On Thursday 08 January 2004 05:53 am, Gutza wrote:
Arwel Parry wrote:
> 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. [...] 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.
>>
>> 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...
Perhaps the most famous example would be "libre" and "gratuit" mapping
onto
the english "free". I agree with Gutza nonetheless that automation would be a
good idea. The overwhelming majority of words can be translated into most
languages one-to-one (ie. no ambiguities). This would save us a lot of work.
And for the few cases where there are problems, they can be corrected by
hand.
Best,
Sascha Noyes
--
Please encrypt all email. Public key available from
www.pantropy.net/snoyes.asc