In message <3FFD1664.3070803(a)moongate.ro>ro>, Gutza
<gutza-xe8bB7KpE7GhKNWrAYCRhA(a)public.gmane.org> writes
Ray Saintonge wrote:
The last thing that Wiktionary needs is a listing
of automated
translation. Of course the English Wiktionary is "English-centric".
What else did you expect? It is first a dictionary, and only secondly
a book of translations. Still, to choose one example and say that
there is a 1:1 correspondence between the words of two languages
represnts a totally naïve view of language.
Really? Here's what I tried: clicked on "Random Page" 10 times. Here
are the results:
1.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Pronunciaci%C3%B3n
2.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%92%AD
3.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Mayoress
4.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Bijutel
5.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Decibel
6.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Balul
7.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%97%86
8.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Airtight
9.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Brush
10.
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%95%9A
There is not a single one hit in the ten above which isn't appropriate
for automated parsing:
* No. 1 would be reverse translated from Spanish to English (note that
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Pronounciation doesn't exist).
* No. 2, 3, 7 and 10 would be completely skipped in parsing because
they don't contain any proper translations.
* No. 4 and 6 would be reverse translated from Volapük to English (note
there is no mention of Balul at
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/January, and
http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Jeweller doesn't exist).
* No. 5, 8 and 9 would be properly translated to the respective
languages for which translations are available.
What would be wrong with this? What counter-examples do you have in mind?
Well, for example if you were translating to/from Welsh, the word "glas"
is normally used to describe the colour of the sky, however it is also
used to describe the colour of grass. "Llwyd" usually means "grey" but
it also has "bluey" connotations...
--
Arwel Parry
http://www.cartref.demon.co.uk/