https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/valid#Translations
On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 at 17:39, MF-Warburg <[email protected]> wrote: > How are bad translations a valid resource? > > Am Sa., 19. Sept. 2020 um 12:01 Uhr schrieb Gerard Meijssen < > [email protected]>: > >> Hoi, >> First, a specific spelling stands for an article. It can be in any >> language. Each lemma in Wiktionary has its own translations. So you can do >> without descriptions and still have meaningful information. Yes, that only >> works when you are at least bilingual. >> >> When a bot moves data between Wiktionaries, the validity of these >> translations exists because of it being moved from one Wiktionary to >> another. >> >> What is sad is that this is not understood or considered as a valid >> resource. >> Thanks, >> GerardM >> >> >> >> On Sat, 19 Sep 2020 at 11:53, Jan Wohlgemuth <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Gerard and others, >>> hello greetings from the new guy. >>> >>> I have to object an "anything is better than nothing" argument. Let's >>> just say the bot accesses an article "fork" and takes the first >>> definition. With some luck, something like "a tool for eating" will then >>> be translated as definition. That leaves out all other meanings of >>> "fork", like when a road splits up into two, but ok, that is a >>> completely different thread of discussion. But if "a tool for eating" >>> becomes the new lemma instead of the translated definition, that's when >>> the entries start becoming unusable, especially if translated again and >>> again. The bot programmer's fallacy is that there are 1-on-1 equivalents >>> in translation. Sometimes there are, more often there are not. Automated >>> "translations" liek the ones used in this case can not pick up on >>> one-to-many relations and can not adequately post them. Another thing is >>> register of synonyms. We certainly do not want any curse words to be >>> listed as the general term for certain body parts etc. This needs to be >>> verified by people who speak both languages or at least can make sure >>> the entry makes sense in the metalanguage (here Malagasy). >>> The review has shown that the output of these bot "translations" in >>> Malagasy Wiktionary are not good. Some of them might be acceptable (by >>> chance), but the majority must be considered questionable. The least >>> that should be done is mark them as unpatrolled bot translations and >>> hope that some speaker can check the accuracy. >>> >>> Greetings from Depok, >>> Jan (Janwo) >>> >>> >>> Am 18.09.2020 22:12, schrieb Gerard Meijssen: >>> > Asaf, >>> > That is not how I understand it. First, I do not mind bots. When >>> > Wiktionaries have information on words in Malagasy, I am perfectly >>> > happy for the translations to be copied from one Wiktionary to >>> > another. When the descriptions are translated using machine >>> > translation, the question becomes only slightly different. >>> > >>> > The question becomes about the quality of the machine translation. Now >>> > I do not mind key words in Malagasy without definitions. With dodgy >>> > translations it is ok because it is still better than providing >>> > nothing. When the quality of the machine translation is such that it >>> > is understandable but not quite there, I am of the opinion that it is >>> > much better than providing nothing. >>> > >>> > The biggest problem I have with the notion of perfection is that it is >>> > the enemy of the good. The good is to provide the best we can offer. >>> > When it needs work, it is acceptable because it is a wiki. >>> > >>> > The biggest problem with language support is that products that are >>> > perfectly functional like Special:MediaSearch are not promoted because >>> > "the next iteration will be even better". It also shows the extend we >>> > have moved away from our Wiki roots. >>> > >>> > The notion that a bot operator is not people... really... >>> > Thanks, >>> > GerardM >>> > >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Langcom mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Langcom mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >> > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
