Re: [Apertium-stuff] Compounding

[Jimmy O'R. <jo...@gm...>]

2009/12/27 Jacob Nordfalk <jac...@gm...>:
>
>
> 2009/12/27 Jimmy O'Regan <jo...@gm...>
>>
>> 2009/12/27 Jacob Nordfalk <jac...@gm...>:
>> >>
>> >> 2009/12/22 Jimmy O'Regan <jo...@gm...>:
>> >>
>> >> > It seems to do a fair job of getting the decompounding right, but, at
>> >> > a glance, the translation results seem - at best - to be 50-50.
>> >
>> > The main problem heres is that the bidix is not mature in eo->en
>> > direction,
>> > giving not-so-good translations in general. For example, flanko should
>> > be
>> > translated as 'side', not 'aspect'. If you take that into account I
>> > think
>> > its generally a big improvement.
>> >
>>
>> No, Jacob, I don't, and only a mix of confirmation bias and sheer
>> optimism would make you think so.
>>
>> Let's take the 8s;
>
> I was looking at the top 10, and weighting by frequency ( world war /
> mondmilito is used 150 times in corpus, so I would say its much more
> important than words used 8 times), but OK.

Yes, but you already had some sort of comment attached to those.

>
>>
>> I'll put my guess of the meaning of the Esperanto,
>> you rate it.
>>
>>      8 Song contest.
>> ^Kantokonkurso/Kanto<n><sg><nom>+konkurso<n><sg><nom>$
>>
>> I figure this is good, but only because I can guess 'song contest'
>> from the Esperanto.
>
> Yes, its perfect (as far as my English reaches :-)
>

Yes. One right, one almost right (bronze era).

>
>>
>>      8 knowledge crown.
>>  ^konverto/kono<n><sg><nom>+verto<n><sg><nom>$
>>
>> Convert?
>
> Yes. Bad analysis. This is the only I would say is really bad from the 8's.
>

Err... no; 'iron course' is just as bad, you just don't have a
rationalisation for this one. The crux of the matter is 'does
decompounding work out better than doing nothing'. (I mentioned
confirmation bias already, right?) Based on Unhammer's evidence, for
nn-nb, it does. Based on yours, for eo-en, it doesn't.

For the record, 'conversion' seems to be the correct translation.

>
>>
>>      8 iron course.
>>
>> ^fervojlinio/fero<n><sg><nom>+vojlinio<n><sg><nom>/fervojon><sg><nom>+linio<n><sg><nom>$
>>
>> Railway line?
>
> First analysis (fero<n><sg><nom>+vojlinio<n><sg><nom>) was chosen by tagger.
> Had it chosen the last it would have been 'Railway line'.
> In general I have the impression that ealiest longest match on first word
> should be preferred, but I have to discuss this with Hector, la lingvisto.
>

A quick google turns up a few pictures; I'd say the correct
translation should be 'train track'.

Two key points: 1) I would have been closer to the meaning by guessing
2) I can find something in google for 'fervojlinio'; googling 'iron
course' gives me mostly pages about smithery and golfing. Both wrong,
and misleading.

You don't get to pass this off onto the tagger: it's a part of speech
tagger, not a same part of speech tagger. Coming back with this is
like a schoolchild coming in the day after the exam and handing the
teacher a page, saying 'I wrote the exam twice, this is the one I
meant to give you'.

>>
>>      8 field city.     ^kampurbo/kampo<n><sg><nom>+urbo<n><sg><nom>$
>>
>> Camp site?
>
> http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kampurbo
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_town ).
> I would say its acceptable, that is, understandable in the context.

If I was to go on a scale where +2 was 'song contest' - completely
correct - and -2 was 'iron course' - wrong and misleading - I would
rate this as 0 - not misleading, but not exactly helpful either. No
better and no worse than a question mark.

>
>
>>
>>      8 Euro sight.     ^Eŭrovido/Eŭro<n><sg><nom>+vido<n><sg><nom>$
>>
>> No idea.
>
> Eurovision
> http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eŭrovido
> I would say its acceptable, that is, understandable in the context.

'Euro sight' makes me think of something political. I'd say it's
actually less understandable than the Esperanto, but I'm willing to
concede that someone else might have guessed right.

>
>>
>>      8 crossing war.   ^krucmilito/kruco<n><sg><nom>+milito<n><sg><nom>$
>>
>> Crusader?
>
> http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krucmilito
> kruco should be 'cross' (heres an example of that the bidix is not mature in
> eo->en direction), thus 'cross war' for 'crusade'.
> I would say its acceptable, that is, understandable in the context.
>

I wouldn't. I would assume 'invasion' from 'crossing war'. On my
earlier scale, I'd call this -1: misleading, but not irreparably so.

>>
>>      8 bronze era.     ^bronzepoko/bronzo<n><sg><nom>+epoko<n><sg><nom>$
>>
>> Bronze age.
>
> Yes. I would say its acceptable, that is, understandable in the context.
>
> All in all, both as a help for postedit and also for people that doesent
> understand Esperanto, the translations above is, in 6 out of 7 cases, a
> help.

That's just deluded. Even if you think I'm being overly harsh - hey, I
might very well be, I'm not immune to confirmation bias either - how
the hell did you come up with 6/7? It's a little like the witch doctor
who shook a snake rattle outside the hospital while surgery was
underway taking credit for a successful outcome.



-- 
<Leftmost> jimregan, that's because deep inside you, you are evil.
<Leftmost> Also not-so-deep inside you.