Re: Translating Lemon/OntoLex (Help wanted)

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Elena Montiel Ponsoda <emontiel@fi.upm.es>
wrote:

> Dear John,
>
> Lupe and I were having a look at the translation of the ontolex labels and
> were wondering how "flexible" we can be with labels.
>
> We are of the opinion that labels should be as descriptive as possible
> (without being definitions, of course) in order to guarantee that users
> understand as quick and easy as possible the meaning of the concepts behind.
> It would be desirable that native users of a certain language are able to
> deduce what is meant by a certain label without having to look up the
> definition (or at least try it...). And that underestanding prevails over
> conciseness of the term. And not only understanding, but also fluency, I
> mean, using those words or expressions that are more natural and fluent to
> the native speaker instead of sticking to the original term in the
> Identifier (Not sure if it is clear what I mean...).
> For example, in the case of senseRelation, instead of saying "relación de
> sentidos", it would be more natural to say "relación entre sentidos".
>
Of course... "relation of senses" is weird in English as well, "relation
between senses" would be preferable in English if a preposition must be
used.

> IN the case of "translatable as", we would say "se traduce como" instead
> of "traducible por", although the latter is 100% correct and would be more
> faithfull to the original, so to say...
>
Yeah, I find the English word 'translatable' to be quite ugly... but
concise. The reflexive passive seems a much better way to express this.

>
> We were also wondering if we could use a verbal phrase in the translation
> of an objectProperty or dataTypeProperties.
> For example: writtenRep -> "tiene representación escrita", instead of
> "representación escrita", so that the directionality of the relation is
> clear and is not to be confused with "es representación escrita de"...
>
I would not put the English label to "has written representation" as the
direction is should be obvious from the context, thus I would avoid adding
these words to other languages as well.

>
> In fact, I am not sure we are consistent in the names we have given to
> Identifiers, since in some case we use "isConceptOf" (for inversed
> relations?), whereas for the direct relations we just use the name/term in
> the identifier but not the verb. The question would be, why not using the
> verb and preposition, if needed, in the labels for properties? It would
> make labels more consistent.
>
Adding a verb and a preposition helps clearly identify inverses from the
original property, that is concept/isConceptOf is a more distinct pair than
something like isConcept/isConceptOf.

>
> As for capitalization, you have use capital leters for all labels in
> English. We think that it may be better to use the conventions of each
> language. In the case of German, capital letters for nouns vs. lower case
> for verbs. In Spanish lower case for nouns and verbs, etc.
>
Yeah with the exception of German, I think there are no fixed rules for
capitalization. I have tended to use title case for the English labels as
the labels feel like the titles of concepts... I am unsure what is best,
but perhaps we start with lower-case, as it is easier to fix this if it
seems wrong after.

Regards,
John

>
> It's all for now. More thoughts to come.
> Best,
> Elena.
>
>
> El 21/11/2014 15:51, John P. McCrae escribió:
>
>  Hi all,
>>
>> It would be good as the goal of this group is to help people to make
>> multilingual resources, if we made the Lemon/OntoLex model also available
>> with multiple translations. To this end I have started to collect
>> translations of all the labels in a spreadsheet here:
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yATI7qxZYD2huxExIwjQusWmT-
>> i2M70GEc5XvZyqhKE/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> If you have the time and inclination I would greatly appreciate
>> contributions, especially new languages.
>>
>> Regards,
>> John
>>
>
>