On 11/25/05, angel rodriguez <angelrr7702(a)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
The other day I tray other way,it was to use
translate, a web page
) from English to
Spanish. I found this tool very useful because...
...in reality I had 831
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
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.
Translators-l mailing list