Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The most impressive improvement is 13, where the composition starts to work. The tool gets some things right, and more so than before, but it also fails on elementary tasks. I therefore have to conclude that Google Translate is still unreliable with Latin. You can certainly gain more insight by studying how Google Translate fares with other ...
What Google Translate is most reliable for is translating documents produced by the United Nations between the languages in use there. This is because UN documents have provided a disproportionately large share of the manually translated texts from which Google Translate draws its five-word sequences.
The phrase "dolor sit amet" (as well as much of "lorem ipsum", albeit in mangled form) is from a real Latin text, namely Cicero's De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum. The relevant passage is: "neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum, quia dolor sit, amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt, ut labore et ...
Use word reference. For any kind of translation requiring the nuances of a specific country, Google translate will be no help. You can't pick between Latin American and European Spanish because there is no universal "Latin American Spanish".
wernernw. •. Google is absolutely incompatible with Latin. It does not read context. Here "ago" with "quid" has an idiomatic meaning of "how" so Google does not get the nuance. In fact, both "ago" and "quid" have very flexible meanings which are not picked up by an auto-translator.
Why Latin Google Translate is so bad. Google Translate for Latin is completely statistical. It has no model of grammar, syntax, or meaning. All it does its correlate sequences of up to five consecutive words in texts that have been manually translated into two or more languages. More precisely, it has built up a hidden Markov model from all the ...
Many thanks to sumdumusername for his link. The discussion there was interesting, but ultimately unsatisfying. Any suggestion that Google doesn't do Latin because it is too hard to get right can't be the real reason. Google does Swahili (and I imagine many other languages) and gets many things very wrong.
Latin tends to be worse, because Google Translate does not have access to a corpus as large as for modern languages (people on the Internet don't write millions of pages every day in Latin). I found that Google Translate works 'adequately' when it translates isolating languages to each other (e.g. translate Chinese to English or vice versa ...
4. Google Translate is notoriously bad at Latin. I am very bad at Latin myself and when I tried to converse with the GPT chatbot in Latin, it had to frequently correct the mistakes in my questions. From the point of view of a complete beginner, like me, it seems, that it is perhaps bettar than Google Translate in the quality of texts it produces.
What Google Translate relies on to be accurate is an involved active populace in the language consistently editing and correcting it either directly through the engine or indirectly through articles searched on the engine, etc., which Latin does not have a strong basis on unfortunately due to it not being a language that is spoken on a regular ...