New extension for transformed languages
doug at ewellic.org
Wed Mar 7 16:57:14 CET 2012
CE Whitehead <cewcathar at hotmail dot com> wrote:
>> Of course, some translation decisions have more to do with the
>> individual translator than with either the source or target language,
>> and of course there is no way to tag that thought process, nor should
>> there be.
> Then I suppose Doug does not feel it would not be wise to register a
> mechanism for a translation (I am unsure myself as to whether it would
> be wise, though, because, for example, some people translating poetry
> ignore the rhythm and carefully translate the words and then make the
> word order come out in the new language; other translations are just
> word-by-word without being rearranged; and then some translations take
> a great deal of liberty, perhaps trying to convey sentence rhythms, or
> the author's "voice").
No, I don't feel it would be wise to register a mechanism for
translation, because we have a brand-new extension ('t') that claims
to be usable for just that purpose. There would have to be some
demonstrated real-world need that the 't' extension demonstrably does
*Some* decisions on the part of the translator are not taggable, IMHO.
That does not mean I disagree with the entire concept of tagging content
as having been translated.
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA
http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell
More information about the Ietf-languages