Re: Computerized translation into conlang?
- On 2008-11-26 Gary Shannon wrote:
> In other words, I now have a program that prettyWouldn't the ease of such a task stand in proportion
> successfully pulls apart an English sentence and
> represents it as separate elements that could now be
> reassembled in any arbitrary fashion. It would be an easy
> matter at this point to reassemble the pieces using
> different root words, add case endings, provide a
> different means of conjugating verbs, etc., and produce a
> "translation" of the sentence.
to how different the source language's grammar is from
English? Seeing how lousy Google Translate performs
on turning English definite noun phrases into Swedish
has restored my old pessimism WRT machine translation
and reassured me that I won't be put out of work by a
computer anytime soon. (Howovor GT performs better when
goinc from Swedish to English...)
- 2008/11/26 Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...>:
> Has anybody ever given any thought to writing a computer program to translate English into a conlang?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_Language_Translation
- 2008/11/26 Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...>
> Has anybody ever given any thought to writing a computer program toI am pretty sure *lots* of people have given it lots of thought already, but
> translate English into a conlang?
I seriously doubt anything really useful has already come out of it. I have
once been thinking of it, but for natural languages (where such a thing
would be way more useful, since that promotes understanding between humans
instead of taking away the fun of translating things into your own
language), and I gave up when realising the messiness of languages. Things
that are expressed using some structure in one language often use completely
different structures in other languages. Just take the following example:
Dutch: We hebben de kosten in het totaal verrekend.
English: We have taken the expenses into account when making the total sum.
A computer translation in the way you propose would give at best: "We have
### the expenses into the total sum," where the ### have to be a verb
meaning covering the meanings of both "inserting the one into the other" and
of "computing, making the sum". Such a verb does not (as far as I know)
exist in English, so that circumlocution is the only solution. I don't think
anybody has ever made a computer program smart enough to get that kind of
> Anyway, just a random thought. It might be fun. It would be a way toMost probably writing a sufficiently good program would take infinitely more
> produce a huge volume of works in that conlang, like translating the
> complete works of Shakespeare in an afternoon. :)
time that translating it all by hand. Now and then my colleagues at work
send mails, with translations in English (for our English-speaking
colleagues) using computer translation. We always have a good laugh. That's
probably most benefit one gets from machine translation nowadays... :-)
Idustvok va yentelkvil gifpir, puk gifpir, ivan kitil.
- --- On Mon, 12/1/08, David Vercauteren <njenfalgar@...> wrote:
> From: David Vercauteren <njenfalgar@...>...
> Most probably writing a sufficiently good program wouldMachine translation seems to be one of those areas where, when first approached, it looks like it would not be terribly difficult. Then, a little deeper into the project you suddenly hit an impenetrable brick wall, and any further progress seems impossibly difficult.
> take infinitely more
> time that translating it all by hand. Now and then my
> colleagues at work
> send mails, with translations in English (for our
> colleagues) using computer translation. We always have a
> good laugh. That's
> probably most benefit one gets from machine translation
> nowadays... :-)
"When one initially examines some area of the syntax of a natural language, it often seems to manifest what can only be called descriptive chaos." --Paul M. Postal in "Edge-Based Model-Theoretic Syntax".