> La vortaro estas uzebla nur por registritaj uzantoj
Why make such restrictions? :(

Divide is дели́ть (perfective version is подели́ть), разделя́ть (perfective is раздели́ть):
«Же́ня раздели́ла мандари́н на до́льки». (Zhenya divided the tangerine into segments.)

In fact, Russian doesn't have an one-to-one correspondence for share.
It can be дели́ться (reflexive version of делить; perfective is подели́ться) when it means just one action of giving something that belong to your to others:
«Поделишься шоколадкой?» (Will your share the chocolate bar [with me]?)
«Поделись улыбкою своей, и она к тебе не раз ещё вернётся». (Share your smile, and it will come back to you not once; from some old cartoon)
Мой друг ча́сто де́лится со мной шокола́дками. (My friend often shares his chocolate bars with me.)

Note that делиться doesn't really imply a cooperation, it's a one-sided act of giving something to another person.


When sharing means sharing something over a long period of time, and the decision about this is made _only once_, there is no single translation. Usually we use the adverb вместе (together) and some verb:
They are sharing a flat. = Они́ снима́ют кварти́ру вме́сте. (lit. They are renting a flat together)
In Windows, dynamic-link libraries share the memory with the calling process. = В Windows динами́чески компону́емые библиоте́ки испо́льзуют ту же па́мять, что и вызыва́ющее их приложе́ние.


What have been said before is applicable to Belarusian as well:
Жэ́ня падзялі́ла мандары́н на до́лькі.
Падзе́лішся шакала́дкай?
Падзялі́ся ўсме́шкаю сваёй, і яна́ яшчэ́ не раз да цябе́ ве́рнецца.
Мой ся́бра ча́ста дзе́ліцца са мной шакала́дкамі.
Яны́ ра́зам здыма́юць кватэ́ру.
У Windows дынамі́чна кампану́емыя бібліятэ́кі выкарысто́ўваюць ту́ю ж па́мяць, што і прагра́ма, яка́я іх выкарысто́ўває.

And to Ukrainian:
Же́ня поділи́ла мандари́н на ча́сточки.
Поді́лишся шокола́дкою?
Поділи́ся по́смішкою своє́ю, і вона́ ще не раз до те́бе пове́рнеться.
Мій друг ча́сто ді́литься зі мно́ю шокола́дками.
Вони́ зніма́ють кварти́ру разом.
У Windows динамі́чно ко́мпону́ємі бібліоте́ки використо́вують ту ж па́мять, що і програ́ма, яка́ їх використо́вує.

Hello!

As for the standard, Tatoeba allows using either. The flags are quire arbitrary and are just a simple visual representation, nothing more. Some flags, such as flag for Arabic, were just created ad hoc.

This is very interesting, but what about your mother tongue? Why don’t you write poems in your native language?

Hello!

If you would like to add Kurdish language, please follow the directions here: http://tatoeba.org/faq#new-language

But adding a language takes time.

Meanwhile, you can just add some Kurdish sentences and mark them as some language you don't know.

I don't think so. :(

There are no other active contributors in Urdu. There are no contributors in Hindi either...

Anyway, your contributions will not be wasted, because people will be able to check them later.

Tutmonda helplingvo por ĉiuj homoj

Wednesday, February 22, 2012 | 1:35 PM

Today, we are adding Esperanto to Google Translate, making it our 64th supported language.

Ludovic Lazarus Zamenhof started his quest for an easy-to-learn language shared by all people in the 1870s and first published the ideas in 1887 with his book Unua Libro. The concept of a common language spread quickly, and initial reactions to Esperanto have ranged from suppression to enthusiastic embrace. Now, 125 years later, Esperanto has hundreds of thousands of active speakers, millions of people with some knowledge of the language, and even a few hundred people who learned it from birth, taught by their parents.

Esperanto and Google Translate share the goal of helping people understand each other, this connection has been made even in this blog post. Therefore, we are very excited that we can now offer translation for this language as well.

The Google Translate team was actually surprised about the high quality of machine translation for Esperanto. As we know from many experiments, more training data (which in our case means more existing translations) tends to yield better translations. For Esperanto, the number of existing translations is comparatively small. German or Spanish, for example, have more than 100 times the data; other languages on which we focus our research efforts have similar amounts of data as Esperanto but don’t achieve comparable quality yet. Esperanto was constructed such that it is easy to learn for humans, and this seems to help automatic translation as well.

Although the system is still far from perfect, we hope that our latest addition helps you to learn more about Esperanto’s history and culture. Translation to and from Esperanto will soon be available on translate.google.com, in our mobile web app, and in the Google Translate app for Android and iOS.

Posted by Thorsten Brants, Research Scientist, Google Translate

Ah! Sorry, I didn’t want to be rude. :)

In short, American English uses dots while British doesn’t.

It's not rewording. It's another way of saying: yes, we should.

Ideally, the percentage of «Mr» and «Mr.» in the corpus should be comparable with the percentage of American and British English texts.


Forcing contributors to stick to one convention is definitely not an option (either programmatically or by setting the rules):
a) it will make Tatoeba learning curve less smooth,
b) we will need to maintain a «rules» file **for every language** and educate contributors not to break it; don't we have any other things to do?
c) or, if we choose to do it programmatically, we will have to maintain a separate program **for every language**; don't our programmers have other things to do?

Not to mention that additional pre-processing is against the spirit of Tatoeba: the sentences should be as raw as possible.

Why not?

> but more important: If Uzbek is, why not Russian,
> Ukrainian or Belorussian?
In Uzbek, both scripts are used. For example, BBC O’zbekcha has two versions:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/uzbek/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/uzbek/lotin/

For Russian, Belarusian and Ukrainian, only Belarusian has a tradition of using Latin script, but most sites written in Belarusian Latin seem to be dedicated to writing Belarusian in Latin alphabet. xD

> I don't know much about Slavic languages but, what's the reason that Uzbek is transliterated?
> but more important: If Uzbek is, why not Russian, Ukrainian or Belorussian?
It's not a transliteration, it's an official alphabet.

(This feature would also be nice to have for Serbian, and it's relatively easy to implement, but I suggest waiting for the next version of Tatoeba...)

By the way, Latin→Cyrillic conversion should be fixed to correct this:
http://tatoeba.org/sentences/show/1200820 So`z beraman senga. Со`з бераман сенга.

It should be Сўз бераман сенга.

` should be replaced with ' in the input string before doing the conversion. When I wrote the conversion script, I've taken care of so‘z and so'z but not of so`z.

I think it's a good idea.

They are beaten not according to the law. :p

Laws are not that bad. According to the Belarusian laws, President is elected by people, while Belarusian language enjoys the same rights as Russian. :)

Provider (supposedly) saves all the information about the sites I visited (and even more), so it won't be fined. :)

Here is the detailed information. Taken from here [my comments are in square brackets]:
http://news.tut.by/society/267317.html

So, the top 5 misconceptions are:

1. Belarusians will be forbidden to visit foreign websites. Those who break this law will be fined.

**In reality:** neither decree No. 60, nor KoAP RB [Codex for Administrative crimes of Republic of Belarus] forbid visiting foreign websites. Article 22.16 of KoAP RB doesn't make any provide any punishments for Internet users, they have right to use foreigh Internet resources, as well as buy goods and services there [well, it's difficult anyway, because PayPal doesn't work with Belarus; mostly Russian sites are available]. And they can also, if they wish so, visit the sites included in the restricted access list.

2. Deals made by Belarusian users on foreign Internet resources can be considered invalid. Foreign Internet resources have no right to provide services for Belarusian users and can block access for Belarusian users so as not to break Belarusian laws.

**In reality.** As has already been mentioned, Belarusian laws don't restrict users' rights to make deals on foreigh sites. What concerns legal entities and entrepreneurs, who are not residents of RB, they are not under the Belarusian juridiction and their actions are not regulared by Belarusian laws, with the exception of representatives of foreign legal entities that are registered in RB.

3. To offer goods, work or services on the Belarusian territory, one must use only the Internet resources with a doman name in the BY zone.

**In reality.** The legislation makes a provision that the informational resource should be situated on the territory of Republic of Belarus and be registered in the State registry of informational networks, systems and resources of the national segment of the Internet computer network, that are situated on the Belarusian territory. There is no requirement that the site must have a domain name in the BY zone. A site that has a domain name in a foreign zone and Belarusian hosting belongs to the national segment of the Internet networc (according to the definition of the national segment, given in the decree No. 60), and it fully satisfies the requirememnts for registration in the state registry. Mandatory use of domain names in the BY zone is provisioned only for state organs and organisations, this is separately stated in the decree of the Council of Ministers of RB, 24.09.2010 No. 645.

4. The owners of the places of collective Internet use must spy on their users and check if Belarusian users don't visit foreign sites. Otherwise they will be fined and their business will be closed.

**In reality.** As we have mentioned above, Belarusian users are not forbidden to visit foreign sites and laws don't make the owners of the places of collective internet access check this. There are responsible for obeying the requirements for identification of user devices when providing the Internet services and/or users of Internet service, keeping information about user devices and personal data on the Internet users, as well as the information of the Internet services rendered.

5. Belarus creates a mandatory restriction, sites in the black list will be blocked.

**In reality.** Mandatory restriction is in power only in governmental organs and organisations, as well as educational and cultural organisations. For other users the access restriction service [sic!] is offered if they wish so, but any user can visit any sites.

It should be noted, that currently the restricted access list includes not only (most) sites with pornographic and frankly extremist content, but also such sites as _сharter97.org_, _belaruspartisan.org_ and _prokopovi.ch_. Paragraph 20 of the decree of Presidential Operative analysis centre, Communications and informatisation ministry, June, 29 2010 No. 4/11 "About the setting the procedury of restricting Internet user access to the information that is forbidden for propagation according to the legislative acts" provides the possibility to appeal agains the governmental organs, authorised to create the list, in the court. The time will show whether any of the site owners will use such a possibility and whether it will be effective. [Of course it won't.]

Or by journalists.

Only Internet providers can be fined, Internet users can't.

Believe it or not, visiting foreign websited is not forbidden.

These ‘news’ seems to come from the Library of Congress. I don't know if it is a lie or misunderstanding, but others just parroted this rumour.


IN REALITY this law forces Internet providers to save information about their users. If they don't save this information, they are fined.

Users are allowed to visit any websited they want.

[If they visit websites that KGB doesn't like, police will just ‘see’ them saying swearwords in public, or invent some other crime for them. But this is not written in the laws, of course.]

ACCORDING TO THE LAW, there are no punishment for users visiting any website.

It's either a misunderstanding or an obvious lie.

Please wait, I'll translate a comment on this new laws.

In short: there are no fines for users at all, only for providers.