Hi Kevin, Thank you for your quick answer. On Fri, Feb 6, 2015, at 18:51, Kevin Brubeck Unhammer wrote: > Per Tunedal <[email protected]> > writes: > > > Hi, > > I've successfully extracted a Swedish word list from > > apertium.sv-da.sv.dix as follows: --snip-- > > LR entries are output from lt-expand with :>: as the field separator, so > you can do > > lt-expand *.sv.dix | grep -v ':>:' | cut -f1 -d: > sv.expanded > > You might also want to exclude RL-marked entries (they tend to be a bit > weird in monodixes): > > lt-expand *.sv.dix | grep -v ':[<>]:' | cut -f1 -d: > sv.expanded >
Excellent! Just what I need. > > Anyhow, I continued by checking the list in Word-processing programs to > > get the real errors and found quite a lot. Some of them have I already > > corrected in the pair sv-da. What about the separate language > > dictionary? Should I merge my corrections somehow? What's the > > recommended procedure when improving/adding to an existing language > > pair? > > It'd be great if you could merge your changes in there; before your > changes the diff was only 32 lines long so I don't think it should be > much work (you might even be able to just copy it over). > OK. I will give it a try. > > By the way: How do I use the separated language monodixies? Can they be > > used for existing pairs or only when creating new pairs? What's the > > recommendation for new pairs? The "Apertium New Language Pair HOWTO" > > still supposes that the monodixies are made exclusively for the new > > pair. > > The challenge is just getting the monodixes merged; if you merge in > those changes, we can make apertium-sv-da depend on > languages/apertium-swe with a little change to the makefiles. Does that mean that the monolingual dictionaries now are independent of the language pairs? What about the old requirement that all words in the monodix had to be translated for the pair; i.e. words had to be present in both monodixies and in the bidix. Is that requirement now abandoned? What happens when translating to Swedish if a form in the foreign language is missing in Swedish of vice versa? Is it now possible to extend the Swedish dictionary, without having to extend the Danish dictionary at the same time? If so, it would facilitate contributions considerably. Lars Aronsson would be happy. > > (The diff for the Danish side is 67736 lines long, so that may be more > of a challenge to merge … but I'd still say it's worth it to merge the > Swedish side right away.) > The next step after I merged the sv-da.sv.dix with the swe-dix would be to merge with the pair is-sv. In that way both the pair sv-da and the pair is-sv would benefit from corrections in the Swedish monodix. > > -- > Kevin Brubeck Unhammer > > GPG: 0x766AC60C > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yours, Per Tunedal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
