Our data is released under various Creative Commons licenses.More information
If you love this content, please consider a donation.
Tips
Before asking a question, make sure to read the FAQ.
We aim to maintain a healthy atmosphere for civilized discussions. Please read our rules against bad behavior.
Latest messages
Wall (5,558 threads)
52 minutes ago
Currently, we have an informal (and, as far as I can tell, undocumented) guideline that corpus maintainers should wait two weeks after a sentence is flagged for correction before modifying, deleting, or unlinking it. The goal of this "grace period" is to give sentence owners the first chance to address the criticism in the way that they prefer. Clearly, we don't want a grace period that is too short (since owners won't have time to respond). On the other hand, too long a grace period makes it hard for corpus maintainers to clean up sentences. One thing that makes the cleanup task especially difficult is that when you're looking at a list of sentences with, say, the "@change" tag, it is impossible to see the dates not only when the tags were left, but when the last comment (if any) was left on the sentence. Changing this would require changing the user interface, so it would take some time and discussion.
For now, I'd like to focus on the length of the grace period. Would people mind if it were shortened to, say one week? Or three days? To put it another way, how long does it generally take for you to get the opportunity to respond to feedback on a sentence? And if someone modifies the sentence after the grace period, but before you get a chance to do it yourself, does it generally bother you, or do you usually appreciate it (or have no opinion)?
For now, I'd like to focus on the length of the grace period. Would people mind if it were shortened to, say one week? Or three days? To put it another way, how long does it generally take for you to get the opportunity to respond to feedback on a sentence? And if someone modifies the sentence after the grace period, but before you get a chance to do it yourself, does it generally bother you, or do you usually appreciate it (or have no opinion)?
0 minutes ago
Minun puolestani minun lauseitani sa muokata kysymättä ja ilmoittamatta. Toki, jos olen tehnyt tietyn virheen useaan kertaan, arvostan tietoa siitä, jotta voin oppia välttämään kyseistä virhettä tulevaisuudessa.
Muiden lauseiden ollessa kyseessä jotkut muokkaavat niitä muutaman päivän kuluessa, toiset eivät ikinä. Suomenkielisiä lauseita kirjoittaa niin harva, että nimet oppii tuntemaan. Jos käyttäjä ei vastaa koskaan kommentteihin, vaikuttaa typerältä odottaa pari viikkoa jokaisen lauseen kohdalla erikseen. Tämä ei päde jos käyttäjää ei tunne, tai jos on epävarma siitä, että onko lause oikein vai ei.
...
I do not mind others editing my sentences. No notice or forewarning necessary.
If a user never responds to comments, it does not seem to be useful to wait for two weeks with every sentence.
Muiden lauseiden ollessa kyseessä jotkut muokkaavat niitä muutaman päivän kuluessa, toiset eivät ikinä. Suomenkielisiä lauseita kirjoittaa niin harva, että nimet oppii tuntemaan. Jos käyttäjä ei vastaa koskaan kommentteihin, vaikuttaa typerältä odottaa pari viikkoa jokaisen lauseen kohdalla erikseen. Tämä ei päde jos käyttäjää ei tunne, tai jos on epävarma siitä, että onko lause oikein vai ei.
...
I do not mind others editing my sentences. No notice or forewarning necessary.
If a user never responds to comments, it does not seem to be useful to wait for two weeks with every sentence.
9 hours ago - 9 hours ago
To the administrators
While waiting to remedy the confusion - prejudicial to Kabyle - noticed and noted by several contributors, could you not - at least - change slightly the icon of the team ber by putting the characters BER on the left?
PS: I persist, of course, in my idea that the change of the Kabyle icon was a bad decision.
Who can do the most, can the least.
Greetings.
PS: This message is a personal initiative and commits only my person.
📲
Aux administrateurs
En attendant de remédier à la confusion - préjudiciable au kabyle -- constatée et relevée par plusieurs contributeurs, ne pourriez-vous pas - tout au moins -modifier légèrement l'icône de l'équipe ber en mettant les caractères BER à gauche?
PS: Je persiste, bien entendu, dans mon idée que le changement de l' icône kabyle était une mauvaise décision.
Qui peut le plus, peut le moins.
Salutations.
PS: Ce message est une initiative personnelle et n'engage que ma personne.
While waiting to remedy the confusion - prejudicial to Kabyle - noticed and noted by several contributors, could you not - at least - change slightly the icon of the team ber by putting the characters BER on the left?
PS: I persist, of course, in my idea that the change of the Kabyle icon was a bad decision.
Who can do the most, can the least.
Greetings.
PS: This message is a personal initiative and commits only my person.
📲
Aux administrateurs
En attendant de remédier à la confusion - préjudiciable au kabyle -- constatée et relevée par plusieurs contributeurs, ne pourriez-vous pas - tout au moins -modifier légèrement l'icône de l'équipe ber en mettant les caractères BER à gauche?
PS: Je persiste, bien entendu, dans mon idée que le changement de l' icône kabyle était une mauvaise décision.
Qui peut le plus, peut le moins.
Salutations.
PS: Ce message est une initiative personnelle et n'engage que ma personne.
5 hours ago
L'idéal est qu'ils mettent tous les drapeaux d'Afrique du nord (Algérie, Maroc, Mauritanie, Mali, Niger, Tunisie, Libye, Burkina Faso) pour la langue berbère. Et reprendre le drapeau initial de la kabylie pour la langue Kabyle. C'est plus sensé en matière d'identité visuelle.
3 hours ago
or perhaps use the original flag by Amastan for the Berber language
and use something like this for the Kabyle language: https://ibb.co/vjMKTy8
That would make it easier to distinguish between the two flags.
and use something like this for the Kabyle language: https://ibb.co/vjMKTy8
That would make it easier to distinguish between the two flags.
yesterday - yesterday
@belkacem77
Dans ma réponse à ton commentaire, je t'ai signalé que
quand j'ai écrit une phrase kabyle sous détection automatique,
elle a été attribuée à BER.
Et ils te disent qu'il n'y aura pas de confusion!
Ni de priorité "indue"...
Quelle misère !
Est-ce un BUG ou une blague ?
That's all folks!
Really!
Dans ma réponse à ton commentaire, je t'ai signalé que
quand j'ai écrit une phrase kabyle sous détection automatique,
elle a été attribuée à BER.
Et ils te disent qu'il n'y aura pas de confusion!
Ni de priorité "indue"...
Quelle misère !
Est-ce un BUG ou une blague ?
That's all folks!
Really!
5 hours ago
Ce n'est pas un bug. étant donné que le corpus berbère contient plus de 95% des phrases kabyles, le modèle de détection de langue est donc proche de celui du kabyle. Et comme il y'a plus de phrases en berbère qu'en kabyle, le système le propose en premier. Si le corpus berbère contenait les autres langues berbères, il aura un modèle propre à lui.
Pour éviter cette situation, soit les autres berbères introduisent des phrases dans leur langue pour que le modèle s'éloigne du kabyle, soit tu choisis d'emblée la langue kabyle, soit ils remettent le drapeau kabyle pour mieux repérer la langue.
En tout cas, ils nous ont foutu la pagaille depuis le changement du drapeau à cause des islamistes algériens.
Pour éviter cette situation, soit les autres berbères introduisent des phrases dans leur langue pour que le modèle s'éloigne du kabyle, soit tu choisis d'emblée la langue kabyle, soit ils remettent le drapeau kabyle pour mieux repérer la langue.
En tout cas, ils nous ont foutu la pagaille depuis le changement du drapeau à cause des islamistes algériens.
2019-09-05 09:15
*What to do with elliptical expressions*
A fine example, but let us discuss the general case: https://tatoeba.org/dan/sentences/show/748252 , or "If I had brushed my teeth..."
I personally have a mild preference for allowing such in the corpus, but only a mild one.
* They might not be complete sentences (the example is not), in the sense of a having a main clause and maybe some other stuff, since the main clause can be implied, as in the example.
On the other hand, there are many other things, such as greetings and other interjections, which are also not complete sentences, but still an established part of the corpus.
* They are valid utterances that are and can be used in conversations and in literacy. Often the context implies the omitted part of the sentence.
One could, as always, say that the context should be added as a part of the sentence. But most sentences and "sentences" are always improved by adding context and more material, yet this is not a corpus of books.
* They add marginal linguistic content, since the ellipsis is an accepted part of many languages. Also, based on the linked sentence, there seems to be some variety in how the ellipsis is expressed, though not much. (Japanese is different and Spanish may be different, if having the spaces there is right.)
Summarising:
I do not see a compelling reason for removing such utterances, though also little reason to encourage contribution of them.
But please provide other perspectives on this.
A fine example, but let us discuss the general case: https://tatoeba.org/dan/sentences/show/748252 , or "If I had brushed my teeth..."
I personally have a mild preference for allowing such in the corpus, but only a mild one.
* They might not be complete sentences (the example is not), in the sense of a having a main clause and maybe some other stuff, since the main clause can be implied, as in the example.
On the other hand, there are many other things, such as greetings and other interjections, which are also not complete sentences, but still an established part of the corpus.
* They are valid utterances that are and can be used in conversations and in literacy. Often the context implies the omitted part of the sentence.
One could, as always, say that the context should be added as a part of the sentence. But most sentences and "sentences" are always improved by adding context and more material, yet this is not a corpus of books.
* They add marginal linguistic content, since the ellipsis is an accepted part of many languages. Also, based on the linked sentence, there seems to be some variety in how the ellipsis is expressed, though not much. (Japanese is different and Spanish may be different, if having the spaces there is right.)
Summarising:
I do not see a compelling reason for removing such utterances, though also little reason to encourage contribution of them.
But please provide other perspectives on this.
2019-09-05 21:59
> I do not see a compelling reason for removing such utterances, though also little reason to encourage contribution of them.
I agree with you. I don't add them myself. However, I wouldn't remove one unless there were some other issue with it.
I agree with you. I don't add them myself. However, I wouldn't remove one unless there were some other issue with it.
2019-09-06 05:37 - 2019-09-06 05:38
> * They are valid utterances that are and can be used in conversations and in literacy. Often the context implies the omitted part of the sentence.
This problem can be solved by following the first rule on our Rules and Guidelines page.
https://en.wiki.tatoeba.org/art...how/guidelines
This shows one example of how context can be added to show usage of non-sentence expressions.
Can you think of a dialogue in which the item at #748252 would naturally fit?
If so, I'd suggest that you add it, so we have a good example.
This problem can be solved by following the first rule on our Rules and Guidelines page.
https://en.wiki.tatoeba.org/art...how/guidelines
This shows one example of how context can be added to show usage of non-sentence expressions.
Can you think of a dialogue in which the item at #748252 would naturally fit?
If so, I'd suggest that you add it, so we have a good example.
2019-09-06 07:43
For this particular sentence, I would imagine a situation where there is something wrong with one's teeth, and this could have been avoided by brushing them. Though I would add the word "only" to the sentence. I'll leave writing natural English dialogue to those who are more skilled at it.
Could you be more explicit about the harm the "sentence" is causing so as to merit its deletion?
Could you be more explicit about the harm the "sentence" is causing so as to merit its deletion?
2019-09-06 07:51
(I added a couple of uses of ellipsis but with unrelated meaning. https://tatoeba.org/dan/sentences/show/8166172 and https://tatoeba.org/dan/sentences/show/8166177
The first is more natural than the example here and the second should be complete by any measure.)
The first is more natural than the example here and the second should be complete by any measure.)
yesterday
@CK
In some languages, e. g. in German, French and Kabyle,
there are many averbal sentences:
Wie der Land, so der Mensch.
Am tmurt, am yemdanen-is.
Am tmurt, am imawlan.
Tel pays, tel peuple.
Chaque pays est à l'image de ses habitants.
Each country is in the image of its inhabitants.
Such a country, such a people. (?)
Voir, please see:
0.4.2 Prédication averbale, relation prédicative, prédicats averbaux ...
In:
https://www.theses.fr/2015USPCA083.pdf#page30
In some languages, e. g. in German, French and Kabyle,
there are many averbal sentences:
Wie der Land, so der Mensch.
Am tmurt, am yemdanen-is.
Am tmurt, am imawlan.
Tel pays, tel peuple.
Chaque pays est à l'image de ses habitants.
Each country is in the image of its inhabitants.
Such a country, such a people. (?)
Voir, please see:
0.4.2 Prédication averbale, relation prédicative, prédicats averbaux ...
In:
https://www.theses.fr/2015USPCA083.pdf#page30
2019-09-06 07:47
From the comment thread of the sentence, by @CK:
"Note that since there is no context, the Japanese could refer to more than one tense and the subject could also be something other than "I.""
This is not very relevant. For example, many English sentences with "you" do not have sufficient context to determine if it is the singular, the plural or the general "you", or the degree of formality. This leads to several different translations in many other languages.
"Note that since there is no context, the Japanese could refer to more than one tense and the subject could also be something other than "I.""
This is not very relevant. For example, many English sentences with "you" do not have sufficient context to determine if it is the singular, the plural or the general "you", or the degree of formality. This leads to several different translations in many other languages.
2019-09-06 08:16
Further by @CK, copied here because I see it as relevant for the general case:
"It's "relevant" because this is not complete and the context is not given, so this is not a complete thought. On the other hand, complete sentences are felt to be "complete", at least in some sense, so alternate translations make more sense, doesn't it?"
I do not see, yet, the hard line between this and "Take a shower before you go swimming." in terms of ambiguity. (I obviously see the hard line in terms of grammar.)
Both could be uttered in a number of different circumstances. The grammatically incomplete example at least specifies the subject, whereas the alternative, above, might be a general principle of hygiene, or something said to a single person or to several people.
Is the completeness here a matter of grammar, or is there somethign else at play?
"It's "relevant" because this is not complete and the context is not given, so this is not a complete thought. On the other hand, complete sentences are felt to be "complete", at least in some sense, so alternate translations make more sense, doesn't it?"
I do not see, yet, the hard line between this and "Take a shower before you go swimming." in terms of ambiguity. (I obviously see the hard line in terms of grammar.)
Both could be uttered in a number of different circumstances. The grammatically incomplete example at least specifies the subject, whereas the alternative, above, might be a general principle of hygiene, or something said to a single person or to several people.
Is the completeness here a matter of grammar, or is there somethign else at play?
2019-09-06 07:56
Relevant blog post from Trang, as linked by @brauchinet in the comments:
https://blog.tatoeba.org/2010/0...f-content.html
A quote:
"
As far as I'm concerned, I think Tatoeba can handle a loose definition of "sentence". We don't strictly need to have an entity with at least a verb. To me, when spoken, everything is a sentence. When written, the main difference between a sentence and a non-sentence is punctuation. That's all. For the rest, as long as people can imagine context where the "sentence" can be expressed, then it's a sentence.
So yes, I'm roughly saying that you can take all the words in the dictionary, add punctuation and perhaps a capital letter, you'd turn it into a sentence. I don't encourage it because it's not useful (dictionaries do that already), but one-word sentences are still tolerated. I'll trust people's common sense for adding only one-word sentences that are significant (for instance, "Hello" is, "House" isn't).
"
https://blog.tatoeba.org/2010/0...f-content.html
A quote:
"
As far as I'm concerned, I think Tatoeba can handle a loose definition of "sentence". We don't strictly need to have an entity with at least a verb. To me, when spoken, everything is a sentence. When written, the main difference between a sentence and a non-sentence is punctuation. That's all. For the rest, as long as people can imagine context where the "sentence" can be expressed, then it's a sentence.
So yes, I'm roughly saying that you can take all the words in the dictionary, add punctuation and perhaps a capital letter, you'd turn it into a sentence. I don't encourage it because it's not useful (dictionaries do that already), but one-word sentences are still tolerated. I'll trust people's common sense for adding only one-word sentences that are significant (for instance, "Hello" is, "House" isn't).
"
2 days ago - 2 days ago
UPDATE: The disputed sentence is gone, with no announcement in the sentence discussion or the well, in spite of the unresolved dispute here.
I do not feel terribly sorry for the sentence, but the procedure does not look very good:
There was a discussion about what to do with these types of elliptical sentences.
Consensus was not reached.
A particular case of elliptical sentences was resolved silently (without any notice).
I think that it would be a very good idea to inform of the action taken in these cases. Here the sentence was not particularly important and people were not particularly passionate about it, as far as I see, but I do think that consistency in handling disputed sentences would be good. And sentences where people are more committed should certainly be handled with more communication.
I do not feel terribly sorry for the sentence, but the procedure does not look very good:
There was a discussion about what to do with these types of elliptical sentences.
Consensus was not reached.
A particular case of elliptical sentences was resolved silently (without any notice).
I think that it would be a very good idea to inform of the action taken in these cases. Here the sentence was not particularly important and people were not particularly passionate about it, as far as I see, but I do think that consistency in handling disputed sentences would be good. And sentences where people are more committed should certainly be handled with more communication.
yesterday
It turns out that in this case, the deletion was the result of negligence rather than an intention to deal with the sentence silently.
Basically what can happen is:
- I'm a corpus maintainer checking sentences that have been tagged @delete.
- I see a sentence that doesn't sound very natural.
- Since I'm able to delete the sentence directly from the tags page, I just delete the sentence without checking the comments.
These things will for sure happen again unless we set up some technical restrictions, such as removing the delete button from all the pages except the sentence's page. This would increases the chances that someone who deletes a sentence is aware of that there is an unresolved dispute. But this might be inconvenient for corpus maintainers too...
For that particular sentence, I'm 99% sure that the sentence was orphan prior to the deletion, which makes it a lot more likely to be deleted. Corpus maintainers usually don't think too long about bad orphan sentences. I doubt the same neglicence (i.e. not checking the comments) would have happened if the sentence belonged to someone.
So all in all, ovisouly, we should be transparent as of why we delete a disputed sentence. We should not do this without explaination. But if there is a dispute on a orphan sentence, then whoever cares for the survival of the sentence should adopt it while it's being disputed. It will reduce the chances that it gets deleted out of negligence.
Basically what can happen is:
- I'm a corpus maintainer checking sentences that have been tagged @delete.
- I see a sentence that doesn't sound very natural.
- Since I'm able to delete the sentence directly from the tags page, I just delete the sentence without checking the comments.
These things will for sure happen again unless we set up some technical restrictions, such as removing the delete button from all the pages except the sentence's page. This would increases the chances that someone who deletes a sentence is aware of that there is an unresolved dispute. But this might be inconvenient for corpus maintainers too...
For that particular sentence, I'm 99% sure that the sentence was orphan prior to the deletion, which makes it a lot more likely to be deleted. Corpus maintainers usually don't think too long about bad orphan sentences. I doubt the same neglicence (i.e. not checking the comments) would have happened if the sentence belonged to someone.
So all in all, ovisouly, we should be transparent as of why we delete a disputed sentence. We should not do this without explaination. But if there is a dispute on a orphan sentence, then whoever cares for the survival of the sentence should adopt it while it's being disputed. It will reduce the chances that it gets deleted out of negligence.
yesterday
Merci for figuring that out. The sentence itself was not particularly special, so I do not feel much was lost.
yesterday - yesterday
There are still many elliptical expressions from the early years of Tatoeba. Now they are against the rules because we want complete sentences, see https://en.wiki.tatoeba.org/art...ow/guidelines. If you manage to make those elliptical expressions, which are often bad examples by themselves, part of larger contributions, then they often make very good examples:
"In the kitchen." (Bad. Not allowed.) → "Where's Granny?" "In the kitchen." (Complete.)
"An apple." (Bad. Not allowed.) → "What's that fruit you're holding there in your hand?" "An apple. Have you never seen one?" (Complete, more interesting, thus better.)
The dialogue often turns out to be an easy way to make them work.
See also Alan's guide to writing good sentences: https://en.wiki.tatoeba.org/art...ood-sentences.
"In the kitchen." (Bad. Not allowed.) → "Where's Granny?" "In the kitchen." (Complete.)
"An apple." (Bad. Not allowed.) → "What's that fruit you're holding there in your hand?" "An apple. Have you never seen one?" (Complete, more interesting, thus better.)
The dialogue often turns out to be an easy way to make them work.
See also Alan's guide to writing good sentences: https://en.wiki.tatoeba.org/art...ood-sentences.
yesterday
ellipsis_at_the_end_of_items_2019-10-13.txt
These are all the items ending with "..." in last week's exported file. This doesn't include items in languages that use a different character set, such as Japanese.
http://tatoeba.byethost3.com/el...2019-10-13.txt
Depending on your browser, you may need to download it and load it into something that recognizes Unicode.
These are all the items ending with "..." in last week's exported file. This doesn't include items in languages that use a different character set, such as Japanese.
http://tatoeba.byethost3.com/el...2019-10-13.txt
Depending on your browser, you may need to download it and load it into something that recognizes Unicode.
yesterday
Her eksemplet var mer lik "Hvis jeg ikke hadde vasket tennene..." enn "I køkkenet." eller "Eple.".
Jeg synes at "Eple." og liknende bør gjøres røde, så at de ikke oversettes videre, mens vrøvl fra Voltaire-bot og liknende bør fjernes.
Jeg synes at eksemplet her er av den slags som kunne findes i boka eller brukes når man taler, så det er fint, selv om det ikke er idealt. Alle setningene kan forbedres med å legge til kontekst.
Det samme med Tom og Mary -setningene - det er så mange at det ikke er idealt å legge til flere, men det kan gjøres fortsatt.
Jeg synes at "Eple." og liknende bør gjøres røde, så at de ikke oversettes videre, mens vrøvl fra Voltaire-bot og liknende bør fjernes.
Jeg synes at eksemplet her er av den slags som kunne findes i boka eller brukes når man taler, så det er fint, selv om det ikke er idealt. Alle setningene kan forbedres med å legge til kontekst.
Det samme med Tom og Mary -setningene - det er så mange at det ikke er idealt å legge til flere, men det kan gjøres fortsatt.
yesterday - yesterday
feature request: button for copying an entire sentence
Sometimes for diverse reasons one would like to quickly copy a sentence. If there exists a button (like the one for play sound) to quickly copy the sentence, it would be very handy.
Especially, when one would like to copy a sentence from devices without mouse (like many phones or tablets) the copying task is not very easy.
Sometimes for diverse reasons one would like to quickly copy a sentence. If there exists a button (like the one for play sound) to quickly copy the sentence, it would be very handy.
Especially, when one would like to copy a sentence from devices without mouse (like many phones or tablets) the copying task is not very easy.
yesterday
this feature already exists. You have to activate it from the settings page
yesterday
Ezeket a köménypatrióta mondatokat egyáltalán van aki fordítja?
(Most nem az enyéimre gondolok, hanem azokra, amikről mintáztam.)
(Most nem az enyéimre gondolok, hanem azokra, amikről mintáztam.)
yesterday
Hva betyr "köménypatrióta"? Google oversetter det ikke så bra; "kumina isänmaallisia" på finsk gir ingen mening, "kuminapatriotiske" på norsk er ikke så enkel å forstå, og engelsk "cumin patriotic" det samme. Den danske "spidskpatriotiske" kunne bety, at setningene er kjempepatriotiske. Er dette meningen?
(Kanskje kunne du legge til noe setninger med "köménypatrióta" til Tatoeba?)
(Kanskje kunne du legge til noe setninger med "köménypatrióta" til Tatoeba?)
2019-09-14 01:39
https://tatoeba.org/fra/user/profile/LINGUISTE
Toutes ses phrases me semblent avoir été écrites en mode singe intelligent. Beaucoup d'entre elles n'ont aucun sens. Malheureusement, comme à chaque fois, certaines d'entre elles sont correctes.
Je suggère de bloquer ces phrases pour éviter que des gens traduisent n'importe quoi.
Toutes ses phrases me semblent avoir été écrites en mode singe intelligent. Beaucoup d'entre elles n'ont aucun sens. Malheureusement, comme à chaque fois, certaines d'entre elles sont correctes.
Je suggère de bloquer ces phrases pour éviter que des gens traduisent n'importe quoi.
2019-09-14 12:00 - 2019-09-14 12:01
+1
2019-09-15 19:51
Est-ce qu'il y a vraiment un problème à les laisser ouvertes aux traductions et laisser chaque contributeur décider par eux-même quelles sont les phrases qui méritent d'être traduites?
On n'a pas vraiment besoin de forcer les choses. À vue d'oeil, seule une minorité de ces phrases ont été traduites.
Il faudrait d'abord voir si des phrases qui n'ont aucun sens ont été traduites. Et si oui, il faudrait consulter les traducteurs pour avoir leur avis: est-ce qu'ils ont juste traduit en mode auto-pilote ou est-ce qu'ils ont traduit parce que la phrase originale leur a servi à quelque chose?
On n'a pas vraiment besoin de forcer les choses. À vue d'oeil, seule une minorité de ces phrases ont été traduites.
Il faudrait d'abord voir si des phrases qui n'ont aucun sens ont été traduites. Et si oui, il faudrait consulter les traducteurs pour avoir leur avis: est-ce qu'ils ont juste traduit en mode auto-pilote ou est-ce qu'ils ont traduit parce que la phrase originale leur a servi à quelque chose?
2019-09-16 09:31
Oooh que oui, il y a un intérêt.
Je me suis occupé de milliers de phrases ophelines et de phrases clairement pas en français correct, et oui, il y a un intérêt. Je suis certain que si on demande l'avis d'AlanF_US, il sera d'accord avec moi.
Le problème c'est que des gens qui croient comprendre la phrase la traduisent dans ce qu'ils croient comprendre. Et comme souvent, ce ne sont pas des natifs français, ils pensent que des erreurs qui sonnent bien dans leur langue ne posent pas de problème.
Un exemple frappant serait par exemple « Je te serre ta main. » qui n'est clairement pas correct, mais qui se traduit tel quel dans beaucoup de langues.
Un autre problème sont toutes les phrases de Maxence par exemple, qui à l'inverse ont d'abord été traductions (horribles) de phrases espagnoles. Le problème surgit quand des traductions portugaises arrivent, parce que la phrase incorrect française fait sens telle quelle en portugais.
Et des exemples comme ça, y en aurait plein. Donc oui, forcer les choses ça peut avoir du bon. Par exemple, en s'arrangeant pour que si un doublon se fait fusionner qu'il appartienne à l'utilisateur qui n'est pas dans le rouge (ou le plus récent, ou autre), c'est juste une suggestion.
Je me suis occupé de milliers de phrases ophelines et de phrases clairement pas en français correct, et oui, il y a un intérêt. Je suis certain que si on demande l'avis d'AlanF_US, il sera d'accord avec moi.
Le problème c'est que des gens qui croient comprendre la phrase la traduisent dans ce qu'ils croient comprendre. Et comme souvent, ce ne sont pas des natifs français, ils pensent que des erreurs qui sonnent bien dans leur langue ne posent pas de problème.
Un exemple frappant serait par exemple « Je te serre ta main. » qui n'est clairement pas correct, mais qui se traduit tel quel dans beaucoup de langues.
Un autre problème sont toutes les phrases de Maxence par exemple, qui à l'inverse ont d'abord été traductions (horribles) de phrases espagnoles. Le problème surgit quand des traductions portugaises arrivent, parce que la phrase incorrect française fait sens telle quelle en portugais.
Et des exemples comme ça, y en aurait plein. Donc oui, forcer les choses ça peut avoir du bon. Par exemple, en s'arrangeant pour que si un doublon se fait fusionner qu'il appartienne à l'utilisateur qui n'est pas dans le rouge (ou le plus récent, ou autre), c'est juste une suggestion.
2019-09-17 01:32 - 2019-09-17 01:33
I don't read French, so this is from Google Translate.
The problem is that people who think they understand the sentence translate it into what they think they understand. And as often, they are not French natives, they think that errors that sound good in their language do not pose a problem.
Additional comment.
This is also one of the primary problems with non-native sentence contributions, which is one reason I keep trying to get members to contribute in their own native languages. We could likely drastically improve the quality of our corpus if all members would do so.
The problem is that people who think they understand the sentence translate it into what they think they understand. And as often, they are not French natives, they think that errors that sound good in their language do not pose a problem.
Additional comment.
This is also one of the primary problems with non-native sentence contributions, which is one reason I keep trying to get members to contribute in their own native languages. We could likely drastically improve the quality of our corpus if all members would do so.
2019-09-17 12:09 - 2019-09-17 12:16
> This is also one of the primary problems with non-native sentence contributions,
> which is one reason I keep trying to get members to contribute in their own native
> languages. We could likely drastically improve the quality of our corpus if all
> members would do so.
This is true when one adds original sentences in their native language like you do, but not so true with translations. Awkward word-for-word translations are a huge problem, too. It's possible to filter out non-native or unowned sentences when searching, but such unnatural translations by native speakers are not so easy to avoid. We don't have an option to exclude sentences by particular users or sentences with particular tags.
> which is one reason I keep trying to get members to contribute in their own native
> languages. We could likely drastically improve the quality of our corpus if all
> members would do so.
This is true when one adds original sentences in their native language like you do, but not so true with translations. Awkward word-for-word translations are a huge problem, too. It's possible to filter out non-native or unowned sentences when searching, but such unnatural translations by native speakers are not so easy to avoid. We don't have an option to exclude sentences by particular users or sentences with particular tags.
2019-09-17 23:15
Salut
J'ai déjà signalé la phrase « Tu pars sous ton nez. » ( que je trouve incohérente).
Mais je m'y suis arrêté, sans lire les phrases restantes.
J'ai déjà signalé la phrase « Tu pars sous ton nez. » ( que je trouve incohérente).
Mais je m'y suis arrêté, sans lire les phrases restantes.
30 days ago - 30 days ago
The most useful thing you can do if you see bad sentences is to write comments on them. This accomplishes multiple things:
(1) It allows the author, or a corpus maintainer, to fix the sentence.
(2) It allows people to determine from the comments left on the author's sentences whether their sentences can be trusted in general.
I like to write comments in a form that indicates the current contents and the suggested rewording. This allows people to see easily whether the comment is still valid. For example:
My dog have fleas. -> My dog has fleas.
Such comments are quick and easy to write, especially with the use of the "copy sentence" button at the right of each sentence. Advanced contributors should also add the "@change" tag so that the sentence will be seen when corpus maintainers review all the sentences with that tag.
Of course, you don't have to go through all of a contributor's sentences. But if you see 10 bad sentences and write comments on them, someone who looks at the comments on that contributor's sentences will see the pattern.
The other piece of this approach, naturally, is that when you choose sentences to translate by an owner you are not already familiar with, you should look at the comments left on their sentences to see whether there are a lot of complaints on them.
If you leave comments on sentences, you give people a concrete basis for deciding not to translate sentences from that contributor (or for administrators to take some other action, though that is less likely). The comments will also persist and be searchable when someone checks the contributor's profile, whereas Wall messages eventually drop off the front page and become hard to find.
(1) It allows the author, or a corpus maintainer, to fix the sentence.
(2) It allows people to determine from the comments left on the author's sentences whether their sentences can be trusted in general.
I like to write comments in a form that indicates the current contents and the suggested rewording. This allows people to see easily whether the comment is still valid. For example:
My dog have fleas. -> My dog has fleas.
Such comments are quick and easy to write, especially with the use of the "copy sentence" button at the right of each sentence. Advanced contributors should also add the "@change" tag so that the sentence will be seen when corpus maintainers review all the sentences with that tag.
Of course, you don't have to go through all of a contributor's sentences. But if you see 10 bad sentences and write comments on them, someone who looks at the comments on that contributor's sentences will see the pattern.
The other piece of this approach, naturally, is that when you choose sentences to translate by an owner you are not already familiar with, you should look at the comments left on their sentences to see whether there are a lot of complaints on them.
If you leave comments on sentences, you give people a concrete basis for deciding not to translate sentences from that contributor (or for administrators to take some other action, though that is less likely). The comments will also persist and be searchable when someone checks the contributor's profile, whereas Wall messages eventually drop off the front page and become hard to find.
29 days ago - 29 days ago
@AllanF_US
I agree with your comment and thank you for writing this very helpful reminder:
... "The most useful thing you can do if you see bad sentences is to write comments on them. This accomplishes multiple things:
(1) It allows the author, or a corpus maintainer, to fix the sentence.
(2) It allows people to determine from the comments left on the author's sentences whether their sentences can be trusted in general.
I like to write comments in a form that indicates the current contents and the suggested rewording. This allows people to see easily whether the comment is still valid."
It's wonderful!
NB: Last but not least, it encourages non-English speaking contributors to improve their English and to allow them to explain (at least in the comments) the meaning of the sentences they write in their native languages that do not find competent translators (because they are considered as minor or infrequent since their speakers belong to linguistic minorities)?
I agree with your comment and thank you for writing this very helpful reminder:
... "The most useful thing you can do if you see bad sentences is to write comments on them. This accomplishes multiple things:
(1) It allows the author, or a corpus maintainer, to fix the sentence.
(2) It allows people to determine from the comments left on the author's sentences whether their sentences can be trusted in general.
I like to write comments in a form that indicates the current contents and the suggested rewording. This allows people to see easily whether the comment is still valid."
It's wonderful!
NB: Last but not least, it encourages non-English speaking contributors to improve their English and to allow them to explain (at least in the comments) the meaning of the sentences they write in their native languages that do not find competent translators (because they are considered as minor or infrequent since their speakers belong to linguistic minorities)?
yesterday
@Trang
Je profite l'occasion pour vous demander d'accorder les droits admin à un de nos contributeurs pour veiller sur le corpus kabyle en l’occurrence @samirt_t à coté de notre admin @Amazigh_Bedar
Je profite l'occasion pour vous demander d'accorder les droits admin à un de nos contributeurs pour veiller sur le corpus kabyle en l’occurrence @samirt_t à coté de notre admin @Amazigh_Bedar
yesterday
yesterday
Merci
30 days ago
Ce que tu décris n'est pas vraiment un problème de mon point de vue.
Si un contributeur décide de traduire "Je te serre ta main", mais que la traduction est une phrase parfaitement correcte dans la langue cible, on corrige la originale phrase qui sonne faux et puis c'est tout. Même si la phrase originale n'était pas correcte, elle aura au moins inspirée à la création d'une phrase correcte, et il n'y a pas de mal à cela.
Certes, on peut se demander est-ce que le traducteur a vraiment compris la phrase ou non. Comment corriger la phrase en s'assurant qu'elle garde la même signification que les traductions? Dans certains cas, il faut discuter avec les traducteurs sur comment ils ont compris la phrase. Mais j'ai du mal à imaginer qu'il y ait beaucoup de cas complexes à ce point. Pour ton exemple, changer "Je te serre ta main" vers "Je te serre la main" ne va pas influencer en quoique ce soit les traductions.
Au pire, si c'est juste trop galère de décider comment corriger la phrase originale, on peut toujours la délier de ses traductions.
Je ne suis pas en train de dire que les phrases de LINGUISTE sont de bonne qualité et de grande utilité. Mais les bloquer ne résoud pas grand chose. Ça ne fait qu'imposer un point de vue, relativement subjectif, sur ce qu'est une "bonne phrase".
Si une phrase n'a absolument aucun sens et ne sert pas à grand chose, il est très improbable qu'elle soit traduite. Les gens préfèrent traduire des phrases qui leurs sont utiles, qui sont intéressantes et qui veulent dire quelque chose.
Si tu as une preuve que les phrases qui sonnent faux ont nettement plus de chance de générer des traductions qui sonnent faux, je comprendrais que tu veuilles empêcher la traduction de telles phrases. Mais selon moi ce n'est pas le cas. Des phrases parfaitement correctes ont autant de chances de générer des traductions qui sonnent faux. La variable principale, c'est le niveau de compétence du traducteur et non pas la qualité de la phrase originale.
Ton problème, j'ai l'impression, est plutôt que c'est frustrant de passer en revue les phrases d'un utlisateur qui n'a pas beaucoup de rigueur et n'a pas mis beaucoup d'effort dans la création de ses phrases. Et je comprends très bien. Mais je pense que c'est un problème qui d'une part se résoud un peu plus en amont, en limitant la quantité de phrases/traductions qu'un nouveau contributeur peut créer. Et d'autre part, en implémentant des filtres pour que chaque utilisateur puisse ignorer les phrases qui ne leurs plaisent pas selon des critères génériques.
Si un contributeur décide de traduire "Je te serre ta main", mais que la traduction est une phrase parfaitement correcte dans la langue cible, on corrige la originale phrase qui sonne faux et puis c'est tout. Même si la phrase originale n'était pas correcte, elle aura au moins inspirée à la création d'une phrase correcte, et il n'y a pas de mal à cela.
Certes, on peut se demander est-ce que le traducteur a vraiment compris la phrase ou non. Comment corriger la phrase en s'assurant qu'elle garde la même signification que les traductions? Dans certains cas, il faut discuter avec les traducteurs sur comment ils ont compris la phrase. Mais j'ai du mal à imaginer qu'il y ait beaucoup de cas complexes à ce point. Pour ton exemple, changer "Je te serre ta main" vers "Je te serre la main" ne va pas influencer en quoique ce soit les traductions.
Au pire, si c'est juste trop galère de décider comment corriger la phrase originale, on peut toujours la délier de ses traductions.
Je ne suis pas en train de dire que les phrases de LINGUISTE sont de bonne qualité et de grande utilité. Mais les bloquer ne résoud pas grand chose. Ça ne fait qu'imposer un point de vue, relativement subjectif, sur ce qu'est une "bonne phrase".
Si une phrase n'a absolument aucun sens et ne sert pas à grand chose, il est très improbable qu'elle soit traduite. Les gens préfèrent traduire des phrases qui leurs sont utiles, qui sont intéressantes et qui veulent dire quelque chose.
Si tu as une preuve que les phrases qui sonnent faux ont nettement plus de chance de générer des traductions qui sonnent faux, je comprendrais que tu veuilles empêcher la traduction de telles phrases. Mais selon moi ce n'est pas le cas. Des phrases parfaitement correctes ont autant de chances de générer des traductions qui sonnent faux. La variable principale, c'est le niveau de compétence du traducteur et non pas la qualité de la phrase originale.
Ton problème, j'ai l'impression, est plutôt que c'est frustrant de passer en revue les phrases d'un utlisateur qui n'a pas beaucoup de rigueur et n'a pas mis beaucoup d'effort dans la création de ses phrases. Et je comprends très bien. Mais je pense que c'est un problème qui d'une part se résoud un peu plus en amont, en limitant la quantité de phrases/traductions qu'un nouveau contributeur peut créer. Et d'autre part, en implémentant des filtres pour que chaque utilisateur puisse ignorer les phrases qui ne leurs plaisent pas selon des critères génériques.
30 days ago - 30 days ago
This search will find over 900 of his sentences that do not yet have translations.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentenc...=&sort=created
I think that if a native French speaker would have the time to at least go through these and delete the bad ones, it would help the project a lot. It would help a lot, too, if at the same time an OK rating would be added to the good sentences.
It's a lot more difficult to deal with bad sentences once they are linked to other sentences, so doing this now would likely avoid a lot of hassle.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentenc...=&sort=created
I think that if a native French speaker would have the time to at least go through these and delete the bad ones, it would help the project a lot. It would help a lot, too, if at the same time an OK rating would be added to the good sentences.
It's a lot more difficult to deal with bad sentences once they are linked to other sentences, so doing this now would likely avoid a lot of hassle.
30 days ago
You're suggesting that we take the easy way. But in this case, I don't think the easy way is the best way.
I, personally, do not mind if someone takes the liberty to delete some of these sentences because I, personally, do not care about them. But by principle, I would have zero arguments to defend us on why we have deleted them. The deletions would be a personal, subjective choice.
Yes, it takes more effort to deal with bad sentences that have been linked, rather than deleting them before they get to be linked. But it can be a worthwhile effort:
1) We get to practice improving sentences. Native speakers could learn things about their own language, or sharpen their literary skills, by doing this exercise.
2) We can explain to those who added the translations about why it was a bad sentence and maybe they can learn something out of it and will choose more wisely their next sentences to translate.
3) It can be an eye-opener on what really is a good or bad sentence.
I, personally, do not mind if someone takes the liberty to delete some of these sentences because I, personally, do not care about them. But by principle, I would have zero arguments to defend us on why we have deleted them. The deletions would be a personal, subjective choice.
Yes, it takes more effort to deal with bad sentences that have been linked, rather than deleting them before they get to be linked. But it can be a worthwhile effort:
1) We get to practice improving sentences. Native speakers could learn things about their own language, or sharpen their literary skills, by doing this exercise.
2) We can explain to those who added the translations about why it was a bad sentence and maybe they can learn something out of it and will choose more wisely their next sentences to translate.
3) It can be an eye-opener on what really is a good or bad sentence.
30 days ago
I assume from your response that these French sentences are probably a lot better than the original message implied, and that they are the kind of sentences that you yourself might use. I had sort of figured that maybe these were more of those bot-created-type of sentences that have come from several usernames contributing French sentences, so I thought that it would be better to quickly eliminate the non-translated bad ones before they caused any more problems. The ones that are already linked to other sentences would take a little more time to take care of.
29 days ago
I have not proofread those sentences and I have no idea how bad they really are. Some might be bad beyond repair. But mostly, I was questioning the argument that "it's a lot more difficult to deal with bad sentences once they are linked to other sentences".
Because to me, if a sentence has no sense and no value, it's very unlikely that it will be translated. If it has been translated (by a sentient, intelligent being), then it may not be bad enough to be deleted and it's worth taking the time to figure it out.
Because to me, if a sentence has no sense and no value, it's very unlikely that it will be translated. If it has been translated (by a sentient, intelligent being), then it may not be bad enough to be deleted and it's worth taking the time to figure it out.
29 days ago
@CK
Have you thought about Francophones (non-French) whose French was (and still is) their working language throughout their working life (and some of whom speak French better than their mother tongue and sometimes better than some real French speakers)? Do you consider them as native speakers?
Friendly yours. AmarMecheri
Have you thought about Francophones (non-French) whose French was (and still is) their working language throughout their working life (and some of whom speak French better than their mother tongue and sometimes better than some real French speakers)? Do you consider them as native speakers?
Friendly yours. AmarMecheri
yesterday
JE me demande comment serons nous classés, nous qui sommes parfois plus francophones que kabylophones.
yesterday
Avec votre permission,
j'ai signalé
par l'icône (?)
les phrases que j'ai triuvées pour le moins inhabituelles.
j'ai signalé
par l'icône (?)
les phrases que j'ai triuvées pour le moins inhabituelles.
yesterday
For those who are studying both Russian and Japanese, you might be interested in the sentences at the top of fjay69's audio list.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentenc.../show/9282/und
I just uploaded about 150 Russian audio files for sentences that are also linked to Japanese sentences with audio.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentenc.../show/9282/und
I just uploaded about 150 Russian audio files for sentences that are also linked to Japanese sentences with audio.
2 days ago - 2 days ago
We now have 44,717 members.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/users/a...direction=desc
Only 27% of these members have contributed sentences.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/users/a...direction=desc
Only 27% of these members have contributed sentences.
2 days ago
Can you find out how many have contributed sentences? Spam accounts are added every day.
2 days ago - 2 days ago
12,177 members own 1 or more sentences.
3,040 members have contributed exclusively in their own native languages.
4,314 members without identified native languages have contributed in just 1 language.
2,811 members have contributed in 2 languages.
1,001 members have contributed in 3 languages.
394 members have contributed in 4 languages.
215 members have contributed in 5 languages.
104 members have contributed in 6 languages.
72 members have contributed in 7 languages.
45 members have contributed in 8 languages.
26 members have contributed in 9 languages.
21 members have contributed in 10 languages.
16 members have contributed in 11 languages.
19 members have contributed in 12 languages.
11 members have contributed in 13 languages.
9 members have contributed in 14 languages.
10 members have contributed in 15 languages.
5 members have contributed in 16 languages.
8 members have contributed in 17 languages.
4 members have contributed in 18 languages.
4 members have contributed in 19 languages.
4 members have contributed in 20 languages.
5 members have contributed in 21 languages.
5 members have contributed in 22 languages.
2 members have contributed in 23 languages.
2 members have contributed in 24 languages.
3 members have contributed in 25 languages.
2 members have contributed in 26 languages.
1 member has contributed in 27 languages.
1 member has contributed in 28 languages.
1 member has contributed in 29 languages.
1 member has contributed in 30 languages.
1 member has contributed in 31 languages.
1 member has contributed in 32 languages.
1 member has contributed in 33 languages.
1 member has contributed in 34 languages.
1 member has contributed in 35 languages.
1 member has contributed in 36 languages.
1 member has contributed in 38 languages.
1 member has contributed in 39 languages.
1 member has contributed in 41 languages.
1 member has contributed in 42 languages.
1 member has contributed in 44 languages.
1 member has contributed in 47 languages.
1 member has contributed in 50 languages.
1 member has contributed in 52 languages.
1 member has contributed in 54 languages.
1 member has contributed in 60 languages.
1 member has contributed in 63 languages.
1 member has contributed in 157 languages.
3,040 members have contributed exclusively in their own native languages.
4,314 members without identified native languages have contributed in just 1 language.
2,811 members have contributed in 2 languages.
1,001 members have contributed in 3 languages.
394 members have contributed in 4 languages.
215 members have contributed in 5 languages.
104 members have contributed in 6 languages.
72 members have contributed in 7 languages.
45 members have contributed in 8 languages.
26 members have contributed in 9 languages.
21 members have contributed in 10 languages.
16 members have contributed in 11 languages.
19 members have contributed in 12 languages.
11 members have contributed in 13 languages.
9 members have contributed in 14 languages.
10 members have contributed in 15 languages.
5 members have contributed in 16 languages.
8 members have contributed in 17 languages.
4 members have contributed in 18 languages.
4 members have contributed in 19 languages.
4 members have contributed in 20 languages.
5 members have contributed in 21 languages.
5 members have contributed in 22 languages.
2 members have contributed in 23 languages.
2 members have contributed in 24 languages.
3 members have contributed in 25 languages.
2 members have contributed in 26 languages.
1 member has contributed in 27 languages.
1 member has contributed in 28 languages.
1 member has contributed in 29 languages.
1 member has contributed in 30 languages.
1 member has contributed in 31 languages.
1 member has contributed in 32 languages.
1 member has contributed in 33 languages.
1 member has contributed in 34 languages.
1 member has contributed in 35 languages.
1 member has contributed in 36 languages.
1 member has contributed in 38 languages.
1 member has contributed in 39 languages.
1 member has contributed in 41 languages.
1 member has contributed in 42 languages.
1 member has contributed in 44 languages.
1 member has contributed in 47 languages.
1 member has contributed in 50 languages.
1 member has contributed in 52 languages.
1 member has contributed in 54 languages.
1 member has contributed in 60 languages.
1 member has contributed in 63 languages.
1 member has contributed in 157 languages.
2 days ago
> 1 member has contributed in 157 languages.
Our overlord! The Messiah!
Our overlord! The Messiah!
2 days ago
I'm pretty sure it's Horus.
2 days ago
I don't think Horus adds new sentences. Just deletes some, and create new links for duplicates.
My bet is on Balamax
My bet is on Balamax
2 days ago
You win the bet. Here are the top 10:
Balamax|156
Vortarulo|63
Ricardo14|60
everylanguage|54
ABChessel|52
MarijnKp|49
SadeceTurkce|47
mayok|44
Batko|42
turklehceleri|41
(Also, there are orphaned sentences in 207 different languages.)
Balamax|156
Vortarulo|63
Ricardo14|60
everylanguage|54
ABChessel|52
MarijnKp|49
SadeceTurkce|47
mayok|44
Batko|42
turklehceleri|41
(Also, there are orphaned sentences in 207 different languages.)
yesterday
I admit that I said a stupid thing.
yesterday
**Using the Vocabulary Feature for Corpus Maintaining**
Recently, I have listed some common Turkish spelling errors as search links. There are hundreds of incorrect sentences. We have fixed some of them, and are still fixing.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentenc...omment-1131503
I was planning to check those links from time to time (once in several months), but then I realized that we could use the vocabulary feature to continuously check and monitor all of them at once, like an alarm system. I created an auxiliary account for this purpose and added those searches as vocabulary items.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/vocabul...shSpellChecker
It might be considered as bending the tools, but since this feature isn't used by many people, I wanted to give it a try. Also, people adding new sentences with wanted vocabulary items are usually native speakers, so they can easily notice that those items are spelling errors and ignore them. I think the risk-benefit ratio is favorable for now. If a feature showing who added which vocabulary item were implemented, this would be even less of a problem.
Recently, I have listed some common Turkish spelling errors as search links. There are hundreds of incorrect sentences. We have fixed some of them, and are still fixing.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentenc...omment-1131503
I was planning to check those links from time to time (once in several months), but then I realized that we could use the vocabulary feature to continuously check and monitor all of them at once, like an alarm system. I created an auxiliary account for this purpose and added those searches as vocabulary items.
https://tatoeba.org/eng/vocabul...shSpellChecker
It might be considered as bending the tools, but since this feature isn't used by many people, I wanted to give it a try. Also, people adding new sentences with wanted vocabulary items are usually native speakers, so they can easily notice that those items are spelling errors and ignore them. I think the risk-benefit ratio is favorable for now. If a feature showing who added which vocabulary item were implemented, this would be even less of a problem.
yesterday
It's a creative way to do corpus maintenance :)
While it is not the intended use for the vocabulary feature and does mess up a bit the "sentences wanted" list, your use case is still a valid one, I think. It only means that we need a way to distinguish between vocabulary that was added to request an example sentence and vocabulary that was added just as part of a list of vocabulary.
That's an idea that I already mentioned in another thread:
https://tatoeba.org/eng/wall/sh...#message_31919
While it is not the intended use for the vocabulary feature and does mess up a bit the "sentences wanted" list, your use case is still a valid one, I think. It only means that we need a way to distinguish between vocabulary that was added to request an example sentence and vocabulary that was added just as part of a list of vocabulary.
That's an idea that I already mentioned in another thread:
https://tatoeba.org/eng/wall/sh...#message_31919