On 6/10/14, Scott Raney <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Google translation is:

[Not good. Got it.]

> It's basically no better than I can do with my relatively limited
> knowledge of Romance languages, and there's enough I'm not getting
> that I'd not be comfortable making any sort of comment on it in a
> public forum were Esperanto the auxlang.  The real auxlang will at the
> very least have to have better machine translation than that...

And it will--even if the auxlang is Esperanto. You see, there are
three problems:

1. Esperanto > English hasn't had nearly as much time and effort
poured into it as Spanish > English, for example (and that isn't very
good either). But if Esperanto (or anything else) becomes accepted as
a global auxiliary, it will have that much time and effort back of it,
and the translation will improve dramatically.

2. The weak link is probably English anyway. Its typical natlang
quirks create problems for translation more than the auxlang side.
This can still be mitigated by sufficient effort, as stated above, but
the natlang problem must be kept in mind. On the other hand, if we
accept a multiple-auxlang solution, translation between auxlangs
probably won't be as difficult.

3. How easy a language is to translate out of is not a good metric. I
admit I often find Esperanto hard to translate elegantly into English,
but that is because it is in some ways more agile, so while I know
what an Esperanto sentence means, I may need to work at finding an
adequate translation into my own native language. If Esperanto could
be translated easily into English, it would argue that Esperanto was
just a relex of English.

(Indeed, to the extent that there is a point to worldlang arguments
about Interlingua, for example, it involves this very fact:
Interlingua does import certain ambiguities of various natlangs,
simplifying translation into and out of them, but no doubt interfering
with translation involving non-Anglo-Romance languages.)

And for what it's worth, Inlis isn't much easier to translate to/from
English than Esperanto is, because it isn't just a relex either.