Professor Wilks,
Couldn't an eminent computational linguist of your stature afford to
forego this sort of response? Wouldn't it be sufficient to disagree?
Bob Parks
At 3:57 PM +0000 11/20/04, Yorick WIlks wrote:
>This reply from Russia is total nonsense, unless "good" means
>something utterly impractical. There are many evaluated MT systems
>that do a reasonable job (i.e. giving a good indication of what a
>document says) and some are available free on search sites as well
>all know. The world's oldest and strongest system SYSTRAN sometimes
>does a very good job. recommending a 20 word MT system shows utter
>ignorance of the last forty years.
>Yorick Wilks
>
>
>On Friday, November 19, 2004, at 12:18 PM, Sergey Protasov wrote:
>
>>
>>Eric,
>>
>>There are no good MT systems today at all.
>>So there are no good opensource MT systems today.
>>
>>ThoughtTreasure is very big system for teaching and it have bad
>>syntax parser. (It fails, if senstence have more that 7-10 words)
>>
>>I recommend you to see link grammar translator for teaching.
>>http://www.link.cs.cmu.edu/link/submit-to-translator.html
>>It show very good translations, but It have 20 words in vocab only..
>>
>>You can add more words... But it is not trivial...
>>
>>If you intresting in statistical mashine translation, forget I said
>>before and go to here
>>
>>http://www.isi.edu/licensed-sw/rewrite-decoder/
>>
>>
>>It simple, but you will do not know how it works..
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Sergey Protasov
>>PhD student in Computational Linguistics,
>>Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Eric Atwell wrote:
>>>Sergey,
>>>do you have any evaluation report or other evidence of how good
>>>this OpenSource MT system is? Bogdan Babych, researcher here at
>>>Leeds,
>>>is thinking of developing a demo MT system for research and teaching,
>>>but it may be worth considering adapting an existing oepn-source system
>>>regards
>>>Eric Atwell
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Nov 20 2004 - 17:49:47 MET