If the latter, how well did the software work? A doo run-run-run, a doo run-run
I find you must do some work on the translation or it's gobbledegook. How much work depends. I probably edited 20-30% of this one, a bit less on the Facebook article below (but that was written in English first, I think, and translated into French). Yesterday I had to rewrite most of a piece for the Salon. When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind
That's my experience with Google's Language Tools as well. A doo run-run-run, a doo run-run
Named in July 2007 representative of Four-bit byte (the United States, European Union, Russia and UNO), Tony Blair took her functions in September. Its mission had been defined in a letter of the ten Foreign Ministers of the States of the south of l' Europe members of l' EU.
Four-bit byte indeed. When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind
But it did get the Quartet. Which suggests it's got a better contextual algorithm of some sort.
It's all still a long way from automatic AND readable. When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind
Translation software systems have to abstract Rules for language use in order to get anything done. Actual language use gives a big neener-neener to those abstractions, unfortunately. Not only are the relationships one-to-many toss in the Semantic Differential and it looks pretty darn hopeless.
On the other hand, humans are able to Speak Much Good so there's got to be some way to solve it. Suggesting them wot are working on the problem (not me, BTW) are looking in the wrong place(s) for solutions. A doo run-run-run, a doo run-run
