Print

Print


> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of MacLeod Dave

> I think it could work in a limited fashion. Ever notice that a
machine
> translator working from English will always make a sentence
formal in
> a language with tu/vous/du/Sie? It would be nice to be able to
choose
> for oneself a bit.

This is always going to be a problem for machine translations
unless some really good AI solution is developed.  Words across
languages just don't have identical meanings.  Yes, there's a
semantic overlap that's used for translating but sometimes it's
just a matter of scope.  Translating English "you" into another
European only presents us with the issue of plurality and
formality which could only truly be understood by context or and
understanding of the social customs.  I would guess this becomes
amplified when translating into Asian languages where there are
honorifics to deal with.  I'd guess also that there's a big
problem with words coming across into English as singular when
they should be marked plural.  I suppose we could also get into
things like experiential marking too just to really complicate
things.

It's for these reasons that when I make up dictionaries like the
one for Sasxsek, I often don't just give a word.  I'll list
several possibilities so the person reading it can get a feel
for intended meaning of the word.  Likewise, when I look up a
word in a dictionary, I'll crosscheck the words listed to make
sure I'm getting the right word to fit the situation, and so I
can get a similar grasp of how the word functions .  I don't
know of any machine translator that has enough sophistication
for cross checking entries and/or resolving ambiguities.