I went to www.wikipedia.org and I found that in English they had 831000 articles but in other language like Spanish they only had 75 000. I understand that is difficult to find people that in the spare of their time do all the translation for one language to other. The other day I tray other way,it was to use translate, a web page tools from google( http://www.google.com/language_tools) from English to Spanish. I found this tool very useful because no more in from of me I had 75 000 articles in Spanish, in reality I had 831 000 articles in Spanish. I want to know if there is a way to use this tools to make a more permanent translation of the majority of articles in English to another language , I understand with some kind of supervision in that way to ratify any errors in the process , and in the same time with the authorization of google without loosing any of principle of the free encyclopedia wikipedia.org.
I don't work for google or wikipedia.org, I only a customer for the service of both.
sincerely -- **************************** ** Angel Rodriguez ** ****************************
Hi,
Le Friday 25 November 2005 03:53, angel rodriguez a écrit :
I went to www.wikipedia.org and I found that in English they had 831000 articles but in other language like Spanish they only had 75 000. I understand that is difficult to find people that in the spare of their time do all the translation for one language to other. The other day I tray other way,it was to use translate, a web page tools from google( http://www.google.com/language_tools) from English to Spanish. I found this tool very useful because no more in from of me I had 75 000 articles in Spanish, in reality I had 831 000 articles in Spanish. I want to know if there is a way to use this tools to make a more permanent translation of the majority of articles in English to another language , I understand with some kind of supervision in that way to ratify any errors in the process , and in the same time with the authorization of google without loosing any of principle of the free encyclopedia wikipedia.org.
I don't work for google or wikipedia.org, I only a customerfor the service of both.
Unfornately, automatic translations are not (yet) of a good enough quality to be incorporated into Wikipedia right away. Sometimes, it is even better to start from crash than to use Google's translation as a base. I say this from my experience as translator.
sincerely-- **************************** ** Angel Rodriguez ** ****************************
Regards, Yann
On 11/25/05, angel rodriguez angelrr7702@gmail.com wrote:
I went to www.wikipedia.org and I found that in English they had 831000 articles but in other language like Spanish they only had 75 000. I understand that is difficult to find people that in the spare of their time do all the translation for one language to other.
Please note that different language editions of Wikipedia are rarely direct translations; they are most often written independently in each language.
The other day I tray other way,it was to use translate, a web page tools from google( http://www.google.com/language_tools) from English to Spanish. I found this tool very useful because... ...in reality I had 831 000 articles in Spanish. I want to know if there is a way to use this tools to make a more permanent translation of the majority of articles in English to another language
The simple answer is "Yes" -- there might be a way to use tools like Google's webpage-translator to help translators and writers with their work; and to give readers more options when looking for content in their language. I would love to see something like this happen. It would require coordination between the developers of Google's translation tool and the developers of the Wikipedia interface[s].
Of course these kinds of machine translations are inferior to 'real' human translations, as Yann notes. But Google in particular has been making strides in this area. Wikipedia would be an interesting testbed for new automated translation tools, precisely because it has original (not translated) content on the same topic in dozens of languages, for tens of thousands of topics.
++SJ
On 11/25/05, SJ 2.718281828@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/25/05, angel rodriguez angelrr7702@gmail.com wrote:
I went to www.wikipedia.org and I found that in English they had 831000 articles but in other language like Spanish they only had 75 000. I understand that is difficult to find people that in the spare of their time do all the translation for one language to other.
Please note that different language editions of Wikipedia are rarely direct translations; they are most often written independently in each language.
The other day I tray other way,it was to use translate, a web page
tools
from google( http://www.google.com/language_tools) from English to Spanish. I found this tool very useful because... ...in reality I had 831
000 articles in
Spanish. I want to know if there is a way to use this tools to make a more permanent translation of the majority of articles in English to another language
The simple answer is "Yes" -- there might be a way to use tools like Google's webpage-translator to help translators and writers with their work; and to give readers more options when looking for content in their language. I would love to see something like this happen. It would require coordination between the developers of Google's translation tool and the developers of the Wikipedia interface[s].
Of course these kinds of machine translations are inferior to 'real' human translations, as Yann notes. But Google in particular has been making strides in this area. Wikipedia would be an interesting testbed for new automated translation tools, precisely because it has original (not translated) content on the same topic in dozens of languages, for tens of thousands of topics.
Sometimes, as a bilingual (chinese-english) I found it useful to translate from BabelFish first then manually edit the addition. Of course this can be done by manually Wikipedians themselves. However I also see that if everything is translated from English to other language the perspective/originality for some current events like articles maybe gone.
I would support translation tool for experimentation but also remain a bit wary about the cultural impacts of that. Thanks.
xcathy
++SJ
Translators-l mailing list Translators-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
-- MPhil Candidate, Department of Sociology, The University of Hong Kong http://cathyma.net
On 11/25/05, Cathy Ma cathyma@gmail.com wrote:
Sometimes, as a bilingual (chinese-english) I found it useful to translate from BabelFish first then manually edit the addition. Of course this can be done by manually Wikipedians themselves. However I also see that if everything is translated from English to other language the perspective/originality for some current events like articles maybe gone.
I would support translation tool for experimentation but also remain a bit wary about the cultural impacts of that. Thanks.
Do you think that by making it 'easier' to use babel-translations than to write things out by hand, there would be negative cultural effects?
SJ
translators-l@lists.wikimedia.org