not use @samp{$(wildcard ...)}.  However that
-means developers need to remember they must run @command{automake} each
+means developers would need to remember to run @command{automake} each
 time they add, delete, or rename files.
 
-Compared to editing @file{Makefile.am}, this is really little win.  Sure,
+Compared to editing @file{Makefile.am}, this is a very small gain.  Sure,
 it's easier and faster to type @samp{automake; make} than to type
 @samp{emacs Makefile.am; make}.  But nobody bothered enough to write a
-patch add support for this syntax.  Some people use scripts to
-generated file lists in @file{Makefile.am} or in separate
+patch to add support for this syntax.  Some people use scripts to
+generate file lists in @file{Makefile.am} or in separate
 @file{Makefile} fragments.
 
 Even if you don't care about portability, and are tempted to use