que choveria / que iria chover

obrigado.

Por que não usaram o pretérito mais-que-perfeito?

Abrams apostou com Browne um cigarro que tinha chovido / chovera.

Creio que o mais lógico era apostar no que poderia acontecer (would rain), e não no que teria acontecido (had rained). E esse, salvo melhor juízo, é o sentido da frase alemã. [?]

O problema é que esta tradução não está ligada à frase alemã. Não seria melhor desvinculá-la do inglês e vinculá-la ao alemão?

Perhaps. Would youy do it?

Sim, mas preciso da sua confirmação por que não sei alemão.

Eu também não sou nenhuma autoridade em Alemão. Será que poderíamos recorrer a @Pfirsichbaeumchen?

A frase original é em inglês. Acho que o pretérito mais-que-perfeito funcionaria também se imaginássemos os personagens saindo de uma caverna e discutindo se havia chovido, não?

Concordo contigo, @arademaker.

Of course, arademaker.
@bill
Good idea, I think.

Pode alterar a frase, arademaker. 👍

Abrams wettete mit Browne um eine Zigarette, dass es regnen würde.
= ... that it would (was going to) rain.
= ... ke pluvos.

Abrams bet Browne a cigarette that it had rained.
= ... ke pluvis.

Jes ja.

Penso que podemos ter todas as versões. Se forem na frase original em Inglês, https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentences/show/2638181, eu criei outras possíveis traduções para português. BTW, esta sentença veio do corpus http://moin.delph-in.net/MatrixMrsTestSuiteEn.

Por outro lado, pensando melhor agora, apenas chovera / tinha chovido funciona como tradução da versão inglês certo? A construção 'iria chover' seria tradução para `it would rain` certo?

Já consertei tudo, arademaker. Obrigado pela paciência.

Eita... como você fez isso @bill?

Eu notei agora que a sentença original em inglês https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentences/show/2638181 foi copiada errada da fonte original: http://moin.delph-in.net/MatrixMrsTestSuiteEn. Eu criei uma nova sentença https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentences/show/8831664 igual a versão do corpus.

Como colaborador avançado tenho permissão para vincular e desvincular frases.

A propósito, a frase em inglês (#2638181) foi alterada pelo AlanF_US há dez dias. Será que ele encontrou algum erro?

Entendi @bill, eu não sabia destas permissões adicionais. Bem então foi o @AlanF_US quem modificou a frase. Uma pena isto poder ser feito. Então o @alvations tinha copiado corretamente a frase do corpus original. Pelo visto o experimento de usar o Tatoeba para criar coleções de traduções do corpus Matrix não vai funcionar. Não podemos ter segurança de que as sentenças que colocamos permanecem inalteradas. Parece que estamos vendo que até gramaticalidade pode ser uma avaliação subjetiva. Mas estas frases foram criadas para avaliar cobertura de gramáticas e estruturas semânticas representadas em MRS, tenho grande confiança de que foram escritas por falantes nativos do inglês.

> Abrams bet Browne a cigarette that it rained.

This is not a good sentence in English. This was noted by tommy_san a while ago. I agreed, as did carlosalberto, and since the original owner didn't respond, as an English corpus maintainer, I changed it.

The fact that the sentence came from elsewhere is interesting, but once you add it to Tatoeba, it becomes part of the Tatoeba corpus, which means that it is subject to our evaluation.

@arademaker

É bom lembrar que falantes nativos também cometem erros.

@bill, certainty.

@AlanF_US, thank you for explaining. The problem is your claim `good sentence in X`. In particular, is it not good for what? is it not good why? Is it ungrammatical? http://erg.delph-in.net says to me that it is grammatical. The source of this sentence is a corpus developed by linguistics with deep knowledge in English and other languages. It can be unusual or unnatural.

I see your point about data submitted to Tatoeba, but once sentences can be edited, the potential use of Taboeba not only as a data provider but also as a service provider is now limited. I would suggest flags, tags, status, comments, etc. Many different ways to mark a sentence somehow, but never edit the data provided by someone else. A 'bad' sentence, whatever this means, will potentially be forgotten without translations or links.

I would say "unclear" rather than "ungrammatical". Basically, one would say one of the following:

(1) Abrams bet Browne a cigarette that it had rained.

Here, the thing that they bet on occurred before the act of making the bet. Perhaps they were sitting in a windowless room, and they were planning to go outside to see whether it had rained last night, which would determine who had won.

(2) Abrams bet Browne a cigarette that it would rain.

Here, the thing that they bet on occurred after the act of making the bet.

But "Abrams bet Browne a cigarette that it rained" leaves things in a strange indeterminate area. Some ambiguous sentences are fine, but I don't think this one fits in that category. I feel like a native speaker would choose either (1) or (2).

As for whether Tatoeba is a suitable service provider, that depends on the contract. The idea that Tatoeba is obligated to accept sentences from another source without being able to modify them is not consistent with the way Tatoeba has always worked, and, I would say, not fair to Tatoeba. It might be possible to come up with a compromise on an individual basis. For instance, maybe all sentences from this source could be given a particular tag, and there could be an arrangement that if a sentence with such a tag is considered problematic, we should simply delete it rather than modify it. But that would have to be worked out.

In any case, it's not true that sentences without translations or links are forgotten. They appear in searches when the presence of translations is not specified. There are frequently situations where I want to see how a word is used, but don't need to see translations of the sentences.

I would say that translations are interesting precisely to help us understand how different languages would express unclear situations like the one we are discussing. Isn’t it interesting to see the possible translations of this a unclear situation? How different languages will deal with that? Different from Portuguese, maybe other languages may not have a translation at all. What about the fact that the two paraphrases received the same Portuguese translation? So many things we can learn from a unclear sentence.

> But "Abrams bet Browne a cigarette that it rained" leaves things in a strange indeterminate area.

That is the main value of Tatoeba! Clear translations 1-1 can be consider the exception, not the rule. This is a very interesting debate that should have more people involved maybe?! Well, I hope...

> Clear translations 1-1 can be consider the exception, not the rule.

Here's how Trang has expressed the goal of the Tatoeba project:

"... we gather a lot of data, try to organize it, ensure it is of good quality and make it freely accessible, downloadable and redistributable, so that anyone who has a great idea for a language learning application (or a language tool) can just focus on coding the application and rely on us to provide data of excellent quality."

So at Tatoeba, clear one-to-one translations, as well as sentences that are clear on their own, ARE designed to be the rule. I don't deny that it could be interesting to examine unclear sentences and see how they are translated. But I don't see a good way to satisfy both that desire and Tatoeba's main goal in the same collection.