I think half of our problems would be gone if we could 'split' Tatoeba into two separate sections. One would be for native speakers to translate into their native language only (the definitive 'website'), and the other one would be for learners to translate into foreign languages. Once the translations by non-natives are checked by native speakers, they would be exported to the definitive database. Many people come to Tatoeba in order to practice (or maybe learn) a foreign language, and the actual system doesn't quite allow that. Yes, I know that's not the 'original' purpose of Tatoeba, but there are many advantages: 1) we would give those people the opportunity to practice a language without causing any harm to the database; 2) only interested members would have to go through non-native sentences to help other users by checking them; 3) we would attract more users, because many people are looking for that resource; 4) we would have more sentences, since more users would try to write sentences in foreign languages; 5) Tatoeba would be more useful and unique.
I think it's worth trying.
I think it's a great idea. For example, many of the contributors to the Swedish corpus don't speak Swedish as their native language. Reading through and correcting takes time that I think a lot of people would rather spend on contributing themselves. Personally, I don't have anything against proofreading sentences, but such a system that you've proposed would be very useful, because it wouldn't force unwilling users to proofread all the time. Of course, this is just one of the pros.
(Native speakers' sentences also need proofreading of course, but not to the same extent.)
One question: How do you keep people who should use Tatoeba 2 from using Tatoeba 1? And, if Tatoeba 1 is built on the ideal of the original Tatoeba, won't it suffer the same fate as the original Tatoeba (i.e. be split in two, if this is done)?
There wouldn't be two 'Tatoebae', but two sections. And you wouldn't have to create a new account to use one section or another. There would be a link in the home page to redirect you to the 'foreign section' (maybe in the 'Contribute' menu). Some changes would have to be made, though. We would have to include that in the FAQ and make it visible to new users.
It would be good if we could collect other ideas from the community...
Fine, but same question. How do you stop users who should be contributing to Section 2 from contributing to Section 1?
I agree that it would work if you assume that every new user will read the guide beforehand, understand it, and follow it. But so would the current Tatoeba.
> How do you stop users who should be contributing to Section 2 from contributing to Section 1?
There are two possibilities, I think:
As for #2, each member would have to indicate their native language(s) in their profile (I still think that should be a requirement to sign in). For example, if I'm from Brazil, I'll be able to write only sentences in Portuguese in Section 1. If someone lies, it would be easy to tell.
I want to make it clear that I know nothing about programming.
I support your idea.
I think it wouldn't even really be "two sections", but just a bunch of additional options. One could click of "Learners' sentences" and get those displayed, then one could easily correct them, vetting them OK afterwards, as you said. One could also, as a regular contributor, choose to get all sentences displayed, with learners' sentences displayed in red or blue (or whatever) so I can do what I always do: translate random sentences, and when I spot a learner's sentence in a language I can correct, then I will do that. If someone dislikes the idea, they could simply turn off that option (or leave it off, as it's probably off by default) and will never see any learner's sentences on Tatoeba.
I think it's a great idea and I would really like to help people with German, Esperanto and Klingon. It also might get me less shy about posting sentences in English, Chinese or Thai, because I wouldn't be afraid that they might be wrong.
A new user could specify what language(s) he is sure about. I would specify this for German, Esperanto and Klingon. Sacredceltic would do this for French and English and probably also Esperanto, someone else might only trust his own English... every other language for the user would be a "Learner's Sentence" by default, except if the user switches this off for a particular sentence because it comes from a native open source.
The selection of "native/fluent" languages might even be a compulsory option for new users. And these languages could be displayed automatically in the user's profile. This way we'd solve the problem that many people are simply too lazy to write their languages in their profiles.
I'm not a programmer, but this sounds doable for me. It's definitely worth considering. And a big plus: for people who oppose this system, nothing would change.
> I think it's a great idea and I would really like to help people with German, Esperanto and Klingon. It also might get me less shy about posting sentences in English, Chinese or Thai, because I wouldn't be afraid that they might be wrong.
You got the idea. That's why I decided to write about it, too. And your suggestions would work very well!
I fully support such a development. It sounds consistent and easy to maintain and would solve many issues on Tatoeba.
One of the main issues I see, with the current service, is new visitors that are experts and never join Tatoeba when they spot low quality sentences. They get deterred and we miss them forever.
If Vortarulo's setting would be defaulted and explained for new visitors - I think the colour codes for sentences are a great idea - I think this problem would be solved, as they would immediately understand that learning is not to the detriment of quality, on the contrary...
your idea is in phase with mine :) see my post on the other thread
I know I've written it quite fast, and I'll try to rewrite it in a better and clearer way
I also support your idea, Alex.
But what if there are only two or three contributors from the same language (or even less)? And what if there is disagreement on some of the sentences? (i.e., some of the contributors think that it's not a good way of expressing the idea in their native language)?
I don't think I understand your first question, Eldad.
> And what if there is disagreement on some of the sentences? (i.e., some of the contributors think that it's not a good way of expressing the idea in their native language)?
Well, there is disagreement even on sentences that were written by native speakers... that's part of Tatoeba, isn't it?
Oh, sorry, it seems I got mixed up between your suggestion and another one that preceded it.
Those who are native speakers will (according to your suggestion) write in one section, while others, for whom it would be a foreign language, will post their contributions in another section, and that will have to be confirmed - before being transferred to the native speaker's section.
Did I get you right?
And, suppose a certain native speaker okeys a sentence, while another NS disapproves of it?
> Did I get you right?
> And, suppose a certain native speaker okeys a sentence, while another NS disapproves of it?
Then we would follow the same procedure as before: they would have to prove their point of view, or a third native speaker could give his opinion.
Vortarulo's suggestions are very worth reading. Maybe they would be easier to implement: