Ray Saintonge wrote:
The last thing that Wiktionary needs is a listing of automated translation. Of course the English Wiktionary is "English-centric". What else did you expect? It is first a dictionary, and only secondly a book of translations. Still, to choose one example and say that there is a 1:1 correspondence between the words of two languages represnts a totally naïve view of language.
Really? Here's what I tried: clicked on "Random Page" 10 times. Here are the results: 1. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Pronunciaci%C3%B3n 2. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%92%AD 3. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Mayoress 4. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Bijutel 5. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Decibel 6. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Balul 7. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%97%86 8. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Airtight 9. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Brush 10. http://wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%95%9A
There is not a single one hit in the ten above which isn't appropriate for automated parsing: * No. 1 would be reverse translated from Spanish to English (note that http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Pronounciation doesn't exist). * No. 2, 3, 7 and 10 would be completely skipped in parsing because they don't contain any proper translations. * No. 4 and 6 would be reverse translated from Volapük to English (note there is no mention of Balul at http://wiktionary.org/wiki/January, and http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Jeweller doesn't exist). * No. 5, 8 and 9 would be properly translated to the respective languages for which translations are available.
What would be wrong with this? What counter-examples do you have in mind?
--Gutza