Slashdot Mirror
Romancing The Rosetta Stone
Roland Piquepaille writes "Not only this news release from the University of Southern California has a fantastic title, it also has a great content. This story is about one of their scientists, Franz Josef Och, whose software ranks very high among translation systems. "Give me enough parallel data, and you can have a translation system for any two languages in a matter of hours," said Dr. Och, paraphrasing Archimedes. His approach relies on two concepts, gathering huge amounts of data, and applying statistical models to this data. It completely ignores grammar rules and dictionaries. "Och's method uses matched bilingual texts, the computer-encoded equivalents of the famous Rosetta Stone inscriptions. Or, rather, gigabytes and gigabytes of Rosetta Stones." Read my summary for more details."
Right after I romance this FP.
did anyone see that saved by the bell episode where screech fucks albert clifford slater by tutoring kelly and denying george michael tickets?
kelly had a camel toe.
He will be sadly missed as he was truly and American Icon.
prepare for the universal translator joke onslaught :)
Since I mistakenly borrowed some undubbed Cowboy BeBop.
Romancing the Rosetta Stone
'Give me enough parallel data, and you can have a translation system in hours'
University of Southern California computer scientist Franz Josef Och echoed one of the most famous boasts in the history of engineering after his software scored highest among 23 Arabic- and Chinese-to-English translatio systems, commercial and experimental, tested in in recently concluded Department of Commerce trials.
"Give me a place to stand on, and I will move the world," said the great Greek scientist Archimedes, after providing a mathematical explanation for the lever.
"Give me enough parallel data, and you can have a translation system for any two languages in a matter of hours," said Dr. Och, a computer scientist in the USC School of Engineering's Information Sciences Institute.
Och spoke after the 2003 Benchmark Tests for machine translation carried out in May and June of this year by the U.S. Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Och's translations proved best in the 2003 head-to-head tests against 7 Arabic systems (5 research and 2 commercial-off-the-shelf products) and 14 Chinese systems (9 research and 5 off-the-shelf). In the previous, 2002 evaluations they had proved similarly superior.
The researcher discussed his methods at a NIST post-mortem workshop on the benchmarking held July 22-23 at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.
Och is a standout exponent of a newer method of using computers to translate one language into another that has become more successful in recent years as the ability of computers to handle large bodies of information has grown, and the volume of text and matched translations in digital form has exploded, on (for example) multilingual newspaper or government web sites.
Och's method uses matched bilingual texts, the computer-encoded equivalents of the famous Rosetta Stone inscriptions. Or, rather, gigabytes and gigabytes of Rosetta Stones.
"Our approach uses statistical models to find the most likely translation for a given input," Och explained
"It is quite different from the older, symbolic approaches to machine translation used in most existing commercial systems, which try to encode the grammar and the lexicon of a foreign language in a computer program that analyzes the grammatical structure of the foreign text, and then produces English based on hard rules," he continued.
"Instead of telling the computer how to translate, we let it figure it out by itself. First, we feed the system it with a parallel corpus, that is, a collection of texts in the foreign language and their translations into English.
"The computer uses this information to tune the parameters of a statistical model of the translation process. During the translation of new text, the system tries to find the English sentence that is the most likely translation of the foreign input sentence, based on these statistical models."
This method ignores, or rather rolls over, explicit grammatical rules and even traditional dictionary lists of vocabulary in favor of letting the computer itself find matchup patterns between a given Chinese or Arabic (or any other language) texts and English translations.
Such abilities have grown, as computers have improved, by enabling them to move from using individual words as the basic unit to using groups of words -- phrases.
Different human translators' versions of the same text will often vary considerably. Another key improvement has been the use of multiple English human translations to allow the computer to more freely and widely check its rendering by a scoring system.
This not coincidentally allows researchers to quantitatively measure improvement in translation on a sensitive and useful scale.
The original work along these lines dates back to the late 1980s and early 1990s and was done by Peter F. Brown and his colleagues at IBM's Watson Research Center.
Much of the improvement and
when it's in the form of a fish, and can fit in my ear...
"I turn away with fright and horror from the lamentable evil of functions which do not have derivatives."
Goatse Receiver, ass contortionist, dead at 55
I just heard some sad news on talk radio - ass strectching exhibitionist Goatse Receiver was found dead in CmdrTaco's bed this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to making the intarweb a great place for millions of users. Truly an American icon.
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*
g_______________________________________________g
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>_\___|_____o
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>_|__/_____a
t_______/\_|___C_____)/______\_(_____>_|_/______t
s______/_/\|___C_____)__RIP__|_(___>_/__\_______s
e_____|___(____C_____)\______/__//__/_/_____\___e
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*
mportant Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything
Can this be modified to seek out and fetch me a beer on a hot day like this?
I would gladly tell the robot a single command that it understoad as:
1. start
2. seek beer
3. plot course
4. get beer
5. return
mmmmmmmmmmmmmm..beer
First CSLib translation stone! Fnord!
This could be an amazing improvent to search engines. If they could instantly translate a page before showing it in the results.
Am I the only one who thinks that translation is quickly becoming obsolete?
Almost everyone can speak, read and write at least tolerable english and most young people can have full fledged discussions in it. Just look at Slashdot, I'm quite sure I'm not the only one who doesn't have english as primary language. It's not that farfetched idea that in the (near) future everyone uses or at least knows english well enough to make translations meaningless in all but the most complicated subjects.
We'll have a supercharged Babelfish ?
You know, it's not really a summary when you just delete half the article.
Romancing The Rosetta Stone
Posted by Hemos on Mon July 28, 17:48
from the cool-story dept.
Roland Piquepaille writes "Not only this news release from the University of Southern California has a fantastic title, it also has a great content. This story is about one of their scientists, Franz Josef Och, whose software ranks very high among translation systems. "Give me enough parallel data, and you can have a translation system for any two languages in a matter of hours," said Dr. Och, paraphrasing Archimedes. His approach relies on two concepts, gathering huge amounts of data, and applying statistical models to this data. It completely ignores grammar rules and dictionaries. "Och's method uses matched bilingual texts, the computer-encoded equivalents of the famous Rosetta Stone inscriptions. Or, rather, gigabytes and gigabytes of Rosetta Stones." Read my summary for more details."
Did I do this right?
--
Karma-whore beginner.
That reference to DARPA has me a little worried about the sort of uses this technology will be put to. I wonder, are the CIA trying to shore up holes in their translation abilities (particularly for Arabic/etc) by using software. What happens when you pair this technology up with the Echelon project? Are we going to see a dramatic rise in the ability of the government to spy on nationals and particularly foreign nationals now?
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
No really... what if it used a shared database and there were hundreds, or thousands, of the systems around the world... Seems like it could become a pretty sophisticated system. And maybe one day it will be available in the form of a small fish which you place in your ear?
Visualize the world of wine
The uber-geeks are going to have a field day with Klingon...
This is a bit of a worry for privacy concerns, given that if I want to keep something secret from the world and private just between me and my intended recipient I have one less option.
How long until this is able to decode things like speech, too, and convert it into something recognisable in another langauge? would it still hold my voice patterns and sound like me? and if it were converted back to the English I already do speak, with mistakes, could that then be used against me in a court of law?
Scary stuff
I am a geek from Kabul. We too have rosetta stone for converting Visual Basic into Commodore 64 assembly so we can develop new DivX algorithms and then see more Baywatch. Jon promised to send me an iPod and some special pictures of himself. I never got the iPod.
Junis.
"Give me enough" is a key element of the Law of Eventuality. Give me enough money, and I'll solve the Microsoft monopoly threat with a hostile takeover. Give me enough time and I'll clean up almost any unnatural disaster site by leveraging nature's own methods.
Give me enough simulated neurons and enough truisms and I'll make a sentient machine.
Eventually, with enough resources, anything is possible. Throwing more time and resources to a problem is rarely exciting science. Reducing the inconveniently large values of 'eventually' and 'enough' are the real problem.
[
How many Rosetta Stones would fill the Library of Congress eched on the head of a pin?
The translation of that Harry Pooter book quicker, though perhaps not perfectly grammatical or literarilly good. Me, i don't read that fodder, but translation is interesting nevertheless. Was it the Germans looking to translate it before the German-release?
goatse -> translator -> man stretching his bum open
Spidey will stop him...
Am I the only one who thinks that translation is quickly becoming obsolete?
Yes.
That's an example from a few years' back of an attempt to translate "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak" from English to Russian and back to English using a different translator.
Can anyone try this on the new (or some other recent) algorithm?
BTW here's Doc Och's most recent website:
Franz Josef Och
Esteem isn't a zero sum game
I believe that using a statistical approach like this is a step in the right direction. Manually building sets of rules, dictionaries, etc., is a waste of time and hard to do. And manuall-built systems become stale as languages evolve, unless a lot of continuing work is done.
For me the holy grail is when I can converse with a computer meaningfully. I believe a similar approach will be required for the computer to "understand" language, and to be able to formulate a coherent and appropriate response.
Isn't the Doc supposed to be in the next Spiderman movie?
Universal translator anyone?
Er, aging geek embarrasing self again, mutter...
From the article: his software scored highest among 23 Arabic- and Chinese-to-English translatio systems
Oops - guess we need some more parallel data (or a few more gigs of rosetta stones).
The battle for the Rosetta Stone "Things are looking decidedly rocky at the British Museum - Egypt's leading archaeologist has demanded the return of the Rosetta Stone. But the museum argues that the removal of the four-foot slab that unlocked the mysteries of the pharaohs would be disastrous"
"Read my summary for more details."
:)
I'd rather have less detail in a summary - thanks
English --> French --> English --> Korean --> English. Of course, it helps that the first sentence is munged anyway ;-)
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Sounds like a brilliant idea. Hopefully this is something that could eventually be compacted enough to fit into consumer electronics. It would be great to be able to watch TV from every country without any language barrier!
DeviantArt Page
NSFWFirstly we could consider the enormous body of work currently available in other languages.
Having this able to be translated into English or other languages could be very valuable for scholars.
Secondly, English is not the primary tongue for the majority of people on the planet - to suggest that because a lot of people can manage to converse in it that the ability to translate between other languages isn't valuable is foolish.
Also note that the article specifically mentions Arabic and Chinese, which I don't think crossed your mind. China has the largest population on the planet, remember.
Translation is far from obsolete, especially given that the majority of the Western world, and especially America, is piss poor at being bilingual.
Regardless of one feeling's about the Revealed Word of God, as a linguistic resource it's amazing. Look up the story of Q to see how linguistic theologians compared different versions of the Gospels, in different languages, to see what they think Jesus actually said, and what was paraphrased, added. Of course, the snake handling heretics of the Protestant Church believe every word is sacrosanct.
Today, the biggest leader in translating Bibles into other languages is the Church of the Latter Day Saints, I guess when Mormon Elders take two or three wives, the younger academic men have lots of time to learn strange languages.
A. Rightmann
Romancing the Rosetta Stone
'Give me enough parallel data, and you can have a translation system in hours'
University of Southern California computer scientist Franz Josef Och echoed one of the most famous boasts in the history of engineering after his software scored highest among 23 Arabic- and Chinese-to-English translatio systems, commercial and experimental, tested in in recently concluded Department of Commerce trials.
"Give me a place to stand on, and I will move the world," said the great Greek scientist Archimedes, after providing a mathematical explanation for the lever.
"Give me enough parallel data, and you can have a translation system for any two languages in a matter of hours," said Dr. Och, a computer scientist in the USC School of Engineering's Information Sciences Institute.
Och spoke after the 2003 Benchmark Tests for machine translation carried out in May and June of this year by the U.S. Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Och's translations proved best in the 2003 head-to-head tests against 7 Arabic systems (5 research and 2 commercial-off-the-shelf products) and 14 Chinese systems (9 research and 5 off-the-shelf). In the previous, 2002 evaluations they had proved similarly superior.
The researcher discussed his methods at a GNAA post-mortem workshop on the benchmarking held July 22-23 at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.
Och is a standout exponent of a newer method of using computers to translate one language into another that has become more successful in recent years as the ability of computers to handle large bodies of information has grown, and the volume of text and matched translations in digital form has exploded, on (for example) multilingual newspaper or government web sites.
Och's method uses matched bilingual texts, the computer-encoded equivalents of the famous Rosetta Stone inscriptions. Or, rather, gigabytes and gigabytes of Rosetta Stones.
"Our approach uses statistical models to find the most likely translation for a given input," Och explained
"It is quite different from the older, symbolic approaches to machine translation used in most existing commercial systems, which try to encode the grammar and the lexicon of a foreign language in a computer program that analyzes the grammatical structure of the foreign text, and then produces English based on hard rules," he continued.
"Instead of telling the computer how to translate, we let it figure it out by itself. First, we feed the system it with a parallel corpus, that is, a collection of texts in the foreign language and their translations into English.
"The computer uses this information to tune the parameters of a statistical model of the translation process. During the translation of new text, the system tries to find the English sentence that is the most likely translation of the foreign input sentence, based on these statistical models."
This method ignores, or rather rolls over, explicit grammatical rules and even traditional dictionary lists of vocabulary in favor of letting the computer itself find matchup patterns between a given Chinese or Arabic (or any other language) texts and English translations.
Such abilities have grown, as computers have improved, by enabling them to move from using individual words as the basic unit to using groups of words -- phrases.
Different human translators' versions of the same text will often vary considerably. Another key improvement has been the use of multiple English human translations to allow the computer to more freely and widely check its rendering by a scoring system.
This not coincidentally allows researchers to quantitatively measure improvement in translation on a sensitive and useful scale.
The original work along these lines dates back to the late 1980s and early 1990s and was done by Peter F. Brown and his colleagues at IBM's Watson Research Center.
Much of the improvement and expansion
Star Trek's had a universal translator for years...
How can this system compensate for the different dialects of all of the different languages?
"Some fight for law. Some fight for justice. What will you fight for? One day, you will see."
That's lazy pseudo-philosophical intellectual masturbation, and, depending on how you choose to interpret it, is either wrong or obvious.
"Give me enough parallel data, and you can have a translation system for any two languages" has never been a true statement before.
What is the novelty of this?
It's hardly news that you can always find correlations in two sufficiently large sets of data.
Reminds me of the Steve Martin joke:
"Chicks go for the intellectual types. I figured the best way to impress 'em was to read a lot of books. But hey, do you know how many books there are? Why, there must be, hundreds of them. But I was already a pretty smart guy. I didn't waste my time reading all those books. Heck no.
I read, the dictionary. Hey--I figure it's got all the other books in it."
I have said it before, on
A good translation is based on several non-quantifiable parameters:
Example:
"My controller has failed. He is going to be replaced" can mean:
OK, maybe the above example is not perfect, but you get my drift... Machine Translation? Bah! Humbug.
That was my "machine translation" rant/flamefest of the month. Carry On.
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
"One of the great advantages of the statistical approach," Och explained, "is that most of the work goes into components that are language-independent. As long as you give me enough parallel data to train the system on, you can have a new system in a matter of days, if not hours."
This statistical method is probably the best approach to computerized translation. It seems to approximate how the human mind will translate a give sentence most efficiently. Language can get awfully complex, and individual words often have, at best, an ambiguous meaning when interpreted alone. One must take into account the context of that word to specify and refine its meaning. This obviously leads to a huge number of permutations to represent a huge variety of thoughts, but the relative size of this number is diminishing as computers become more powerful.
Therefore, instead of playing with messy grammars and sentence structures, we can simply have a catalogue of thoughts as represented by words, and correlate that catalogue with a different set of words to facilitate translation. This software would operate on a deeper level than it would if it operated with the words and symbols themselves. It would utilize a map of the deep structures of language, instead of a map of the less-meaningful words and grammars.
I really like this method, and while it may seem like a brute-force hack applied to translation, the simple fact that languages do not contain elegant patterns must be accepted. It also appears to be a most efficient method, as the simple comparisons involved would bring the speed of translation into realtime.
I want to be able to play all those crazy Japanese games that come out, but I dont understand the jibberish picture doodles they pass off as a language.
What does it mean for the fish?
University of Southern California computer scientist Franz Josef Och echoed one of the most famous boasts in the history of engineering after his software scored highest among 23 Arabic- and Chinese-to-English translatio systems, commercial and experimental, tested in in recently concluded Department of Commerce trials.
Maybe what Dr. Och should do next is write some software to double-check the work of whoever translates his press releases from the original Latin. The translator seems to have missed a few words here and there.
English : correctly forming sentences in it I can.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I wonder if the resultant translation engine could be considered a derivative work of the texts that populated it. This system is standing on the shoulders of all the translation efforts that went in to it. I think it's a great idea, but in the current IP climate, could well be shot down in flames. How much dual-language text is available in the PD or on open content licence?
You know, that actually does sound like something that would be a Russian aphorism...
The use of three languages is critical. Grammar isn't consistant, and words have multiple meanings. By using two known languages, you can eliminate many of the errors thus introduced, because the chances of some error fitting both known languages in the same way is much smaller.
If you double the number of known languages, you more than quarter the number of errors, because although errors can occur in either or both, they're unlikely to be the same error. Once more information exists, you can re-scan the same text and fill in the blanks.
Me, personally - I'd require four languages, three of which were known. The number of texts required would be considerably smaller and the number of residual errors would be practically non-existant.
They chose two languages for the obvious reason: It's simple. It's easy to find a student who knows two languages. At least, easier than finding one who knows four.
However, the price of simplicity is bad science. The volume of information they require makes their system little better than an infinite number of very smart monkeys with text editors and a grep function. That they're being paid signficant money on such stuff is a joke.
If they offered me the same money (and one of those Linux NetworX clusters) I could have a superior system in a month, although (as stated above) it would require more than one known language.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Translating from well-known languages such as Hindi or Arabic are all well and good, but they're already pretty easy to translate (the rules are well-known, translations are easy to check). This may still be a good way to do such translations faster, but it won't help you with: new or obscure languages (not enough translated data to feed into it), quality translation (no mention of the results, so I assume no one's going to be relying on this for publishing or journalism), or very pragmatically dissimilar languages (the rules of conversation rather than grammar). It's a good use of number-crunching, but would you want, say, your wedding vows, free lance article, or software specs done this way?
***WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU THINKING?***
:)
Look, seriously, even if everyone did speak English, there are still tonnes of literary works in other languages - the original texts of the Ancient Greek classics, for example. To read in the original language is often a much more rewarding experience. Besiders, relying on past translations of non-english material can lead to errors. And consider how many different English translations of the Bible there are.
Almost everyone can speak, read and write at least tolerable english
Almost everyone can communicate using gestures, facial expressions and grunts, but is that any reason to use that as our primary communication method? I mean, to really stretch a metaphor from human languages to programming languages, we can write any computer program "tolerably" in assembler (it's Turing-complete), but that doesn't mean it's the best way to do it. If I can only speak one language "tolerably", but another exceptionally well, which one is better for conveying my ideas?
most young people can have full fledged discussions in it
I don't think we can rely on "d00d, u r so l33t" to teach people true literacy. Young people are increasingly using SMS and online chat and are actually losing their ability to correctly spell words or write grammatically correct sentences. The number of young adults I see who cannot distinguish correctly between there, their and they're is ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE. Literacy is a major problem in English-speaking nations.
Just look at Slashdot, I'm quite sure I'm not the only one who doesn't have english as primary language
that doesn't mean you can use it well. Take a good look at slashdot - many, many people mangle the English language. The American people are probably the biggest infringers here...
It's not that farfetched idea that in the (near) future everyone uses or at least knows english well enough to make translations meaningless
Human languages don't map to each other 1:1. Some languages have words that basically cannot be translated without a serious loss of accuracy. (I guess you could ssay that no human language is Turing-Complete, in that it can't totally express every conceivable human thought). Having everything translated to english is NOT a solution. Brevity, language tricks (such as puns, rhyming, etc) cannot always be substituted across languages.
If it wasn't 2:15am in Melbourne right now, I'd try to order my thoughts and express them more clearly, but after 4 hours of Java debugging I'm off to get some sleep before uni tomorrow. Goodnight.
The PowerPC includes for this purpose two instructions called SYNC and EIEIO.
The big problem I see with this scheme is how do you collect the Gigs of data (ie content) without wholesale copyright violation or licensing (big bucks). Sure you can get lots of content whose copyright ran out from the Guttenburg project. But that's gonna be +70 year stuff.
Add the fact that the Mickey Mouse Copyright Extension act and related legislation threaten to extend copyright terms for infinity minus a day and you're never gonna have much content available that reflects CURRENT usage of the languages you're trying to translate.
Even existing translation programs could benefit from a ranking system. Wouldn't it be helpful if you could tell just how confident the translator is about a certain phrase or word? That way, you could rephrase your sentence before you foolishly ask someone to "taste" you....
Och's ability to work quickly was tested recently in June, 2003, when researchers all over the country (and in England) raced in a "Surprise Language" exercise sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to create machine translation tools to deal with texts in Hindi.
Hmm, I wonder why they chose Hindi...
The quality of his Hindi system is now being evaluated against those created by other scientists at the same time.
Ahh. So they can get some cheap Indian labor!
It's hardly news that you can always find correlations in two sufficiently large sets of data.
Hello? Did you think about this AT ALL? Of course you can FIND correlations between translated works, but how are you going to use them to translate OTHER works?
(hint: it's not easy.)
Bite the wax tadpole
It's not quite done yet, but the system does show promise. Dictionaries have already been created in Spanish, English, German, Japanese, Italian, French and several other languages.
20 mil and I will! Learn Esperanto with 20M others.
I understand that this is a cool idea for building automatic translators, but is it practical? Basically what they are doing is taking a well-researched domain of languages and trying to make something new and cool in it by completely ignoring the domain knowledge. My intuition tells me that "always use as much domain knowledge as posssible" is an engineering axiom.
I passed the Turing test.
As press releases tend to do, this leaves much to be desired for folks who are familiar with the discipline. As I read it, it seems to imply that the main driver is phrase-matching. What does it do with phrases it hasn't seen before? The problem is solved by throwing lots of data at it -- how much data is needed for a reasonable system? How well does it generalize to text outside the domains of the training data?
Incidentally, had my brother been a girl, he was in serious danger of being named Rosetta Stone.
-- Trevor Stone, aka Flwyd
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
It seems statistics is becoming a major force in our lives. Bayesian algos keep spam views down to almost tolerable levels, statistical analysis of texts helps with translations, weather is predictable at the macro level, Tivo collects data in the aggregate, etc. See any connections?
The Obviousness Nazi
I always thought it would be interesting if google applied its page rank algorithm to provide a translation service. Like poll the top 5 translation service sites for a translated sentence and then based on what each of them return, generate a 'average' or best possible result for that sentence.
+1, Insightful
In Soviet Russia, enough gets you!
There are 1.5 Chinese people and 4.5 billion other humans. How do you figure the Chinese outnumber the rest of humanity?
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
GPG or similar, or using large, one-time pads will always work. Of course, then they just make encryption illegal. What are you trying to hide, eh? Only dishonest people need privacy! Eh!
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
When I lived in Europe, a friend and I went to Paris. We're both bi-lingual; myself German, him Spanish, but unfortunately neither of us knew French. We had occasion to ask which train we neededto be on to get somewhere; and asked (in French) if the person we were asking for directions knew Spanish, English or German. We went through a good ten people before we found someone willing to admit that they spoke something other than French.
I'm sure they thought they were being all "Ha-ha, I will not let these Americans get away with not speaking French!" but our interpretation of the situation was "We're americans, we speak two languages, what's wrong with you?"
paintball
For those of you wanting to learn a language that is spoken by approximately 2 million people around the world, start learning Esperanto today!
20 mil and I will! Learn Esperanto with 20M others.
If it can translate Bob Dylan, then it can do anything.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
How about piping in various algorirhtms encoded in Pascal and C into the thing and seeing what it does to convert arbitrary sources. Where Can I get the soource? Pawel
It's interesting how English-like Dutch is. A Dutch friend of mine, Annamiek, has a Mac running the Dutch version of MacOS 9.2.2. I had no problems navigating around on it, and the menus and dialogue boxes were fairly sensible to me even though I had to ask her about a few particular words.
Dutch is basically a cousin of English, with both being heavily influenced by Low German. Yiddish also came from the same source, in this case influenced by all the countries the Jewish Diaspora passed through, like Russia and Poland. English is basically Low German with lots of stuff that came to us from Latin-derived languages like French and Spanish and Italian.
Oh yeah, in Holland, most people speak English. A lot of people in the Netherlands speak English better than we Yanks do. For that matter, so do most non-rural Pakistanis and Indians. I wouldn't be surprised if, in my lifetime, American English morphs even further. Enough to where non-Americans who speak English will, basically, only be able to function with it like I did when I was helping Annamiek fix her computer.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
So, can I train this program with a bunch of requirements documents, and a bunch of implementations, and have it learn how to code? :-) If so, I think I am obsolete. *poof*
This automates the task of converting from oe language with a large body of existing translations to another. If you're relying on putting your secrets in French and not having anyone who knows French read it to keep your secrets secret, you're an idiot.
As for used in a court of law, maybe, but who cares? We have an advesarial judicial system - if the translation is wrong, get someone who actually knows the language being converted to/from and refute it.
Speaking in a language that can be translated back to English isn't any more private than speaking in English. There's no loss of anything here.
paintball
If you want all those foreign web pages to come back translated into english from 1648.
paintball
It is called the Bible. Not only has the translation have been done into many language, but you are dealing with discreet, labelled paragraphs.
Back in 2000, there was a professor at U of MD that was working on using the Bible as a language source.
Fight Spammers!
IBM tried this statistical technique years ago, it's not a new approach. They used the texts of Canadian parliamentary discussion, which is kept in both English and French. See here or just search Google for "IBM tranlslation canadian parliament" or the like.
I is ahead of my time I's been completly ignoring grammer rulz for years now.
***I GOT NUTHIN***
I wonder how this would fare putting two computer languages side by side? I mean... take a few thousand programs, coded using the same algorithms but different computer languages... would his language translation software translate between them? Would it be able to differentiate between languages that manually allocate memory and those that use garbage collection? How about between procedural langauages like C, and more esoteric and oddly structured languages like LISP?
An interesting challenge, eh?
Would there be any benefit to this?
"I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
People have denied the automatability of human skills for the last ten thousand years. "They could not hit a barn at that dista...". Famous last words.
The human brain does not emply magic. It uses strategems, hard-coded guesses, models, and logics, filled with and tuned by accumulated information and knowledge.
All this is automatable. It just takes a _lot_ of investment.
My prediction is that within ten years we will have machine translation that speaks significantly better than average people, although not nearly as well as professional translators.
And it will be as banal as playing chess against a piece of software.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
Wat dacht je hiervan dan? Ik kan wel engels spreken maar dat wil niet zeggen dat ik daar altijd zin in heb!
Did you not hear about the web becoming increasingly mutlilingual - not less? With the advent of things like Unicode the use of other languages than good old english will only increase. I think in software at least the predominance of english is a historical artifact.
I also think you are also somewhat mistaken when you say that translations will only matter in the most complicated subjects. Personally studying astrophysics I find that the more specialized the subject the more likely it is that there is only English literature on it. More mundane subjects almost always have dutch (my mothertongue) translations. English is the lingua franca of the sciences but for day to day things I am more likely to use dutch. Plus there are some things better said in dutch than in english (and vice-versa ofcourse).
English as a sort of universal newspeak? No thanks!
...and I will make pseudo-insightful comments based on the headline text without reading any of the source articles, until my karma is excellent?
Now that would be cool.
Seriously though, this leaves only the odd tribal languages of African (and perhaps South American?) tribes that are comprised entirely of clicks and gutteral sounds as not easily comprehended. Could this system's approach finally result in a Babelfish-like universality even for languages such as Chinese and Japanese? The added complexity makes it much more challenging for things like Babelfish, but if this system can do it, it's going to be a landfall discovery.
Anybody have any further research by this guy? I'm interested! Who knows, maybe I could have gotten a better grade in French thanks to this research...
Even though your definitions of "everybody" and "tolerable" differ greatly with mine, at first glance, it appears that you're making a good point. But there are two huge problems with your post.
Firstly, while English is fairly widespread, it is by FAR not any sort of "universal" communications medium. It's my primary language (there's also the Spanish that I rarely get to use, so it languishes pitifully), but I know there are literally BILLIONS of people who don't speak a word of English, and hundreds of millions who have never been--and will never be--exposed to spoken or written English in their lifetimes.
Secondly, even if English were perceived as a solution to inter-cultural communications, the thought abhors me. As ignorant as many Americans are, and as difficult as it would be to get some Americans to consider using ANY other language, English should definitely not be the first choice as a unified "Official Planetary Language."
A worldwide movement to eliminate the use of other languages (or even let them fall to a state where they might meet the same fate as my Spanish skills) would signify an intolerable level of neglect toward so much of the diversity that makes our world interesting and colorful.
Sure, if you speak your native tongue throughout your day and type English when you browse Slashdot, English will continue to be a "secondary language." But you can't deny that if English were the language of choice in every public forum, atrophy would eventually overtake any attempts to retain fluency in one's other languages.
Language barriers can prove frustrating at times, but there are MUCH better ways to improve efficiency. Buy a pocket translator if you're hurting for ideas.
Mom says my
The Rosetta stone itself did not do much in the way of our knowledge of the egyptian language.
What it did do, was provide insight into their method of writing.
It was the latter discovery of the the relation between Coptic and Egyptian that revealed most of the actual language.
(IIRC)
May I point out that the biggest user for this, if it works, are unlikely to be secret services (US or not) or religious folks?
The European Union will have 25 members on the 1 May 2004, if all goes well, and European legislation will then have to be translated into 21 different languages (not 25, some Member States share the same language).
Can you begin to imagine how many battalions of translators we're going to need?
There hasn't been a substantial breakthrough in automatic (i.e. unaided) translation in at least 15 years, and, if Moore's law holds, I'll take this with thanks, as I would be but too happy to throw processing power at it...
I have seen it all: SYSTRAN, originally used to read Russian confidential messages, EUROTRA (sort of son-of-SYSTRAN), METAL (the Siemens system, good if the writer is a cyborg who uses standard building blocks-maybe the oilman in the White House might fancy it...), whatever.
There might be some promise in this approach, as the problems in parsing weird languages (Estonian, for instance) seem at present unsolvable.
This fellow deserves watching, methinks...
Thufir Hawat
Part-time Mentat
You know, I just don't get why christian-bashers tend to be so bleeding ignorant.
I mean, when *I* make fun of someone, I make sure I'm educated enough about them that I don't sound like a total fool.
Maybe the Old King James (or "Authorized Version") was written in the language of the 1600s, but not only is there the New King James, there are plenty of modern-english translations, including those who have completely translated idioms into modern-day English idoms, which makes for much more interesting sit-down leisure-reading than the stuffy old king james version.
Consider yourself educated.
- Improved Statistical Alignment Models (2000) - Franz Josef Och, Hermann Ney, which investigates and compares several models
- A Syntax-based Statistical Translation Model - Yamada, Knight (2001), which tries to treat sentences structurally instead of just a stream of words
- A Finite-State Approach to Machine Translation - Bangalore, Riccardi (2001), which uses a different way of looking at the problem than usual
Kevin Knight prepared an excellent (if now somewhat outdated) introduction to statistical machine translation that you can see in HTML or RTF (the formatting was corrupted when the RTF was converted to HTML - I recommend the RTF).--
I romp with joy in the bookish dark
Time for inflamatory reasoning. The statistical approach will beat out the grammar and rule based ones, at least for English, is for the simple reason:
English is not a language
Or rather, it resembles one but is more not than is, IMO. It is a large collection of idiomatic expressions that changes quite rapidly (and not only in colloquial forms, just look at what the political-correctness movement has done to phraseology). You know the story... more exceptions than rules, things that are legitimate to say language-wise are considered incorrect anyways, and vice versa, etc. etc.
That's not to say it doesn't have advantages; it's relatively easy to learn the basics of communication since it's weakly conjugated, has genderless articles, fairly simple uncased sentence structure. But, it is monstrous to master and I suspect most native speakers aren't true masters (not to mention the orthographical nightmare; is English the only language with spelling bee contests?)
The reason it's the new lingua franca (or should it be lingua angla now?) is techno-socio-political as is always the case. Stop harping on Americans for being largely mono-lingual. "Why didn't the Romans learn the local languages when they controlled Europe? Because they didn't have to." If every state spoke a different language, which would be more akin to Europe, then there would be need.
Almost everyone can speak, read and write at least tolerable english
/. , because english is the primary language of the site's main audience - stands to reason that english speakers would look at an english language site. On top of that, most people here are geeks, and english is (as far as I know) the human langauge most programming langauges are related to.
;)
:)
That may be the case on
I think it more likely that we'll end up with a lingua franca for the net combining useful bits from any language that has something useful to offer. Look at 'english' as it is now; it's heavily laden with words borrowed from the latin group, nordic languages, even chinese and japanese. And where would we be if you couldn't say karaoke?
Personally, I think it'd be a terrible loss to for the whole species if we all spoke the same language. There are ideas and concepts you just can't express in english that appear naturally in other languages, and I'm sure english has much to offer people who don't speak it as their first language.
Variety in all things...
Warning: May contain nuts
If you want to transmit something secretly then encrypt it! If you idea of secret communication is speaking in another language then you sorely need to learn more about cryptography.
I had this idea a few weeks ago after reading a biography of NEC founder of Koji Kobayashi, whose dying wish to NEC engineers was to have a machine that could instantly interpret English and Japanese speech by the date of his hundredth birthday in 2007. I wrote down my brilliant idea to use only statistical matching and a huge database of texts to make a translation on a napkin from the coffee shop I was in. I spent a few days thinking about it some more, but decided I would put it off until I had a better computer (better than my P266MMX) and could actually program. I guess I can forget about that now though... Sigh. And to think this guy had me beat before I'd even thought of it.
You may have methodological problems with their approach, but it works. Simple approaches are not fundamentally bad, specially simple approaches no one has tried before. From the small amount of information available, it looks like a very promissing path once you have enough storage and processing power. Guess what, we now have both at consumer level prices. So why not try the "dumb" method? Specially if it works better than all other methods available.
Using babelfish with English->Spanish, then
Spanish->English we get:
the alcohol is arranged but the meat is weak
... where the more available examples of actual spam and actual non-spam the better the accuracy of the result, and where you basically let the computer work out the probability, rather than feeding it hard and fast rules up front.
Can anyone say if the two procedures are technically related?
I would love to see an Ebonics translation of Harry Potter...
"You look nice..." --> "Shall I compare thee to a Summer's day..."
-- Sig down
I know this is a dramatic title. But better translation systems will do as much for cross cultural communication as the internet has done for cutting through geography.
I am waiting for the day when I can read Middle Eastern texts without having them selected, censored, and biased by american publishers and editors.
Because of the large volume of required input language into the system, I don't think that this system will be good for translating Bibles into new languages (think Wycliffe USA).
The advantage of this system, as it would pertain towards helping a particular religious community, is to make it easier to translate the large amount of books on religion into other languages more accurately.
The Czech schoolboys who worked so hard to make a Czech translation of the Harry Potter books would no longer have to wait so long for translations. Rather, the book could be fed through the statistical system and in under a day (minus proofreading) there could be a very nice translation into any mainstream language you wanted.
The advantage here would not be in translating Bibles into new languages, but rather translating massive amounts of books on the subject of Christianity to various languages.
Perhaps this technology would even have a use with Amazon's online digital book project in allowing all of the books on their site to be effeciently translated into other languages and marketed digitally. Interesting concept, to have all of the resources of Amazon.com in digital format for any mainstream language. That could do amazing things for the cross-country circle of ideas and thoughts.
Just my 3.14159 cents...
Respectfully, :)
clint
The Rosetta Stone translates YOU!
Human style translation is nice. Machines are starting to be programmed to tackle problems like normal people do, not just like programmers do. About time.
We went through a good ten people before we found someone willing to admit that they spoke something other than French.
And what made you think they did actualy speak anything other than French? I'm French and I can say from personal experience that the percentage of adults who can speak anything other than French is quite low. Sure we all learned two foreign languages in school but after a few years most of us don't remember anything... about the only thing I remember from my Spanish class is "me llama guillermo" and I'm not even sure this is correct (it was 19 years ago).
I find it funny (kind of) when an American think of Frenchman as arrogant because they don't speak English... I guess what you're really thinking is : "Ha-ha, I will not let these Frenchman get away with not speaking English in France!".
So my interpretation of the situation is "what's wrong with YOU"
...the language translates YOU!!!
It's the PARISAN French.
;)
French people were very nice/helpful everywhere else I went in France OTHER than Paris. As it turns out, the rest of France doesn't much like Parisans either.
paintball
I don't expect anyone in a non-English speaking country to speak english. (Hell, sometimes, I find that expecting even native-born Americans to speak english is a bit much.)
The amusing part is that most of the people we talked to almost certainly knew one of the languages that we did, but preferred to cop the Parisan "I'm better than you because I know more than one language!" attitude - not realizing that they were essentially pretending to be stupid, not conveying that they were 'enlightened' like they were trying to.
paintball
They've had the same technology at CMU's LTI for years now, called EBMT. This officially stands for Example-Based Machine Translation, but those of us who worked with it called it Extremely Bad Machine Translation because it took millions of example sentences before it started to not suck, and even then it required manual tweaking and the addition of primitive grammar rules.
So yeah, this method learns fast, but it generally learns to a useless level for anything other than a rough assessment of some of the phrases that were in the original text.
-- Fratz, human
I know enough (or at least I did back then) of Germanic/Romance language roots for transportaion-related stuff to read train schedules in pretty much any (Western) European country. There was just some particular nuance (coupled with the fact we were in a bit of a rush) that made asking necessary.
Another trick is to make use of the automated ticket purchasing kiosks. They generally let you make your purchase in a few different languages. Problem there is they can't get you the full range of iteneraries (wierd connections, stops, layovers, etc) you can get at an agent; but the agent may not know a language you can speak...
So we would just buy tickets to somewhere in a language we knew, cancel the order, do it again in the local language, write down the words that corresponded to the words in the previous language, and then just present that order on paper to the agent. Worked pretty well.
paintball
The idea seems very similar to Eli Abir's, now commercialized at the company of
Fluent Machines.
jpenguin AT the google email service
A compiler (or interpeter, for those of you into that sort of thing) takes programs written in your preferred language and translates them to machine code.
The benefit to using compilers allows you to see what language/compiler produces the most efficient code. Ideally all compilers should be able to produce the most efficient code, but they'll each have their own strengths depending on what they're designed to do.
I'd hazard a guess that this system will also have trouble with a high-context language such as Japanese.
If all the effort is expended at the point of accumulating the parallel texts, then that's simply lots of computer time but if the text has to be massaged by the user to suit the system at translation time, then that could still be a lot of work.
The approach sounds rather like Translation Memory (as used in Trados and other systems) on a grand scale: "here's a sentence I translated earlier", as Blue Peter would say.
Can't knock it if it works, of course, which it appears to do.
None of the languages you give were designed for ease of learning. Nor are they free of a whole load of cultural baggage.(1) The concept behind Esperanto is to provide a neutral, quick learning experience for newcomers.
-------
(1)Now, Esperanto does have a decided tilt towards European languages for its base, so I'm sure there's room for improvement for inclusiveness. But at least it's a higher level of cultural bias.
Due to unprecedented developments in technology, A call was sent out today from DARPA and MIT jointly to all aspiring sci-fi writers and directors to get off their butts. Having now created preliminary versions of just about every StarTrek, Asimov, Clarke, etc device possible, DARPA and MIT both are running out of cool ideas and will need to revert to evil geshhhtaaaapo technologies if we can't find something cool to work on.
Joe Schmo said, "Keep a scientist off the streets, write a story. WIthout cool sci-fi to keep them up at night they'll be building super-world-destructo bombs, and other "evil genius" devices..."
meh
A linguistics grad student (D. Hatch) at Brigham Young University has been working on a similar project using Analogical Modeling for parallel text in machine translation. Dr. Royal Skousen developed Analogical Modeling as an "exemplar-based general theory of description that uses both neighbors and non-neighbors (under certain well-defined conditions of homogeneity) to predict language behavior"
The results have been quite successful so far.
You need to get my church to invest in the latest versions.
Although personally (not like I've done an exhaustive comparison) I've found that the more modern translations lose a lot from the King James version. Seems like the goal with the King James version was accurate translation, while most of the modern translations are geared towards reaching the masses.
Regardless, I wasn't Christian bashing. It was meant to be half-funny in the "Oh look, we got the wrong english" sense, and half-serious, in the "using a particular text where the 'timestamp' for the known languages used may be different by hundreds of years, and where one 'known' language's translation may be based on an older translation from another 'known', but not source, language, might not work as well as you'd hope." sense.
paintball
For starters, we specifically target young people when asking questions where a non-native language will be required. 3-4 of the people were employees, indicating at least a passing knowlege of "What track is this train on?" in a few European languages might be a job-relevant talent. Additionally, the sneer. Attitude is attitude regardless of what country you're in.
We don't expect people to know foreign languages. We *DO* find it amusing when people who are razzing *US* for not knowing THEIR language do not know any foreign languages.
paintball
Given the impressive progress made by Bayesian algorithms in spam detection, I wouldn't be surprised to see impressive results from this method either.
So bravo for Franz Och! He's taken what appeared to be an intractible problem requiring magic AI to solve, and perhaps found a way to solve it effectively using the stupid brute force methods computers are so good at.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
This program can be made better if it first builds the grammer and dictionary as a foundation. Then, it gets fed with the parallel text data to build the statistical references between the two languages.
It is the combination of definition and context that makes a translation more accurate. In fact, that's how humans learn. We first learn to reference words/sentences to what we see (like parallel data). Then, we also learn to understand grammer and word definitions. We wouldn't learn by just one way without the other.
On another note, I think this will be great step in achieving speech AI. Just as this program translate by making statistical parallels between language, it can go further and make statistical parallels responses to a sentence. Reason why I think this program is better is because it goes beyond plain definition, the program has to "understand" the input text by searching thru its database, its "knowledge". It's still far fetch, but i think this is one step further towards AI.
Ouch. Don't need a translator for that.
1: Create a set of "Rosetta Stone" data by taking thousands of recorded phone calls to customer service/operators, etc.
2: For each call, track what the customer service rep/operator typed into their computer terminal.
The result would be natural language voice-recognition that would probably achieve a high degree of accuracy because it would be limited in scope (e.g. asking for a credit line increase, reporting a lost card, checking your balance, etc.) and be based on real queries from real customers.
Since the biggest majority of calls are for very simple problems (I forgot my password is the most common tech support call we get) this should be pretty useful.. you could probably automate "Level 1 Tech support"!
The facts have a liberal bias. --The Daily Show
Ah, so the DoD must be secretly staffed by slash/shonen ai-loving women. I get it now.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Some people have decided to use Slovio (a language) on their porn sites. Their idea is based on the fact there are 400 million potential customers of which only a very small part is speaking English.
This has already been done some years ago in Canada, where the translation system was fed the complete text of parliamentary debates for umpteen years (required by law to be translated by humans into French, if originally in English, and vice versa). I don't know how it fares when presented with a sample of parliament-speak (I concede, this is not a fair approximation of human language), but it fails miserably on a simple rhyme. Read your Hofstadter, guys.
I can assure you, the best way to get rid of dragons is to have one of your own.
the parent to your post (my post) got trolled?! my god, what kind of yuppie faggot loves harry pooper that much?! YES i blow karma, but fuck that. YOU ARE A BUNCH OF BLEEDINGASS FAGGOTS, YOU FUCKING MODS!
Am I the only one who's glad Doc Och is working in the field of language and not robotics?
(Well, the subject line is anyway)
DARPA is paid to find ways to kill people and destroy property, but the employees sometimes become distracted and do something good for the world.
"I'd hazard a guess that this system will also have trouble with a high-context language such as Japanese."
:-)
I think that's exactly what his system is about, it also analyzes context, so it works similiar to the human thinking. It takes the surrounding words into consideration and checks given translation.
E.g., wrong translations for the German word "Bank" which can mean both "bench" or "bank" are less likely, as a context like "sit, park..." would favor the translation "bench" while a context with "money, stock..." would lead the system to assume the meaning "bank" is more likely.
This way, it should be far superior to word-to-word based translation systems.
I hope this is true, but that's how he explained it to me about 7 years ago when he started the project
I don't need a signature.
goodness, i certainly didn't think that when i first logged into /. today that i would be seeing old english...
it's astonishing just how germanic it looks to me.
ed
Here are some things that language allows, but reality doesn't:
IANAL (linguits), but you also run into peculiarties of language where on language lacks a concept. English does not impart gender in objects. Ancient Chinese is largely written in the present tense. Some african languages have no concept of "Should". In order to translate information you need to add, remove, or complete rephrase certain ideas.
Finally, you run into the problem of ambiguous concepts. There is no german word for "luck" or "happy". They are combined in one word "glucklich". The chinese use one character to represent both danger and oppertunity. To know which you are speaking of requires context, and once you start adding state to a statistical model it starts to become a differential equation.
A far better approach would be a digital "Esperanto". Linguist would design a universal language, and then design a filter to translate each language (and all its quirks) into the universal. Each language would also need a filter to translate FROM the universal. Even then, you still would have stuff that just plain doesn't translate.
For giggles, try picking up a copy of Sun Tsu's Art of War, or Lao Tsu's Tao Te Ching. Better yet, pick up 2 different translations. In order to make any sense out of it, you have to constantly read between the lines.
Computer are notoriously BAD at reading between the lines.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
I was going to post this but this nails it, so now I don't have to.
The `spirit is willing' story is amusing, and it really is a pity that it is not true. However, like most MT `howlers' it is a fabrication. In fact, for the most part, they were in circulation long before any MT system could have produced them (variants of the `spirit is willing' example can be found in the American press as early as 1956, but sadly, there does not seem to have been an MT system in America which could translate from English into Russian until much more recently --- for sound strategic reasons, work in the USA had concentrated on the translation of Russian into English, not the other way round). Of course, there are real MT howlers. Two of the nicest are the translation of French avocat (`advocate', `lawyer' or `barrister') as avocado, and the translation of Les soldats sont dans le café as The soldiers are in the coffee. However, they are not as easy to find as the reader might think, and they certainly do not show that MT is useless.
BTW, since this book is no longer available in the stores, the whole contents is placed online, though the server appears down right now. I recommend reading this book to anyone who is interested into the subject of MT. It really is a nice introduction into the subject.
Romancing der Rosetta Stein
' geben Sie mir genügende parallelen Daten, und Sie können ein Übersetzung System in den Stunden haben'
Universität des südlichen Kalifornien Informatikers Franz Josef, den Och ein vom berühmtesten widerhallte, rühmt sich in der Geschichte der Technik, nachdem seine Software stark unter 23 die arabische und Chinesisch-zu-Englischen translatio Systeme zählte, kommerziell und experimentell, geprüft innen in vor kurzem gefolgertem Handelsministerium Versuche.
"geben Sie mir einen Platz zum Standplatz an, und ich verschiebe die Welt,", nachdem dem Zur Verfügung stellen einer mathematischen Erklärung für den Hebel sagte den großen griechischen Wissenschaftler Archimedes.
"geben Sie mir genügende parallelen Daten, und Sie können ein Übersetzung System für alle mögliche zwei Sprachen in einer Angelegenheit von Stunden haben,", sagte Dr. Och, ein Informatiker in der USC Schule des Informationswissenschaft-Instituts der Technik.
Och sprach nach den Prüfstandversuchen 2003 für die maschinelle Übersetzung, die im Mai und Juni dieses Jahres durch das National Institute of Standards and Technology der VEREINIGTE STAATEN Handel-Abteilung durchgeführt wurde.
Übersetzungen Ochs prüften gut in den 2003 head-to-head Tests gegen 7 arabische Systeme (5 Forschung und 2 Kommerziell-weg-dregal Produkte) und 14 chinesische Systeme (9 Forschung und 5 ab Lager). Im vorhergehenden 2002 Auswertungen hatten sie ähnlich überlegenes geprüft.
Der Forscher besprach seine Methoden an einem NIST Postmortemseminar über das Benchmarking gehalten Juli 22-23 Johns Hopkins an der Universität in Baltimore, Maryland.
Och ist ein Herausragend-Exponent einer neueren Methode des Verwendens der Computer, um eine Sprache in andere zu übersetzen, die in den letzten Jahren erfolgreicher geworden ist, während die Fähigkeit der Computer, große Körper der Informationen anzufassen gewachsen ist, und das Volumen des Textes und der zusammengebrachten Übersetzungen in der digitalen Form hat, auf (zum Beispiel) mehrsprachigen Zeitung oder Regierung Netzaufstellungsorten explodiert.
Methode Ochs benutzt zusammengebrachte zweisprachige Texte, die Computer-kodierten Äquivalente der berühmten Rosetta Steinbeschreibungen. Oder eher Gigabytes und Gigabytes Rosetta Steine.
"unsere Annäherung benutzt statistische Modelle, um die wahrscheinlichste Übersetzung für einen gegebenen Eingang zu finden," Och erklärt
"sie ist zu den älteren, symbolischen Annäherungen zur maschinellen Übersetzung ziemlich unterschiedlich, die in den meisten bestehenden kommerziellen Systemen verwendet wird, die versuchen, die Grammatik und das Lexikon einer Fremdsprache in einem Computerprogramm zu kodieren, das die grammatische Struktur des fremden Textes analysiert, und produziert dann Englisch, das auf harten Richtlinien," er basiert, fortfuhr.
"anstelle, vom Computer erklärend, wie man, wir ließ ihn selbst ihn heraus darstellen übersetzt. Zuerst ziehen wir dem System es mit einem parallelen Korpus d.h. eine Ansammlung Texte in der Fremdsprache und ihre Übersetzungen ins Englische ein.
"der Computer verwendet diese Informationen, um die Parameter eines statistischen Modells des Übersetzung Prozesses abzustimmen. Während der Übersetzung des neuen Textes, versucht das System, den englischen Satz zu finden, der die wahrscheinlichste Übersetzung des fremden Eingang Satzes ist, basiert auf diesen statistischen Modellen."
Diese Methode ignoriert oder rollt eher über, finden ausdrückliche grammatische Richtlinien und sogar traditionelle Wörterbuchlisten des Wortschatzes zugunsten des Lassens des Computers selbst matchup Muster zwischen einer gegebenen chinesischen oder ara
wish i could edit...
i didn't wanna lump it in w/ the other stuff in the list: it's sorta in a different class by itself, IMHO.
ed
Neither the approach nor the results are particularly unique: statistical models are all the rage in natural language processing--and for good reasons. There are probably a few dozen research groups working on these kinds of systems.
But such systems also have well-understood limitations. Translation often does require a deeper understanding of the subject matter, and you simply cannot get that from aligning two large corpora.
Like, how is this offtopic? We're talking about languages and linguistics and how better computer programs can be built for translating. Someone made a comment about Dutch and about needing to know Dutch to read a few websites. MsGeek just made the comment that she could get by in Dutch simply because of Dutch's similarities to English. How the fuck is that offtopic?
Written language and spoken lang are different beings. Written lang is usu standardized & does not nec reflect dialect.
AFAICT (having RTFA,) the software works only on parallel texts, not parallel recordings.
- anonymous linguist
Arabic, Chinese, and Hindi? It is pretty easy to imagine why DARPA would be interested in the first two with the War on Terrorism and China being a pseudo-enemy. But Hindi? Conspiracy theorists please comment...
You don't get the situation. French feel enormously threatened by the Americans, culturally speaking. Maybe the feeling is even founded on something...
If you approach them with English, or even saying "Do you speak English?" in broken French, they would rather watch you being eaten live by sharks then understand your cries for "Help!".
What you do is, ask the French person what-ever you need to know in your best French. Probably he will not even understand what the hell you're trying to say. Speak to him (in French) again. And again. Bring out your phrase book and shuffle the pages, speaking uselessly at the french guy.
Maybe he WILL understand parts of it. This will just cause him to unleash torrents of speedy French in your direction, which you can't understand. Look stupid. Stupidity is key.
Soon, it will be obvious that you don't know shit about the french language. NOW, and ONLY NOW, ask in your very brokenest French (no, NOT English, you will ruin everything you just accomplished!) if maybe he knows just a little English.
Of course he does. After all, all the kids study English in school, and have so for many years. This way he can feel superior about helping the daft tourist idiot.
NB. I am not american, I'm swedish. I had the exact same problem in Paris until I developed this method.
I choose to remain celibate, like my father and his father before him.
And all those cpu cycles will soon be paid off.
can't we all just speak Esperanto?
(i suppose i should've written this message in esperanto to illustrate my point, oh well)
THERE IS NO DATA. THERE IS O
the parent to your post (my post) got trolled?! my god, what kind of yuppie faggot loves harry pooper that much?! YES i blow karma, but fuck that. YOU ARE A BUNCH OF BLEEDINGASS FAGGOTS, YOU FUCKING MODS!
it's mods like you who keep the GNAA and other real trolls posting, and gaining more people every day. You lead a sad sad life mr. mod.
Yeah I know there was an Esperanto movie. Exactly my point of free from culture.
You just have to .
S P E A K
L O U D
A N D
S L O W L Y. .
I just had to. Besides, I think it's proving a point, or something.
--
Romancing of the Rosetta stone
' you give me sufficient parallel data, and you can have translation a system in the hours '
University southern California of the computer scientist Franz Josef, which Och of most famous against-resounded, praises itself in the history of the technology, after its software counted the Arab strongly under 23 and Chinese English translatio systems, commercially and experimentally, examined inside in recently concluded Ministry of Trade of attempts.
"you indicate a place to me to the location, and I shift the world,", after to to order a mathematical explanation for the lever said the large Greek scientist Archimedes place.
"you give me sufficient parallel data, and you can have translation a system for all possible two languages in an affair of hours,", said Dr. Och, a computer scientist in the USC school of the institute for information science of the technology.
Och spoke after the benchmark tests 2003 for the machine translation, which was accomplished in the May and June of this yearly by the National Institute of Standards and Technology United States of the trade department.
Translations Ochs examined well into the 2003 head ton head tests against 7 Arab systems (5 research and 2 commercial away dregal products) and 14 Chinese systems (9 research and 5 from stock). In preceding 2002 evaluations had examined it similarly superior.
The researcher discussed his methods held at a NIST Postmortemseminar over the Benchmarking July 22-23 of John Hopkins at the university in Baltimore, Maryland.
Och is an outstanding exponent of a newer method of using the computers to touch in order to translate a language into other one, which became more successful in the last years, while the ability of the computers grew, large bodies of the information, and the volume of the text and the brought together translations in the digital form has, on (for example) multilingual newspaper or government net places of assembly explodes.
Method Ochs uses brought together bilingual texts, the computer-coded equivalents of the famous Rosetta descriptions of stone. Or rather gigabytes and gigabyte Rosetta of stones.
"our approximation uses statistic models, in order to find the most probable translation for a given entrance," Och avowedly
"it is rather different to the older, symbolic approximations for the machine translation, which in most existing the commercial systems is used, which try, to code the grammar and the encyclopedia of a foreign language in a computer program the grammatical structure of the strange text analyzed, and produced then English, which on hard guidelines," it is based, continued.
"employs, explaining from the computer, how one, we left it it out explains translated. First we draw the system it with a parallel korpus i.e. an accumulation of texts in the foreign language and their translations into English.
"the computer uses these information, in order to co-ordinate the parameters of a statistic model translation of the process. During the translation of the new text, the system tries to find English sentence which is the most probable translation strange entrance of the sentence, be based in these statistic models."
This method ignores or rolls over rather, finds express grammatical guidelines and even traditional dictionary lists of the vocabulary in favor of leaving the computer matchup samples between given Chinese or Arab (or any another language) texts and English translations.
Such abilities grew, while computers improved, by making possible for them, from using the individual words as the fundamental unit on using the groups of words to move -- cliches.
Versions of the different human translators of the same text change frequently considerably. Another key improvement was the use of repeated English human translations to permit the computer too its transmission by an ana
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Are you barking mad, stupid or just trolling?
English enables communication between people based on a shared code. It is therefore a language. Do you understand what I'm saying? If you do, you've proved that you are wrong.
It may be a syncretic, mongel, illogical one, admiting degrees of mastery that few reach, but that describes most human languages to some degree.
3-4 of the people were employees
I think it's a mistake to judge all Frenchmen based on your experience with government's employees. Particularly the one from SNCF! Everyone will tell you they are the worst!
Ok... Jokes aside, most of them are good people but we always remember the arrogant bastard. Also the truth is a lot of people blame them for whatever reason and they tend to be very defensive.
Additionally, the sneer. Attitude is attitude regardless of what country you're in.
Attitude is closely related to culture, so you must never base your interpretation of an attitude on your culture. For example if you met me one day, you would probably think I'm a cold person : I won't greet you with a big smile and certainly won't invite you for dinner with a tap in the back. But it doesn't mean I despise you! It only means I don't want to impose myself. For me, the guy who greets me with a great smile, shake my hand and invite me to dinner the first time we meet is a self-centered asshole.
We *DO* find it amusing when people who are razzing *US* for not knowing THEIR language do not know any foreign languages.
Well, I'm sure you know that most people in France never use soap... Same kind of thing. It's always fun to bitch against someone different so we can feel good about ourselves. Don't take this to seriously.
Interesting method.
It seems to me this is more similar to natural learning of a language (usually at a young age) by exposure and immersion, as opposed to scholar learning of a language in classrooms, etcetera.
It shouldn't be surprising that in humans, the first method also works best at acquiring fluency in multiple languages. As a matter of fact, it's the only method through which we come to understand our FIRST language, which is in almost every case the one we command the best.
I think most people get, by consuming huge amounts of information, a feeling of "what sounds right" and "what sounds wrong" that is more effective for them at predicting the unwritten rules and exceptions, both in translations and in original sentence-creation, than memorizing a set of grammar rules which, in the end, are just codifications of the current state of the language.
I don't think the success of the approach means the symbolic methods are pointless for this endeavor, any more than the formal study of languages and their grammars is for human translators.
Professional writers and translators do study such rules to dramatically improve their command of the different languages, and do get much better results.
But it seems to me they are more successful going from "statistical matching with massive real-use data" to "optimized grammar rules matching the data" than going backward, from "scholastic grammar rules" to "consumption of massive data to acquire exceptions, and correct and complement the rules".
What would be interesting, I think, is if one can study the state of the system after it's performing well and extract/deduct grammar rules, algorithmically.
It would be interesting to see the results of a program doing that, collecting (and correcting) the grammar using the data, and using the grammar rules when no match in the dictionaries is found to, say, apply a greater weight to the gramatically-correct choice among the alternatives.
If the results were good with this approach, one could consider decreasing the size of the database as the grammar gains stability. Use that memory for other processes, other languages, or new sample data that could not be examined before.
Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, everything else follows...
This software would operate on a deeper level than it would if it operated with the words and symbols themselves. It would utilize a map of the deep structures of language, instead of a map of the less-meaningful words and grammars.
Actually, as a result, it operates on a shallower level. In fact, it's almost like you wrote this comment for an article in a parallel universe where statistical translation was the norm, and somebody was just now proposing symbolic translation, so much so that it's almost spooky.
This translation technique is so shallow it doesn't even particularly care what languages it works with. In a way, it can't really be said to be "translating" in the traditional sense; it's just correlating phrases with no clue what they are.
Traditional symbolic translation is better described by what you said:
Therefore, instead of playing with messy grammars and sentence structures, we can simply have a catalogue of thoughts as represented by words, and correlate that catalogue with a different set of words to facilitate translation.
Word(/phrase) -> symbol -> word(/phrase) is traditional tranlation. This is word -> word translation.
It's working better because we've had little or no success creating the middle part of the symbolic translation; matching the symbology used in our head has proven impossible to date. This works better by skipping that step, which introduces horrible distortions by forcing the words to fit into an incredibly poor symbology (compared to what we're actually using).
However, in theory, traditional translation should still have a brighter future; this is a hack around our ignorance, perhaps even a good one, but eventually we will want to extract the symbols.
(Incidentally, it's also why this same technique can't be used to match words -> symbols; we don't know how to represent the symbols yet! This kind of technique could eventually potentially be hybridized with something else to attack that problem, but simple, direct application can't result in the complicated relationships between symbols that exist, and we'd want a computer to "understand" those relations before we'd say it was truly translating or understanding English.)
Anyways, just flip your comments around 180 degrees and you're pretty close.
Es oficial; Netcraft ahora confirma: * El DEB está muriendo un bombshell que lisia ma's golpeó * comunidad del DEB cuando IDC confirmó que * la cuota de mercado ya cercada del DEB ha caído con todo otra vez, ahora abajo menos que una fracción de 1 por ciento de todos los servidores. Viniendo en los talones de una encuesta sobre reciente Netcraft que indica llano que * el DEB ha perdido más cuota de mercado, servicios de estas noticias reforzar a lo largo de lo que hemos sabido todos. * El DEB se está derrumbando en desorden completo, según lo apropiado ejemplificado fallando absolutamente pasado [ samag.com ] en la prueba comprensiva reciente del establecimiento de una red del sistema Admin. Usted no necesita ser un Kreskin [ amazingkreskin.com ] para predecir * el futuro del DEB. La escritura de la mano está en la pared: * El DEB hace frente a un futuro triste. En hecho no habrá ningún futuro en todos para * DEB porque * el DEB está muriendo. Las cosas están pareciendo muy malas para * el DEB. Tanto de nosotros esté ya enterado, * el DEB continúa perdiendo la cuota de mercado. La tinta roja fluye como un río de la sangre. FreeBSD es puesto en peligro más de ellos todos, perdiendo el 93% de sus reveladores de la base. Las salidas repentinas y desagradables de los reveladores largos Jordania Hubbard y Mike Smith de FreeBSD del tiempo sirven solamente para subrayar el punto más claramente. Allí conserve sea no más de largo cualquier duda: FreeBSD está muriendo. Guardemos a los hechos y miremos los números. El líder Theo de OpenBSD indica que hay 7000 usuarios de OpenBSD. Cuántos usuarios de NetBSD hay? Veamos. El número de OpenBSD contra los postes de NetBSD en USENET está áspero en el cociente de 5 a 1. Por lo tanto hay los cerca de usuarios 7000/5 = 1400 de NetBSD. Los postes de BSD/OS en USENET están sobre la mitad del volumen de los postes de NetBSD. Por lo tanto hay cerca de 700 usuarios de BSD/OS. Un artículo reciente puso FreeBSD en cerca de 80 por ciento * del mercado del DEB. Por lo tanto hay (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 usuarios de FreeBSD. Esto es constante con el número de los postes del USENET de FreeBSD. debido a los apuros del cala de la nuez, las ventas abismales etcétera, FreeBSD salió de negocio y fue asumido el control por BSDI que venden otro OS preocupado. BSDI es también muerto ahora, su cadáver turned.over a otra casa de charnel. Todos los exámenes importantes demuestran que * el DEB ha declinado constantemente en cuota de mercado. * El DEB es enfermo y sus perspectivas a largo plazo de la supervivencia son muy déviles. Si * el DEB es sobrevivir en todos lo que estará entre dabblers del dilettante del OS. * El DEB continúa decayéndose. Nada de un milagro podía ahorrarlo brevemente a este punto en tiempo. Para todos los propósitos prácticos, * el DEB es muerto. Hecho: * El DEB está muriendo
cpeterso
England is not the language
or something, similar one but it compared to it are, the IMO. Is idiomaticas expression was not more great collects its absolutely rapid change (and not only by familiar form, right glance does movement this politics corrects fraseologia). You compared to know to historical... are more exceptions is the rule which legitimately thinks, the matter language wise person is considered incorrectly in any event, with vice versa, and so on.
One does not have not to think its advantage; Its relatively easy academic society correspondence foundation because of it by conjugate weak, to be had article genderless, quite simple uncased official lecture structure. But, he are strangely dominate and I suspect the most localities are partial I are not the real master (do not mention this orthographical nightmare; The only language and the spelling bee's competitor is English)
This reason is frank new lingua (or it must now be lingua angla) he always is the techno partner politics likely case. Stops harping uses the American is to big scale scope monolingue. " why does Romans do not have the academic society place language when they controlled Europe? Because they do not have. " if each condition speaks one different language, that with Europe related, there then is necessary.
Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
Correct spelling in Slashdot? You gotta be kidding, they would revoke by club membership.
(I hope it is obvious I just thought it was too small a comment for me to need preview - the most common fatal error. But I haven't started anything with "end". What do you think the two "..." mean?)
I wanted to use Babelfish to do a English-Russian-English translation on that phrase. Imagine my shock when I discover that while there's a "Russian to English" option, there's no "English to Russian" option.
;
"That can't be right," I thought. So, I took the code from the "Add Babel Fish Translation to your site" link, created a web page, pasted it, and added the following option to the list:
<option value=en_ru>English to Russian
Wonder of wonders, it worked! I have no idea why Babelfish isn't displaying the E-to-R option, but this is a functional workaround.
In case you were curious, the results were disappointingly mundane. "Spirit is willingly ready but flesh it is weak."
Here's the complete HTML document.
<html>
<head></head>
<body>
<FORM ACTION=http://jump.altavista.com/searchbox4.go name=mfrm>
<input type=hidden name=doit value=done>
<table width=200 border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=6 bgcolor=#93b2dd><tr>
<th colspan=2 bgcolor=#FFFFFF><a href=http://www.altavista.com>
<img src=http://a12.g.akamai.net/7/12/282/13/av.com/sta tic/i/af/box_logo.gif border=0 width=118 height=45></a><br>
</th></tr>
<tr><td colspan=2><img src=http://a12.g.akamai.net/7/12/282/13/av.com/sta tic/i/bf/Bfishheading.gif width=192 height=20><br><font size=2 face=arial,helvetica,sans-serif color=#FFFFFF>
<small>Type or Paste text or Web address<br> (beginning with http://) here:<br> </small>
<textarea cols=20 rows=2 name=urltext></textarea>
</td></tr>
<tr><td colspan=2><font face=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif size=2 color=#FFFFFF><small>Translate from:<br></small></font>
<select name=lp>
<option value=en_zh>English to Chinese
<option value=en_fr>English to French
<option value=en_de>English to German
<option value=en_it>English to Italian
<option value=en_ja>English to Japanese
<option value=en_ko>English to Korean
<option value=en_pt>English to Portuguese
<option value=en_es>English to Spanish
<option value=en_ru>English to Russian
<option value=zh_en>Chinese to English
<option value=fr_en>French to English
<option value=fr_de>French to German
<option value=de_en>German to English
<option value=de_fr>German to French
<option value=it_en>Italian to English
<option value=ja_en>Japanese to English
<option value=ko_en>Korean to English
<option value=pt_en>Portuguese to English
<option value=ru_en>Russian to English
<option value=es_en>Spanish to English
</select></font></td></tr><tr>
<td><input type=submit value=Translate style=font-family:sans-serif;font-weight:bold;colo r:#FFF;background-color:#990000;cursor:hand;margin -bottom:-1px;width:85px;></td>
<td><font face=arial,helvetica,sans-serif size=2 color=#FFFFFF><small>Powered by Systran</small></font></td>
</tr></form></table>
</script>
</body>
</html>
Very well-said, raehl. Based on my own trip to France in February 2002, I have a some things to add...
1. Do the French hate Americans?I was told in advance by several people that the French look down upon everyone else--especially Americans--with a certain air of distaste. For the most part, I didn't find this to be the case. As long as you remember you're not at home (America, in my case)--that you're a guest--and to behave accordingly, there's no problem. I saw a few people staring as if they didn't want us there, but not many.
I'm a pretty gregarious guy, easy going, laid back. For example, saying "Bonjour" with a friendly smile before asking for help came naturally to me. I would be surprised if my accent fooled anyone
but I think they appreciated the effort. No doubt they could tell immediately that my "Parlez-vous Englais" was stilted by a from-across-the-Atlantic accent, but they also realized I respected the fact that I was in THEIR country. I may have been "just lucky," but nearly everyone I encountered in Paris was "just fine," attitude-wise. We enjoyed spending 30-45 minutes just chatting with the guy who managed our hotel the last three nights.
2. It's a major city. Go to any large city in the world, and you'll find people with ugly personalities. New York, Los Angeles, Tokyo, etc. Their local economy is largely tourism-based. I'm sure some people don't mind that fact, but others resent it, yet they continue to live there. And some people are just plain assholes. Any large city is bound to have a higher concentration of them. Also, to paraphrase a point someone else made today, you remember the one jerk out of ten nice people.
3. Are the French arrogant? I wonder if a large part of this perceived animosity stems from a phenomenon becoming increasingly prevalent in the United States; many of the people I meet here at home have a mentality that drips with egotism. They're not bashful at all when expressing the idea that they're not treated well enough by everyone else, even when nationality is a non-issue. I can only imagine trying to deal with this type of person and trying to remain civil.
I didn't get this impression from reading posts by raehl, by the way. I'm betting that he just ran into the wrong people. And raehl makes a valid point about expecting fluent English from the average American.
Going to the mall with a girl I used to date: When she was behind the wheel, she would impatiently complain about people walking too slowly in front of her as she circled the parking lot to find the absolute closest spot, and if she could get by without waiting, she would. Yet she was intolerant of motorists who didn't slow down to let her walk in front of their vehicles. Clearly her mode of transportation wasn't all that was pedestrian. More and more Americans have displayed this sort of behavior. I don't know if it's worldwide, but I have a feeling it's not. The only reason this feeling bothers me is that it frightens me to be part of THE country known for one-sidedness such as this.
Incidentally, the worst of the handful of bad experiences occurred when a woman approached me outside the train station a few blocks from Notre Dame. She asked me a question that sounded like a French request for directions. I asked her "Parlez-vous Englais?" (am I spelling that correctly?), After a moment of shock, she looked at me as if I had just attempted to rob her, and then she stormed away.
One of the nicest experiences started the same way: My friend and I were asked for subway assistance on Champs Elysees by two attractive young French women visiting Paris for the first time (sorry, no "dear Penthouse" story here). Like the other woman, they clearly thought I was French; maybe it's because I don't own any Hawai
Mom says my
Another one that gets mentioned is "Out of sight, out of mind" which gets reverse-translated into "Invisible idiot".
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
The whole world is literally at your finger tips. Here are a few examples.
20 mil and I will! Learn Esperanto with 20M others.
So i won't try. (-;
20 mil and I will! Learn Esperanto with 20M others.
And you think it's bad in English? Try it in German or French where the governments are trying to control language evolution with legislation, instead of just textbooks.
The Voynich Manuscript!
And where are you going to find gigabytes of parallel Klingon-English texts?
No seriously, this is the fallacy behind any statistical approach to automated translation.The news release gives the telling comment:
This paragraph just doesn't make any sense to me. Either it's badly explained, or the entire approach is flawed:
Statistical methods just cannot deal with the subtlety of meaning to be found in natural language texts. It's a little like believing that you can always win at chess if you can just look ahead far enough. I believe that this approach is inherently limited and any apparent success is illusory. This news release hasn't changed my opinion.
Sorry to be a party-pooper, but that's how I feel.
Those first few sentences are embued with a new mystical quality of exposition that simply can't help but to move a reader's soul to new dimensions of awe at the simple, yet complex, enlightenment of just how *bad* most translation software genuinely is. I think the translation speaks (muddily) for itself:
--
The danger that will inside load the place inside of the order that is enough Pierred U RomancingRosette ', the counterbalance that gives, it gives the system? Finally and of the translatio of software and history commerce technician, chow and 23 peoples or compared with the enemy the quality of the test that recently finishes in arabian it system of the concentration of the British inquiry and it commerce of this reading of it, ' probably California the one main parcel Och the real quality who is the college south of specialist of the hour of shipment of the Franz inside of dataprocessing, will sound to it, approximately nobleman and compliment that scholar inspected for respecting, translates. of the "o my interior that is being been situated the handspike of the emission regarding the Archimedes of the scientist of the danger the world it place of the grease, in the future the end to think interior d explaining the place, and to request it" and the visible age in the inquiry and this water index of the clause. The danger that will load the counterbalance that is enough, gives it and "it gives and it must translate the Och that inside says to the doctor of specialist dataprocessing of the school of the USC of the association of the danger all the language that 2 things are possible in the hour and the interior of the danger the company burden of the system,", it the information science technique that it is a possibility.
--
Have you ever really stopped to ponder "the counterbalance that gives, it gives the system?" Are these the words of a condescending gray-bearded UNIX guru? Have you yet implemented this counterbalance on your system? If so, do you recommend Perl?
Don't forget: "it the information science technique that it is a possibility."
Where's this great title we were supposed to find?
I had the same problem - having lived in Europe for a year, I was not wearing the typical brightly-colored or college/professional sports team-themed American tourist clothes, and was frequently asked directions etc. by the locals, or other tourists assuming I was a local. Always a blast when someone from the British Empire approaches you and asks in the local language if you speak english.
;)
And for the record, once we were outside of Paris, virtually everyone we met in France was great.
But next time, you should put a little more effort into it when two attractive women ask you for directions.
paintball
>"Parlez-vous Englais?" (am I spelling that >correctly?)
"Parlez-vous Anglais ?" is the right spelling.
"Anglais" is the tongue spoken by the Angle (Angli in Latin) tribe.