Re: [atlarge-discuss] My FINAL reply to Judyth on Translation in Outreach Re: [atlarge-discuss] Translation issues

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Judyth and all stakeholders of other interested parties and members,

espresso@e-scape.net wrote:

> At 02:11 -0700 2002/08/20, Jeff Williams wrote:
> >> [me] TM software can work extremely well in any organization
> >>where there are teams of highly-skilled terminologists and
> >>translators who prepare the databases and edit the results in
> >>parallel with the originals.
> >
> >  Not actually true.  The UN and about 68 of the consulates that we have
> >had the privilege and pleasant experience to have delt with using the
> >same or compatible Software Translation facilities that the UN uses
> >for contractual and common communications have no such "Teams"
> >of terminologists.  Most have only two or three on staff and only
> >the larger consulates have a significant number as these Translation
> >facilities have themselves facilitated a reduction for such "Teams"
> >that only a few states, including the US, had needed in the
> >past (Quite some time ago now) for such translations of various
> >documents and the spoken word...
>
> A "team" is two or more persons. Terminologists are needed to create adequate terminology databases for CAT, and sometimes to assist human translators and editors dealing with the results, not to run the CAT programs themselves.

  Indeed true here.  However many of these types of databases have already
been created and are in broad use today and have been for a number of years
now...

>
>
> >>{me]  The problem is that, while the UN and similar organizations understand translation issues well and make sure the process is handled so as to produce accurate, well-written results, most of the organizations using TMs don't.
> >
> >  This may be true, but it is not necessary to be so as the UN does offer
> >aid in this area for every member countries private sector orgs that wish
> >to accretion such information/assistance, even and especially for the less
> >financially progressive nations...
>
> Unfortunately, like most people including translators and clients, I had never heard that the UN offered free assistence of this kind to the private sector, or even consultancy for a fee.

  For small orgs in many countries they do.  Yes it is not well known as it
might better be.  That is indeed an unfortunate happenstance...

>
>
> >> Every now and then, some English-speaking Albertan working for the Canadian government causes a major uproar in the Quebec media by putting one of those "translations" up on a government Web site.
> >
> >  I have seen very few instances of this occurring.  None in the past two years.
> >Do you have some URL references of such?  My guess is that you don't
> >or don't have any of any real significance as it relates to Internet >policy...
>
> I don't much like being called a liar, Jeff.

  I wasn't calling you a liar Judyth.  So just cool down a bit.  Sheeesh!

> I can't give you URLs of the incidents I know about because those pages were removed

  Hummm?  Well I would think that there would be some archived versions
around somewhere... ????  Google perhaps would be a good start for you...

> or replaced ASAP once the problem was known. If you read French, you may find confirmation from newspaper articles in Le Devoir and La Presse by doing a search on "Environnement Canada" and "traduction" and "inacceptable" or "épouvantable".

  Ok, I have some folks up there.  I shall ask them to research the printed
archives of those...

>
>
> >  Annoyance is a state of mind.  Such annoyances do not effectively or
> >significantly go to the understanding of the translation. Hence I don't see
> >this argument as particularly impacting on ICANNATLARGE.COM
> >or it's members now or in the future...
>
> I would disagree. Confusing, upsetting and antagonizing people is no way to start building an international organization with any credibility.

  I agree if such antagonizing and confusing is done purposefully.  When
translating a document for broad reading and review it is generally considered
that not such purposeful intent is implied...  Hence I stand by my original
response comment/statement.

>
>
> >> [me] I'm by no means averse to computer-assisted translation: I just don't do that much work involving formulaic expressions and repetitive vocabulary myself: I find little help in having the software translate every instance of "the" into "le" so that I can go back over the results and change the right occurrences to "les", "la" or "l'" as the grammatical context requires, to take a very simple example.
> >
> >  This depends in some languages like French and spanish as to the >masculine or the feminine.  Most GOOD Translation systems or facilities
> >can check for that by looking at the context and the tense of the sentence >or paragraph in which such terms are used and than make that correction >immediately. Babelfish is NOT one of those BTW.
>
> Many languages are inflected. Context-matching ability varies with the program used and the care taken in preparing one's databases.

  Absolutely right.  Hence you made my point.  Thank you...

> If you know of a software that can reliably get gender, tense, case and mood right, **please** tell me which one it is: there are thousands of people who would buy it tomorrow.

  There are a number of them available.  I, or should I say
my staff and I are compiling a list of those now.  I will be posting them
to this forum for those interested.  And by the way a few are sold
to thousands already, and have been for several years now..

>
>
> >>[me] I was thrilled when they invented machines that would let yopu paste in boilerplate text with a couple of keystrokes or knock out a form-letter to dozens of people. But I do care about language -- clarity, accuracy and good usage as well as appropriateness for the destined readership -- and we humans can't say everything we need to communicate using only boilerplate sentences.
> >
> >  I don't believe that I have suggested any use of "Boilerplate" usage
> >thus far, and fail to see where that is particularly relevant to the
> >use of Translation software facilities of various types for >ICANNATLARGE.COM...
>
> "Boilerplate" means a piece of text (phrase, sentence or paragraph) which occurs often enough that it's worth keeping in a database for automatic insertion when needed.

  Yes I know what boilerplate is...

> Preparing a database for a CAT program isn't all that different: it's hardly worth adding an item that will occur only once; it's useful to have the computer substitute target language for source language automatically if it occurs over and over again.

  That's true..

>
>
> Example: presumably once we have a name and a mission statement, those items will recur in our documentation in exactly the same form. It would make sense to let the CAT program store the standard translations and do the substitutions. It might not make sense to do it for our e-mail correspondonce about CATs...
>
> >  Agreed that there is no Translation facility that will do 100% of any document
> >or written word accurately.  We already went over that in two previous
> >exchanges in this thread.  However that is really not the point as 80% is
> >done and is good enough for a first pass and than followed up by proofreading
> >to address the remaining 20% and at the same time cut cost to our
> >organization significantly..
> >
> >> [me] How do you decide whether a particular sentence calls for "say", "says", "said", "was saying"...? It's a very complex intellectual process, even though we do it without conscious thought most of the time, it's not easily reduced to yes/no decisions a computer can handle.
> >
> >  Modern "Good"  database based Translation facilities don't just do yes/no
> >decisions on a computer.  This is I think were you may be confused or
> >misinformed.
>
> I suspect the confusion lies elsewhere. ALL processing of information by computers is inherently dependent on yes/no choices: the options are essentially On/off, True/false. My point (not made clearly enough) is that making the decision between various forms of a word is complex although unconscious in the human who speaks the language as a native.

  Your right as far as arithmetic operations are concerned.

  I am also not and have not suggested that any translation software will
translate any language from one to another as a native speaks it.  I AM
AGAIN saying that about +80% of such translations by use of a translator
of good quality can and is routinely achieved...  Clear Enough?

>
>
>
>
> ##########################################################
> Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
> Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
> ##########################################################
> My apologies if you are receiving this late - I've been
> exceptionally busy this week and fell behind with e-mail.
> ##########################################################
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de