Hi,
When I translate documents into French, I often wonder what is "the" correct/better translation of some common words, like "Policy" or "Officer". I found some old pages on Meta ([1] and associated) with translations of a glossary and common words, in the languages en-fr-it-ja-ru and Nemo bis just indicated me a page on translatedwiki [2].
I started an unified glossary of common words which should have a translation, by taking inspiration from fr,ja,ru from meta. You can see an implementation on [1] and the common template is [3].
For now, there is a single template but I think it could be better to split into many templates by categories of words. And there is some work to determine which words should be added to the template.
What are you thinking about that?
~ Seb35 [^_^] 15:05, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_teams/fr/English-French_Wikimedia... [2] http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Terminology [3] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Translation_of_glossary
On 26 December 2011 17:05, Seb35 seb35wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
When I translate documents into French, I often wonder what is "the" correct/better translation of some common words, like "Policy" or "Officer". I found some old pages on Meta ([1] and associated) with translations of a glossary and common words, in the languages en-fr-it-ja-ru and Nemo bis just indicated me a page on translatedwiki [2].
I started an unified glossary of common words which should have a translation, by taking inspiration from fr,ja,ru from meta. You can see an implementation on [1] and the common template is [3].
For now, there is a single template but I think it could be better to split into many templates by categories of words. And there is some work to determine which words should be added to the template.
What are you thinking about that?
I think that glossary/terminology is certainly needed, but it must also be machine readable and multilingual. It should also be prescriptive where possible to unify also the English usage of terms. There is no way it will grow into useful level if it is too hard for all languages to contribute to it. One aspect of this is that the terms should have definition and/or explanation - how else can you even start thinking translations for it.
-Niklas
Niklas Laxström, 26/12/2011 16:36:
I think that glossary/terminology is certainly needed, but it must also be machine readable and multilingual. It should also be prescriptive where possible to unify also the English usage of terms. There is no way it will grow into useful level if it is too hard for all languages to contribute to it. One aspect of this is that the terms should have definition and/or explanation - how else can you even start thinking translations for it.
I agree, although it's not so obvious how to organize them in a simple and yet effective way. Seb, if you didn't yet, I encourage you to read the discussion that I've now moved to https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Talk:Terminology and comment (it's stalled). As you said, it's important to find words to be included: as Niklas suggests, this should probably be the first and only thing to do (together with definitions): before translation of the terminology/glossary. I think that wiki terminology should be kept on/moved to Translatewiki and Wikimedia terminology stay on Meta, but the important thing is that we avoid duplicate work and we find a common approach to join efforts.
With regard to words to be included (but perhaps I should say it on wiki), beside WMF job titles currently included I think it's better to add only some general terms which are commonly used to form titles and are difficult to translate (aka drive translators crazy); I put some for the Italian translation of [[wmf:Staff]] on https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Talk:Terminology .
Nemo
translators-l@lists.wikimedia.org