@change
「一般に今週の天気はよかった。」is quite unnatural. We never ever say 一般に for weather.
I submitted an alternative translation #10105437 「今週は天気の良い日が続いた。」

@MsFixer

今週は全般的に天気がよかった。
or
今週は全体的に天気がよかった。

なら、どう？もし、OKなら、より自然と感じる方も教えてください。

Better than 一般に (generally speaking). I personally have never heard 全般的に or 全体的に in weather news, though… ○○の日が続いた, 連日の○○が and 一週間を通じて are common phrases. I’m afraid you mixed up with a similar phrase 全国的に. I really don’t know how to deal with sentences imported from the Tanaka Corpus. I just prefer abandoning them and submitting natural translations from scratch.

「一般に」がgenerally speakingの意味になって破綻している現状から比べれば、相対的にはベターではあると思います。ですが天気予報で「全般的に」「全体的に」という言い回しを個人的に耳にしたことがないような。「普通に考えれば、「○○の日が続いた」か「連日の○○が…」か「一週間を通じて」が使われるのではないでしょうか。「全国的に」という地理的な表現とニアミスなだけで、一定期間に「全般的に」「全体的に」は使わないような気がします。
というか、一度、田中コーパスから移入した例文は何が何でもお化粧直しして存続させないとマズいのでしょうか？ Review NGのままお蔵入りさせて、適切な翻訳をゼロから投稿するだけでいいのではないでしょうか。外部サイトで既に誤訳を利用している場合であっても、そもそも内容を精査せず利用しているのは自己責任だと思いますし。

@MsFixer
>「全国的に」という地理的な表現とニアミスなだけで、一定期間に「全般的に」「全体的に」は使わないような気がします。
残念。出直します。:)

後半のご質問については、私が答えるべきかどうか定かではありませんが、私が認識している範囲内でお答えします。

>というか、一度、田中コーパスから移入した例文は何が何でもお化粧直しして存続させないとマズいのでしょうか？

そんなことないと思います。田中コーパスに限らず「 使えるものは使う」「変更して使えそうなものは使う」「使えないものは削除する」で、そのために、

(1) 自分が普段使っている言い回しであれば採用する。
(2) 自分は使ってないけど、文法的に正しく、他の人が採用するかもしれないと思うものは採用してくれる人が現れるまで待つか、若干の変更を加え採用する。
(3) こういう表現は文法的におかしいし、絶対にしないというものには、変更するか削除する。

作業を行っています。ただ、田中コーパス由来の文につては削除・変更する時は、独断でしないでくださいということです。

なお @change は「この文は変更する必要がありますよ」という意味になります。なので、具体的にどういう内容に変更すべきかを書いていただけると助かります。
田中コーパス由来の文については必ずしも変更できない時はありますが、前回のように改善される場合もあります。

>Review NGのままお蔵入りさせて、適切な翻訳をゼロから投稿するだけでいいのではないでしょうか。外部サイトで既に誤訳を利用している場合であっても、そもそも内容を精査せず利用しているのは自己責任だと思いますし。

私も、利用される側の責任だと思います。
ただ、Tatoebaプロジェクトは、システム開発者がシステム開発に専念できるようにコーパスを提供することが目的だと伺っています。データーベースの価値を上げる（不良データ率をさげ・信頼性のある・利用しやすいデーターベースにする）ためには、MsFixerさんが言われるように、正しい文をゼロから投稿し母体数を上げることも大切ですが、不良データを少なくすることも大切だと私は思います。特に日本語は。:)

@small_snow
詳しくご説明頂きありがとうございます。一般的な手続論ではなく、今回のケースに絞って私見を述べますと、今回は筋が悪すぎるのでお蔵入りが妥当な案件と考えます。
問題は on the whole の訳が明らかにおかしいだけでなく、has been (単純過去形 was ではなく完了形) の時制に含まれるニュアンスがつかみきれていないところにあります。英語と日本語それぞれに独特の言い回しがある天気用語であり、逐語訳は馴染みませんので、原文を「化粧直し」すべき案件ではないと判断しました。
むろん、私の行った意訳「天気の良い日が続いた」がイマイチとお感じで、むしろ田中コーパス訳をベースに化粧直しした方がマシだとお考えでしたら、話は別ですが。

@MsFixer

>むろん、私の行った意訳「天気の良い日が続いた」がイマイチとお感じで、むしろ田中コーパス訳をベースに化粧直しした方がマシだとお考えでしたら、話は別ですが。

そんなことないですよ。明確でいいと思います。

ところで、
[#10105437] 今週は天気の良い日が続いた。
と
[#4733187] Secara umum cuaca minggu ini selalu dalam keadaan baik.
のリンクはどうされますか？

もし、リンクされたいようなら、[#4733187] の翻訳に[#10105437]の日本語をコピペしたらできるのでやってみてください。できないようだったら、また声をかけてください。

@JimBreen
MsFixer and I think this Japanese sentence is unnatural. Also, she has added a new translation, so could you please check this one?

[#10105437] 今週は天気の良い日が続いた。

If you like MsFixer's translation, we will unlink this Japanese sentence from English and Indonesian and reuse it.

Thank you.

@small_snow
インドネシア語 (尼語) #4733187 は、こちらも言い回しが不自然なため、Review NGをつけています。ネイティブ2名からの指摘コメントURLを添えています。後ろから4つ目の単語 “selalu” (英語のalwaysの意味) が不要なので削る必要があります。

ですが実は、尼語 #4733188 (ID 1つ違い) で同じ筆者が “selalu” 抜きバージョンも投稿していて困っています。87の方を selalu 除去すると 88と同一エラーになりそうです。筆者は他の例文でもコメント欄での問いかけに3ヶ月応答なしのため、非アクティブユーザと思われます。

続いてリンクですが、日本語 #10105437 (私が新たに投稿した訳)、日本語 #190202 (田中コーパス誤訳) ともに、尼語にダイレクトリンクは適しませんので、後者はリンク解除の上で、英語 #27360 と尼語をダイレクトリンクさせるのが良いでしょう。英尼間はほぼ単純な逐語訳で、相性が良いです。

I have no problem with dropping the original sentence. I do wonder though if the proposed new Japanese sentence is really a suitable translation of "The weather this week has been good on the whole". The reason is that in English the "on the whole" part implies that some parts of the week had poor weather. I feel that the Japanese is saying something more like "The weather this week continued to be good."

#10105437 : minor updated. Thank you.

Thanks! I'm now using that new sentence along with #27360 as examples, and I've dropped #190202.

Thank you, both of you. I've unlinked from those sentences, and I've changed this sentence.

Tanaka Corpus タグを外しました。

@MsFixer
では、戻しますね。その上でまた処理の方法につていは管理人の方に今一度確認しますね。

Hmmm. A few comments:
- the Tanaka Corpus in its original form was declared by Tanaka to be in the Public Domain (despite it containing some sentences from proprietary works.) It was brought into CC coverage within Tatoeba as Public Domain concepts are problematic in France. I don't think the modification by @small_snow is much of an issue.
- I'm no longer using the #190202/#27360 pair in examples (i.e. as downloaded in the "wwwjdic.csv" file.) I'm using #10105437.

Since JimBreen isn't using this, and there are no linked translations, I think that if you feel the sentence isn't a good one, it would be OK to delete it.

> Deleting a sentence causes a dead link. And external users lose an opportunity to understand why this sentence isn’t good.

This isn't actually true. If you follow a link to a deleted sentence, you will get to a page with the logs on the right side of the page, and any comments left on the page.

I wonder if your understanding of "public domain" is correct. You might want to google it.

"Unless the author requests for deletion, just keep it." A curious notion. Back when the Tanaka Corpus was (only) in the Public Domain I deleted tens of thousands of sentences because they were effectively duplicates, spelling errors, etc. When something enters the Public Domain there are NO residual authors' rights. When the corpus was brought into the CC regime within Tatoeba it was partly to stop others from asserting rights over it. It wasn't to protect the past compilers who had long since abandoned any rights.
IMNSHO @small_snow was perfectly justified in amending or deleting such a sentence. The contents of the Tatoeba Project are a continuing and evolving work in progress.

I agree with Jim.

@MsFixer I believe you are mistaken about several aspects of copyright law.

Since Tatoeba is registered as an association under French law, French copyright law applies. Insofar as international copyright law applies, e.g. because France signed a treaty, this has already been reflected in French law, so I'll be citing from https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/...TA000006133323 in the following, adding a translation of the original French.

To establish some common ground, I'll start with a few things which I think you're right about.

1. Author's rights include moral rights: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/...TI000042814694

Article L111-1: L'auteur d'une oeuvre de l'esprit jouit sur cette oeuvre, du seul fait de sa création, d'un droit de propriété incorporelle exclusif et opposable à tous.

Ce droit comporte des attributs d'ordre intellectuel et moral ainsi que des attributs d'ordre patrimonial, qui sont déterminés par les livres Ier et III du présent code.

.... (abriged)

Article L111-1: The author of a work of the mind enjoys on this work, by the sole fact of this creation, an exclusive right of intangible property and enforceable against all.

This right includes attributes of an intellectual and moral order as well as attributes of a patrimonial order, which are determined by books I and III of this code.

---------------

2. Those rights exist even when the author is anonymous or pseudonymous: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/...TI000006278886

Article L113-6: Les auteurs des oeuvres pseudonymes et anonymes jouissent sur celles-ci des droits reconnus par l'article L. 111-1.

Ils sont représentés dans l'exercice de ces droits par l'éditeur ou le publicateur originaire, tant qu'ils n'ont pas fait connaître leur identité civile et justifié de leur qualité.

... (abridged)

Article L113-6: The authors of pseudonymous and anonymous works enjoy the rights over them recognized by article L. 111-1.

They are represented in the exercise of these rights by the original editor or publisher, as long as they have not revealed their civil identity and provided justification.

---------------

(In this case, the original publisher would be Prof. Tanaka.)

3. The author retains the right of withdrawal: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/...TI000006278894

Article L121-4: Nonobstant la cession de son droit d'exploitation, l'auteur, même postérieurement à la publication de son oeuvre, jouit d'un droit de repentir ou de retrait vis-à-vis du cessionnaire. Il ne peut toutefois exercer ce droit qu'à charge d'indemniser préalablement le cessionnaire du préjudice que ce repentir ou ce retrait peut lui causer. Lorsque, postérieurement à l'exercice de son droit de repentir ou de retrait, l'auteur décide de faire publier son oeuvre, il est tenu d'offrir par priorité ses droits d'exploitation au cessionnaire qu'il avait originairement choisi et aux conditions originairement déterminées.

Article L121-4: Notwithstanding the transfer of the right to exploitation, the author, even after the publication of the work, enjoys a right of repentance or withdrawal with respect to the assignee. However, this right may only be exercised on the condition of indemnifying the assignee beforehand for the damage that this repentance or withdrawal may cause. When, after exercising the right of repentance or withdrawal, the author decides to have the work published, the author is required to offer the right to exploitation as a priority to the assignee that was originally chosen and under the conditions originally determined.

---------------

4. The BY of CC-BY is intended to provide attribution to the author (the legally binding text here is https://creativecommons.org/lic...0/fr/legalcode but I'll just quote from the English summary https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ If you think it doesn't accurately reflect the content of the full license, we can discuss that later.)

Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

---------------

Now lets move on to the parts which I think you're wrong about.

> deleting is a violation of the moral rights

5. The fact that the author has the right of withdrawal (3.) does not mean that nobody else is allowed to delete a copy of the work. The author can require others to cease publishing the work, but not require them to *continue* publishing it. If there were such a right, it would be both incredibly inconvenient and would also have to be described explicitly in the legal code.

> the attribution requirement under CC-BY is fulfilled by the tag “Tanaka Corpus”. Once you overrode this page, you falsely attribute 今日はとてもいい天気だった。to Tanaka Corpus. The right of attribution (BY) is designed to protect authors by connecting their names with their ORIGINAL works. In some cases, MINOR edits are allowed without getting permission from the author. But, small_snow’s amendment is far beyond the exception regulated by copyright laws.

6. CC-BY allows exploiting the work by modifying it without limiting the scope of modifications: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

You are free to: ... Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
for any purpose, even commercially.

---------------

The attribution requirement (4.) is still fulfilled, since the changelog on the right side of the page clearly indicates what the original sentence from the Tanaka Corpus was and how it was subsequently adapted by small_snow.

I don't have a copy of the email you sent to team@tatoeba.org, but it has been leaked to me that it includes the following snippet:

> I would recommend Tatoeba admins to temporarily disable the “adopt” icon. I will explain my legal concern about adoption later.

I don't know what exactly you legal concern about adoption is, but I suspect it is unfounded. Adoption is just a Tatoeba-internal mechanism for reassigning who is responsible for taking care of a certain sentence. The whole concept of sentences having an "owner" could disappear tomorrow without any legal ramifications, since attribution is recorded in the changelog.

I'm not a lawyer and I'm definitely not Tatoeba's lawer, but I'm pretty sure my understanding of the legal situation is correct. If you think there are any flaws in my reasoning, feel free to point them out, preferably by referencing the relevant laws and regulations.

Hmmm. You'll be struggling to find any case law associated with alleged copyright infringements within documents under CC-BY, CC-SA, etc. The notion that people contributing to collaborative projects such as Tatoeba could go to court claiming copyright violation if anyone edited their contribution is simply laughable. I've been active in these sorts of projects for about 30 years, and until now I have never encountered claims that contributions were in some way protected by copyright and closed to edits by others.

BTW, earlier Yorwba wrote: "In this case, original publisher would be Prof. Tanaka." I'm not sure that is the case. In 2001 Tanaka handed out CDs containing the collections of sentences assembled by his students, and remarked that they were in the Public Domain (I'm quoting Prof. Christian Boitet who was present at the workshop.) I seriously doubt that any legal jurisdiction would regard Tanaka as the "publisher" of what has since been called the Tanaka Corpus. Declaring something to be in the Public Domain is not publishing.

Apart from tatoebaproject@googlegroups.com I'm not on any mailing list.

> You totally misunderstand the basics of copyright laws.

That is certainly possible. While I've tried to research this to the best of my ability, I might've missed a relevant paragraph or misinterpreted it in some way. In that case, it would be helpful if you could provide references to authoritative sources so that not just I, but also everyone else can realize their misunderstanding.

> In a nutsell, Tatoeba is not the copyright owner. Each sentence contributor (i.e. author) is the one.

Agreed. But that's not a problem, because every user licenses their contributions under CC-BY, which allows reproduction and modification, provided the attribution requirement is complied with, which we do.

> Once copyright infringement happens, the copyright owner files a case in a court in their country, not in France. .... French government doesn’t have jurisdictions outside their territories.

Neither does the court of a foreign country have jurisdiction in France. If someone won a judgment against Tatoeba in a foreign court, that judgment would be unenforceable. If they actually want to change what Tatoeba does, they should sue in a French court instead, based on the copyright protections that France extends to authors of foreign works.

> You need to refer to case laws of each country.

Could you cite relevant passages from the specific case law you're basing your legal analysis on?

There are a few misconceptions around about the history of the Tanaka Corpus and how it came to be included in the Tatoeba project. The background can be found at https://www.edrdg.org/wiki/index.php/Tanaka_Corpus in particular the first two paragraphs. Note that Prof. Tanaka died in 2003; several years before Trang started off Tatoeba.

The Corpus is not under my care; its contents are integrated into Tatoeba. My particular focus is on the ~150,000 Japanese-English sentence pairs for which word-level indices are being maintained to enable them to be linked to dictionary terms in various sites and apps. Many of these pairs are from the Tanaka Corpus but there are quite a few which have been added along the way. Because edits to these sentences impacts on the indexing, we have been drafting some guidelines on carrying out such edits: https://en.wiki.tatoeba.org/art...ow/tanakaedits

I have hidden the discussion, not because I thought it was dangerous, but because it was distracting. The conversation can still be carried on by other means.

Can you provide details of the "other means"? I know of the admins-only mailing list, and the little-used Google group.

日本語ネイティブの皆様へ:
議論脱線により上記コメントが全面非表示になっておりますが (管理者Alanさんの対応を支持します！)、この例文に直接関係する点のみ要約してお伝えします。

@small_snow さんと私 MsFixer 共に「一般に」という言い回しは不自然と判断。よって翻訳元の英文からリンクが外されました。

@small_snow さんから改訳案が2つ提示されていますので、賛否のご意見またはさらなる改訳案があればコメントをお寄せ下さい。
A案: 「今週は全般的に天気がよかった。」
B案: 「今週は全体的に天気がよかった。」

私は既に改訳案にやや難色を示しておりますが、あくまで個人的な感覚です。第三者の忌憚ないご意見をお待ちしています！
以下、私見です。天気予報で「全国的に」(晴れ渡る等) は使いますが、「全般的に」「全体的に」は耳にしたことがないからです。また英文は単純過去 was ではなく完了形 has been を使っていますが、そのニュアンスが抜けていると感じたからです。

残念ながら私は意訳派なので、今回のような逐語訳を改善するのはあまり得意ではありません。元の「一般に今週の天気はよかった」の形を大きく崩さない逐語訳の範囲内で、改善案をご議論下さい。もし大きく崩した意訳が思いついた方がいらっしゃれば、私が #10105437 を投稿したように、別IDでお願いします。

Jim, by "other means", I meant private message. If you'd like to exchange e-mail addresses by private message, and then carry on a discussion via e-mail, that's another option. Private messages don't allow one to automatically keep a thread going between multiple recipients, nor do they allow attachments, but they might be sufficient for what you want to discuss.

On the other hand, if you just want to discuss the content of the sentence, comments on the sentence should be fine.

I will be deleting this sentence. Considering that it is unnatural and that there's a significant amount of off-topic comments, I think it's best to just delete it. It would be unpractical to replace it now by a natural sentence as it won't benefit from a "clean" comment section.

I want to confirm that @small_snow did nothing wrong early on, by editing the sentence and removing the "Tanaka Corpus" tag. There's no legal issue with that. I have provided more explanations on the Wall:
https://tatoeba.org/en/wall/sho...#message_37243

I will also display again the messages that were hidden, since the purpose of hiding them was mostly to prevent this section to become an endless off-topic thread. If anyone wants to argue about copyright laws, they can now do it on the Wall. I don't expect more comments here.