GNU gettext - Bugs: bug #55871, Integrate with machine translation...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
bug #55871: Integrate with machine translation tools
Submitter: | Bruno Haible <haible> | ||
Submitted: | Sat 09 Mar 2019 04:57:08 PM UTC | ||
Category: | Translator tools | Severity: | 1 - Wish |
Item Group: | None | Status: | None |
Privacy: | Public | Assigned to: | None |
Open/Closed: | Open |
( Jump to the original submission )
Sat 18 May 2019 10:16:11 AM UTC, comment #6: |
Jean-Christophe Helary <suzume> |
Sat 18 May 2019 05:57:43 AM UTC, comment #5:
|
Ineiev <ineiev> |
Sun 10 Mar 2019 12:00:16 AM UTC, comment #4:
Thanks for mentioning this! I have now added a pointer to Pology to the gettext manual.
As far as I can see from http://wiki.apertium.org/wiki/Main_Page, Apertium is good for languages with relatively few speakers, for example to create an Occitan translation from a French translation. Unfortunately, for a translation from English currently it offers only the target languages Spanish, Galician, Catalan, and Esperanto. This means, there still is a long way to go. |
Bruno Haible <haible>![]() |
Sat 09 Mar 2019 10:38:36 PM UTC, comment #3: I don’t see a need to implement this in gettext. There already exist tools that can translate PO files using machine translations tools/services. I recommend using Pology (the ‘pomtrans’ binary), which you can read more about http://pology.nedohodnik.net//doc/user/en_US/ch-misctools.html#sec-mimtrans
I have successfully used Pology/pomtrans (with the offline Apertium backend) for initial translations of PO files. The resulting files need careful proofreading, but having a rough machine translation available saves time. |
Karl Ove Hufthammer <huftis> |
Sat 09 Mar 2019 06:09:03 PM UTC, comment #2:
Yes, services raise issues such as:
At least some of these services, under GPL, can be used as tools, without some of the concerns of network services. |
Bruno Haible <haible>![]() |
Sat 09 Mar 2019 05:16:06 PM UTC, comment #1: Generally speaking, services raise different concerns,
You may want to discuss this with rms. |
Ineiev <ineiev> |
Sat 09 Mar 2019 04:57:08 PM UTC, original submission:
Machine translation is getting better over the years, thanks to advances in AI: machine translation based on neural networks and deep learning is significantly better than machine translation based on statistical models.
An approach that works in practice is machine translation followed by post-editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postediting .
The GNU gettext tools, in particular msginit, ought to have an option that allows to easily use free machine translation tools.
We should only integrate to free (GPLed/LGPLed) machine translation software, because the GNU maintainers guide https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Ethical-and-Philosophical-Consideration.html says "A GNU package should not recommend use of any non-free program".
Fortunately such free machine translation software exists nowadays, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_machine_translation_applications . For another list, see http://docs.weblate.org/en/latest/admin/machine.html . There is also ModernMT https://github.com/modernmt/MMT . |
Bruno Haible <haible>![]() |
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
I agree that gettext could provide a way to pre-populate the translation. It could be from a MT provider (by providing the info required by the service API) or from a local TM file in a supported bilingual format (PO/TMX ?). That would be tremendously helpful.