[Foundation-l] Parallel text alignment (was: Push translation)

[Andreas Kolbe]

P.S. Chatting to Mark off-list about GTTK, and having experimented with other languages, it appears that GTTK quality varies widely depending on the language pair, and probably the source/target direction. 

German, Hindi and Japanese are definitely handled poorly; some other language combinations seem to do much better.

A.  

--- On Mon, 9/8/10, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Parallel text alignment (was: Push translation)
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Monday, 9 August, 2010, 2:37
> > I read that thread and noticed a
> lot of confusion. One translator
> > admitted she never even tried it, but still had lots
> of negative stuff
> > to say; more than one person said they found it useful
> (see
> > Esperantisto's response), and other people seemed to
> not realize there
> > was a difference between Google Translate and Google
> Translator
> > Toolkit.
> 
> 
> GTTK allows you to create your own translation memories,
> much like Trados or Wordfast. If there is nothing in your
> memory to correspond, however, you get pretty much the same
> translation that you get in Google Translate.
> 
> In that sense, Google Translate gives us a good indication
> of what Google's translators get when they start on a
> Wikipedia article. 
> 
> You can all try this: go to a random Japanese or German or
> Hindi WP article, and paste the text into Google Translate
> to have it translated into your language. 
> 
> http://translate.google.com/
> 
> This is what the translator will have to start from.
> 
> A.
> 
> 
>       
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>