Alexander Terekhov scripsit: > To me, compilers (and tools like http://world.altavista.com) > do nothing but "transliteration", not "translation" in the > legal sense. I may be wrong, of course.
A strong point, certainly; but I think legal language, like ordinary language, applies "mechanical" to only a small subset of the acts that can actually be done by machines these days; roughly, those performable by machines that have only a small amount of state or none at all. Certainly machine translation is not translation in the full sense of the word, but the (very imperfect) state of the art requires considerably more state than seems to me consistent with the meaning of the word "mechanical". -- All Norstrilians knew what laughter was: John Cowan it was "pleasurable corrigible malfunction". http://www.reutershealth.com --Cordwainer Smith, _Norstrilia_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3