The expanded system of the coordinated dictionaries and its using for universal semantic coding and translation of the polysemous source text
By Panich Iuli,
Russia
iuli-panich [at] yandex . ru
Get the List of 5,400+ Translation Agencies Now!
No Recurring Membership Fees!
Universal
semantic coding
Universal
semantic coding (continuation)
Universal
semantic coding (Appendices)
Читайте также версию на русском языке
Annotation. Semantic coding is based on supplementing the polysemantic
words and word-combinations by components of dictionary
entries that the author chooses in the basic explanatory
dictionary of the source language (the native language for
the author). The universality consists in subsequent machine
translation into other languages using bilingual dictionaries
coordinated with a basic explanatory dictionary. The process
of coding takes into account not only the wide range of
meanings of polysemantic
words, but also the ambiguity or incompleteness in the expression
of actions and states, where in one language such features
as gender and number, character of action and state, etc.,
are determined only by the context, while in another language
they may be reflected in concrete grammatical forms.
Contents:
The presuppositions.
Essence of the proposed
method. A
preliminary identification of the source text.
Characteristics of the expanded
system of the coordinated dictionaries.
The special sections of differentiated (morphological and syntactic) meanings in the coordinated dictionary entries.
The semantic coding of the source text.
(continuation)
The translation of the encoded source text into target languages.
Some characteristic examples explaining
operations of semantic coding and translating
Some considerations of general character.
(Appendices)
(examples of coding and translation, fragments of coordinated dictionary
entries).
App. 1. The phrases containing polysemantic words.
App. 2. The phrases containing polysemantic set
expressions and set expressions characterized by the
structural formula with variable lexical components.
App. 3. The coding and translation with using the
differentiated (morphological) meanings of the verbal forms.
App. 4. The coding and translation with using the
differentiated (morphological) meanings of the pronouns.
*****
The
presuppositions.
As
a rule, polysemantic
words and expressions inevitably
exist in source texts. Translation
of these words and expressions depends on the context. Analysis
of the sense and form of a wide context is impractical with traditional
machine translation programs.
Many
source texts published in the world require translation
into other languages. Among these are articles in national
scientific magazines, descriptions of inventions published
in the regional funds of patents etc. All are of interest
for users speaking other languages.
Therefore,
the source text which can be potentially translated into
many target languages should contain certain
additions
which, in a universal form, would indicate polysemantic
words’ and expressions’ actual semantic meanings.
Such
additions should also reflect the grammatical (morphological
and syntactic) features of the wider context. During translating
into target languages these additions allow to choose the
corresponding grammatical forms of words or words' groups
and also to choose syntactic links between words.
Such semantic additions eliminate both the
polysemy of the source language, and the mutual ambiguity
arising during translation; it will allow to receive correct
over the sense and over the form the machine translation
into any target language.
Some
rather abstract methods of semantic coding of source text
are known [1-3, 3*].
One
of the early methods, based on semantic analysis of polysemantic words and their semantic coding, is described
in US Patent 5,285,386 “Machine translation apparatus having
means for translating polysemous words using dominated codes”.
This
method of semantic analysis is universal in that it does
not depend on the target language of the translation.
Some
codes of "philosophical" nature are offered. This
method uses four classification categories to present all
information on a word: the great category (it is designated
by the first numeral), middle, small and thin categories
of classifications.
All
words in a thesaurus are classified in ten great classifications,
including "character / nature", "property",
"change", "action", "feeling",
"person", "propensity", "society",
"culture", "subject".
Each
great classification is divided into ten middle classifications.
In this embodiment a code with a symbol S is given by the
following form:
S0
belongs to "character/nature"
S02
belongs to "weather" in "nature"
S028
belongs to "wind" in "weather"
S028a
belongs to "pressure" in "wind" ….
The
given codes of classification have hierarchical character:
the range of meanings for the upper semantic code is wider
than for the lower semantic code.
As
has been noted, the method described in this patent can
have a universal character; however the offered hierarchical
system of the codes describing semantic meanings of words
and dependences between words has too abstract character,
i.e. it is far from the real problems of translation of
expressions and word-combinations with their various usage
and complex syntactic
structures, etc.
Elements
of semantic coding of similar abstract character are offered
in US Patent 5,523,946 “Compact encoding of multi-lingual
translation dictionaries”.
Each
word is a file containing information codes pertinent to
some base abstract language; this information is based on
the concepts of type - part of speech, gender, number, punctuation
mark, area of meaning of a given word (for example, a field
of knowledge, actions, …).
For
example, the code for the verb “to know” may
include the attribute (sth) which limits the field of knowledge.
The
coding is done by an editor of the source text.
The following source phrase is given as an example: "to have down pat, be an expert"; this phrase
is divided into the following symbols: "to" "have"
"down" "pat" "," "be"
"an" "expert".
The codes for each symbol and its concept have
the following form:
1991 "to" 872 "have"
501 "down" 18005 "pat" 17 ","
427 "be" 95 "an" 2407 "expert".
The string, representing this phrase, contains the following
numeric sequence: 1991 872 501 18005 17 427 95 2407.
As stated in the description, the given translation file consists
of about 6700 groups of concepts.
In sum, this method contains elements of semantic coding in the form
of concepts of an abstract basic language.
This coding, however, is also very superficial inasmuch as it is
not concerned the concrete semantic meanings of words, but
is based on general attributes (part of speech, gender,
field of knowledge, etc.).
Finally, there is the Universal Networking
Language
project (UNL) [3,3*], which
has being in development for
a long time. This project aims to create a universal
artificial language by developing codes, which, in some
abstract form, would reflect the set of semantic and grammatical features of a source language, and,
at the same time, reflect translational specifics of a set
of target languages.
In
other words, these artificial semantic codes would have
to be refined and coordinated as much as possible, i.e.
they would need to simultaneously reflect the intra-language
polysemy and the mutual ambiguity, arising
in translation[16, 16 *].
A
special apparatus of coding of semantic meanings is elaborated
for this purpose. The UNL has its own dictionary
UW (universal word) made up on the basis of English,
which is an input. Specifically, it is English words that
are used to determine semantic and syntactic constraints
or restrictions.
The
text on UNL is universal words with additional symbols of
type:
icl (inclusion),
aoj a thing which
is in a state or has an attribute: aoj(red (aoj >thing),
ball(icl > thing))… “ball is red”,
… etc.
Each
meaning can have also a set of particular meanings, for
example:
seq (occur, occur) / seq (occur, do) / seq (do, occur) / seq (do, do)
/ seq (occur, (aoj>thing))...
Example
of designation:
“because Mary arrived, John is happy” … agt: 01 (arrive (icl >
occur), Mary (icl > person) agt: 02 (happy (icl >
do), John (icl > person) rsn (:02, :01);
“horse” … horse (icl > animal) horse (icl >male)
horse (icl > apparatus).
Codes
of attributes are added to a universal word and they specify
variants of use:
category of tense @future,… / modality
@obligation, … / character of expression @emphasis,
@focus, …, @begin-soon, @begin-just… @progress… @complete, @state, @repeat
… @generic, @indef … @affirmative, @confirmation, @exclamation,
… etc.
The
sentence “The dog caught a wild cat” will have following
UNL-representation:
[S]
agt(catch(icl>#event).@past.@pred.@entry,
dog(icl>animal).@def)
obj(catch(icl>#event).@past.@pred.@entry,
cat(icl>animal).@indef)
mod(cat(icl>animal).@indef,wild(icl>#state,
ant>domestic)) [/S]
These examples indicate that artificial language has the special
dictionary structure, special forms of representation of
semantic meanings and also has own morphology and syntax;
all these features are expressed as complex chains of restrictions
and attributes.
The
UNL is based on double machine translation (see
the scheme): (I) from the source language into an
artificial language (Enconventer) and (II) from an
artificial language into target language (Deconventer).
On the first stage the author can make the interactive changes
directly in the text of an artificial language by means
of operations of the direct translations and the reversed
translations (Author /
Editor).
It
is possible to point out the following properties of system
UNL:
a) as already noted above, the analysis of sense and the form of
a wide context is practically impracticable by means of
programs of machine translation.
The double
machine translation stipulated in system UNL will lead to
inevitable summation of mistakes in transfer of sense of
the text and to mutual influence of ambiguities, arising
on each of stages; in other words, the mistakes arising
at the first stage, can generate a circuit of mistakes at
the second stage;
b) the author has an possibility to make some changes in the text
in an artificial language as it is stipulated in system
UNL; but for this purpose the author should know professionally
this language, i.e. should be able to indicate the real
deviations which have arisen between the source text and
its reversed translation by means of combinations of symbols;
с) it is known, the operations of direct and reversed translations
are carried out a phrase by a phrase and they demand a multiple
recurrence; these operations can be applied only at translations
of short texts and may have extremely unstable character
(similarly to a control system containing elements with
unpredictable reactions). In others words, if the basic programs of the machine translation
(Enconventer, Deconventer)
make the distortions of sense of the text, then the
essential increase of a level of accuracy due to the interactive
sanction (Author / Editor)
will not occur.
Probably, the universal language UNL can be used for transfer
of the sufficiently short and "monosemantic, unequivocal"
texts.
To sum
up: one can assume that the abstract methods based on artificial
codes allow to solve a problem of universality, but they
do not contain the elements allowing to raise accuracy of
machine translation.
Essence of the proposed method. A preliminary identification of the source text.
Proceeding from the general reasons, a source polysemy (or a source
ambiguity) leading to wrong interpretations of words and
word-combinations should be eliminated prior to the beginning
of machine translation.
The information necessary for a very precise semantic coding of the
source texts is already present in the existing explanatory
dictionaries and bilingual dictionaries. The detailed presentation
of semantic meanings in an explanatory dictionary characterizes
the internal polysemy of the source language. The illustrative examples ... below we use ill.e.(s), included in the dictionaries,
are important in that they reflect the various forms of
usage of word and word-combinations; the translations of
the specified examples in the bilingual dictionaries reflect
the mutual ambiguities of the source and target languages.
The basic idea is to use the elements
of the explanatory dictionary of the source language instead
of some artificial codes; these elements can naturally reflect
the sense of a wide context.
An author would need to carefully examine
the meaning of a given word in its context, compare that
to the available dictionary entries, and, then, key in the
actual meaning of the word, or a corresponding illustrative
example, as a supplement to the word, thus insuring a proper
translation into target languages.
In
other words, this is a preliminary identification of semantic
meanings, forms of use, etc., by means of an explanatory
dictionary of the source language.
The
question is how to transform the various elements of dictionary
entries, including the aforementioned ill.e.(s), into universal semantic
codes. In other words, the problem is how to coordinate
these elements with the translations contained in the bilingual
dictionaries. To resolve this problem we propose
a system consisting of a basic explanatory dictionary of the source, native language, which
we shall call further
a Coordinated Explanatory Dictionary (c.e.d.), and
a set of special dictionaries of source language - target
languages, which we shall call further the Coordinated Bilingual Dictionaries
(c.b.d.) [19, 19*].
Characteristics
of the expanded system of the coordinated dictionaries.
The
following elements of each c.b.d. shall exactly
match the
c.e.d.:
-
the vocabulary of source language, a sequence of the vocabulary
entries,
- the sequences of semantic
meanings, each identified by the same digital, alphabetic
and symbolic designations; this also concerns the particular
and closely related sub-meanings of each semantic meaning,
-
the ill.e.(s) reflecting different word usage
at concrete semantic meaning,
- all expressions, their semantic
meanings and their own illustrative examples,
- all grammar/usage commentaries
on the headword, derivative words, compound words, etc.
The specialized
and thematic sections of the dictionaries shall similarly
match.
For illustration let us present some fragments of the
coordinated dictionary entries.
| Russian c.e.d.
прилагать 1 присоединять
2 направлять действия на …, применять; ~ усилия; ~
все усилия; ~ старания
|
Russian - English c.b.d.
прил... 1 add
2 apply; ~ усилия make efforts;
~ все усилия make/ exert every effort; ~ старания take pains
|
Russisch-Deutsch c.b.d.
прил.. 1 beilegen
2 anwenden; ~ усилия sich anstrengen;
~ все усилия alle Kräfte aufbieten, sich alle Mühe geben; ~
старания sich bemühen |
Russe - Français c.b.d.
прил.. 1 joindre 2 appliquer; employer; ~ усилия faire des efforts; ~ все усилия faire tout son effort (pour); ~ старания apporter des soins a qch
|
| English c.e.d. [6]
bed n 1 thing to sleep or rest
on 2 bottom of the sea, a river: Explore
the ocean ~ 3 layer of clay, rock; stratum
4a flat base on which sth rests; foundation 4b
layer of stone as a foundation for a road 5
garden plot
……………………………………
pull v…(idm) pull
strings/wires for sb use influential friends;
indirect pressure in order to obtain an
advantage for sb… pull the wool over sb’s eyes
hide one’s real actions or intentions; deceive
(phr
v) … pull sb in (a) detain sb (b)
attract (audiences, supporters)
|
English - Russian c.b.d.
bed n 1 кровать, постель, ложе
2 дно, русло: Explore…Исслед. дно океана 3 слой (песка...); пласт 4a основание; фундамент 4b слой камней (в основан. дороги)
5 грядка
………………………………
pull v…(idm) pull strings… использовать влиятельных друзей; косвенно
влиять на ход дела... pull the wool over sb’s eyes скрывать; обманывать
кого-л.
(phr v) … pull sb in (a) задерживать (b) привлекать, прельщать, притягивать |
The c.e.d. thus combines the function of an explanatory dictionary with those of a translation dictionary. That is, the c.e.d. must reflect those elements
of the source language, which have special meaning at least
in one of the target languages belonging the system of coordinated
dictionaries of this source language. Really, if ambiguities
of one type do not depend on target language, then the ambiguities
of other type will arise only in translating into the certain
language.
Thus, together with the
multitude of semantic and grammatical features of the source
language, the c.e.d. should reflect
the translation - specific features of all target languages.
Therefore, the entries should
be “maximally differentiated”, i.e. they should simultaneously
reflect both the intra-language polysemy and the mutual
ambiguity, namely:
- the c.e.d. entries should contain
the non-phraseological expressions having the especial translation
(the non-word-for-word translation) at least into one of
the target languages out;
- the c.e.d. entries should reflect the meanings of morphological nature, due to the presence in any
of the target languages of separate grammatical forms, which
are absent in the source language;
- the c.e.d. entries should also
reflect the meanings of syntactic nature, for example those indicating possible
syntactical links, clarifying syntactical ambiguities in
the source language, etc.
With
this purpose, the differentiated (morphological, syntactic)
meanings are entered into dictionary entries in the form
of the special (additional) section that follows those semantic
word meanings to which this section is general. These sections
have a symbolic designation (morphm)
(an abbreviation of morphological meanings) and (syntaxm)
(from words syntax, meanings).
The following example reflects a polysemy
of pronoun you and also reflects the coordination
of entries when in one of the languages semantic word meanings
are defined by a context, however in other languages these
meanings have the separate grammatical forms:
In the given example the pronoun you replaces the person
or group of persons of masculine gender or feminine gender
(what depends on sense of the text). In translation into
Russian a pronoun you correspond two forms - ты, вы. At last, in translation into a Hebrew
a pronoun you corresponds to four forms expressing
a masculine gender and a feminine gender both in a singular
and in plural:אַתֶן
/
אַתֶם/ אַת/ אַתָה.
How we see, the specified features of target
languages are reflected in English c.e.d. where the
meaning of a pronoun you is presented in the form
of four private meanings (a)…(d) - it
takes into account the specified features of two target
languages – Russian and Hebrew.
An expanded fragment of coordinated entries showing the differentiated
nature of dictionary entries is presented below:
| English
c.e.d.
[6,7]
take I v 1 carry sb/sth, accompany sb from
one place to another… 4 gain possession of
sth.; capture or with sth… 17 need or require: |
English - Russian c.b.d.
take I v 1 брать к.-л./ч.-л., сопровождать к.-л.
…
4 овладевать чем-л.; покорять…
17
нуждаться, требовать: |
| That cut is taking a long time
to heat.
It’ll ~ time for her to recover from the illness.
It ~s stamina to run a marathon. She didn’t
~ much persuading. It took three hours for
her to mend… How long does it ~ to get there?
... |
That
… Этот процесс резания требует… It’ll … Ей
потребуется время... It ~s … Нужна выносливость ... She… Её
не нужно уговаривать. It took … Ей нужно
3 часа…
How long…Ск. врем. добираться?... |
| …
37 used with ns to show that the action
is being carried out: |
… 37 действия, смысл которых
определяется дополнением: |
| ~ a break;
~ a deep breath; ~ a flyer; ~ exercise;
~ a look; ~ notice; ~ offence;~
shelter; ~ a walk …
|
~ a break прервать; ~ a deep … вздохнуть; ~ a flyer упасть вниз головой; ~ exer… делать моцион; ~ a look взглянуть; ~ notice замечать; ~ offence обижаться; ~ sh…укрыться; ~ a walk прогуляться; … |
| (idm) ~ account of consider
along with other factors; ~ care of look after;
~ it easy proceed gently or carefully; ~ it
(that) assume or suppose; … |
(idm) ~ account of принимать в расчёт; ~ care of заботиться;
~ it easy не спешить, не напрягаться; ~ it (that) допускать, предполагать; … |
| (phr v) ~ sb aback shock sb;
~ after sb resemble in appearance; ~ sb/sth
away (from sb/sth) remove sb/sth;
subtract; ~ oneself off (to…) leave
a place; ~ up with sb begin to be friendly
with sb |
(phr v) ~ sb aback произвести впечатление
на кого-л.;
~ after sb походить на кого-л.; ~ sb/sth away (from
sb/sth) удалять; вычитать; ~ oneself off (to…)
уходить, уезжать; ~ up with sb сближаться с
к.-л. |
| (morphm) 1. Inf., Indef. T. (a) (imper-ve) (b)
(per-ve)
2. passive form (a) (state) (b) (action) (c)
(imperf-ve)
(d) (perf-ve)
3. should+Indef. Inf., Perf. Inf. (a) (indic-ve)
(b) (subjunc-ve)
4. participle in verb
phrase (a) (simult.) (b) (preced.)
(c) (imperf-ve) (d) (perf-ve) |
(morphm) 1. (a) (несоверш.) (b) (соверш.)
2. страдат. (a) (состояние) (b) (действие) (c) (несоверш.)
(d) (соверш.)
3. (a) (изъявит) (b) (сослагат)
4. при|частный, дее-
оборот (a) (одновр.
c действием сказ-го) (b) (предш. действию сказ-го) (c) (несоверш.) (d) (соверш.)
|
| (syntaxm) (a) tak|ing,
-en a separated attribute/ apposition (its part)
to
c.w.* (b) tak|ing,
having been taken
a separated adverbial modifier (its part) to c.w.*
expressing action |
|
|
(comp) take-off
n … |
(comp) take-off
n … |
| |
semantic meanings of the headword |
| |
sections of illustrative examples (by
different meanings) |
| |
sections of non-phraseological word-combinations
(by different meanings) |
| (idm) |
section of phraseological word-combinations
(set expressions, idioms) |
| (phr v) |
section of grammatical word-combinations
(phrasal verbs in English) |
| (morphm) |
section of differented (morphological)
meanings |
| (syntaxm) |
section of differented (syntactic) meanings
|
| (deriv, comp) |
section of derivatives, compounds … |
As
follows from the table, the sections of illustrative examples
and of the non-phraseological word-combinations are coordinated
and as much as possible expanded; the use of elements of
these sections at semantic coding allows to take into account
the features of the use of words.
Some
explanations, concerning the section of differentiated (morphological,
syntactic) meanings, will be presented below.
The
structure of systems of coordinated dictionaries is presented
on Fig.1.
As
it has noted been above, the entries
should be “maximally differentiated”, i.e. they should simultaneously
reflect both the intra-language polysemy and the mutual
ambiguity.
The account of the all types of the
ambiguities somewhat expands volume of dictionary entries.
In this connection a system of coordinated
dictionaries of given source language
may consist of several subsystems of the coordinated
dictionaries - for related groups of target languages (Fig. 2).
In the some cases, the subsystem can
include only two languages - source and target; it means,
that the bilingual dictionary, only one in this subsystem,
should be coordinated with an explanatory dictionary.
The coordinated dictionary entries are in details described
below.
Let's
explain in more detail the sense of mentioned special (additional)
sectionсs.
1. The differentiated
(morphological) meanings.
We are concerned here with words,
which can express, depending on context, different grammatical
attributes (i.e. the meanings having grammatical nature),
but they have no corresponding grammatical forms in the
source language. However in the some target languages there
are the separate grammatical forms of a word and / or connected
words for the expressing these meanings.
These groups of words may include
the following:
1)
personal and reflexive pronouns, which, in a given
source language, have no separate forms to denote the person
of masculine or feminine gender / the person or a group
of persons / a group of persons of masculine or feminine
gender / the person or an inanimate object, and also possessive pronouns, which, in a given source language, have no separate
forms to indicate the gender and / or grammatical number
of the belonging object, or the separate forms specifying
a gender of the person to which it belongs (i.e. when the
meaning depends on who or what is being described in context);
at the same time those or other target languages can have
the pronouns (and / or words, contextually associated with
them) which have the concrete
grammatical forms to express above mentioned attributes.
Let’s illustrate this with other characteristic example of
the possessive pronoun-noun yours. This pronoun does
not have any other grammatical forms, but in a combination
with a context may express:
- masculine / feminine / neuter gender of
belonging object or plural of this object; this must be
taken into account when translating into Russian, where
one of next pronouns may correspond, depending on a context,
to the pronoun yours: тво|й, -я, -ё, -и …;
- a person
or a group of persons to whom the belonging is expressed;
this, too, must be taken into account when translating into
Russian, where one of next pronouns may correspond, depending
on a context, to the pronoun yours: тво|й, -я, -ё, -и; ваш, -а, -е, -и;
-
masculine / feminine gender of person or persons to whom the belonging is expressed; this must be taken into account
when translating into Hebrew, where one of next pronouns
may correspond, depending on a context, to the pronoun yours:
שֶלךָ - belongs to a male, שֶלָך - belongs to a female, שֶלָכֶם - belongs to a males group, שֶלָכֶן -belongs to a females group.
The
described polysemy of the pronoun yours, having a
grammatical nature, is reflected in the following dictionary
entry:
As
we see, in Hebrew the dependence of personal pronouns on
the gender and number of the subject is even greater than
in Russian or English.
2) verbs, participles, verbal adverbs, which in the
source language have no separate forms unambiguously expressing
the character of an action and /or a
state,
reached as a result of the action (i.e. it is possible to
judge the character of the action and / or the state only
from context);
at
the same time, the specific grammatical forms of some verbs,
participles and verbal adverbs are used in some target languages
to express the shades of the meanings of the actions and
/ or the states required by the source text;
below
are some characteristic examples of grammatical meanings
in English and Russian:
a) in Russian a verb, in
context, may express one of the following meanings, which
correspond to a specific grammatical form in English ([12],
p. 113-162):
-
(неопр.) … (the separate group of the
Indefinite Tenses is used for this purpose in English);
- (длит.)… (in English this is expressed by the separate
group of Continuous Tenses);
-
(к опред. м-ту) … (in English
this is expressed by the separate group of Perfect Tenses);
- (изв. дл-ти)… (in English this is expressed
by the separate group of Perfect Continuous Tenses);
-
(состояние), (действие, неопред.),
(действие, длит.), (действие, к опред. м-ту)… a Perfective verb in the verbal
form of the Passive Voice may express an action or a state,
achieved as a result of the action (in English this is expressed
by separate group of Passive Voice
Tenses, [12], p.166-184);
-
(в наст.-будущ.), (в
прошл.)… a verb expresses an unlikely or improbable action
in a conditional sentence in a Subjunctive Mood with the
particle “бы”; the time of fulfillment
of the condition depends on the context (and possibly the
time is pointed in a sentence previous to or subsequent
to the present one).
Also in Russian, a participle (in context) may express one
of following meanings to which the separate grammatical
forms conform in English ([12], p.113-162):
- (одновр.), (ранее) … a participial form in the Active Voice expresses simultaneous actions
or actions preceding the action expressed by the predicate;
-
(реальн.)… a participial form in the Passive Voice
of the Imperfective indicates the real action expressed
by the participle;
-
(вообще) … the same as above, but the action
happening irrespective of time.
The following table shows differentiated
(morphological) meanings in a coordinated dictionary entry
of the verb заканчивать:
| Russian c.e.d.
зак|анчивать,-ончить довести до к.
(morphm) 1. (a) (неопред.): действ. без указания
на его длит., законченность и безотносит. к другому
действ., м-ту: Я
закончил работу и ушел домой.
(b) (длит.): незаконч. длит. действ., к-ое началось до опред. м-та в
наст., прош., будущ.: Я уже заканчивал
работу, когда вы зашли ко мне.
(c) (к опред. м-ту): действ. совершённое
(заверш.) к опред. м-ту в наст., прош., будущ.: Я закончил работу и сейчас иду домой.
(d) (изв. дл-ти):
действ., начавшееся до опред. м-та в наст., прош.,
будущ. и длившееся известный период времени, включ.
этот м-т: Я закончил два факультета за последние
5 лет и сейчас нашел работу.
2. страдат. (a) (состояние): Работы
закончены. Техники могут отдохнуть.
(b) (действие, неопред.): Работы обычно заканчиваются в полночь.
(c) (действие, длит.):
Работа сейчас заканчивается.
Инспектору придется подождать.
(d) (действие, к опред. м-ту):
Работы только что закончены техниками.
3. действ. (маловероятное) в условном предлож.
в сослагат. наклонении с частицей бы; время
выполн. условия зависит от контекста
(a) (в наст.-будущ.): Если бы вы закончили исследования, мы начали
бы проект. Но вы не закончите их скоро.
(b) (в прошл.):
Если бы вы закончили исследования, мы
начали бы ... Но вы их до сих пор не закончили.
4. действит. причастн. оборот; действ. одноврем. или предшеств. действию сказуемого
(a) (одновр.), (b) (ранее)
5. страдат. причастн. оборот несоверш. вида (a) реальное
действие (реальн.) (b) действие, происходящее безотносит. ко
времени (вообще)
|
Russian – English c.b.d.
зак|анч… to finish, to end
(morphm) 1. (a)
Indef. T.: I finished a work and went home.
(b)
Contin. T.: I
was already finishing a work when you
called on me.
(c)
Perf. T.: I
have finished a work and am going home now.
(d)
Perf. Contin. T.: I had been finishing two faculties for last 5 years and I have
now found work.
2. passive form (a) (state) Compound Predicate:
The works are ended. The technicians can
have a rest.
(b) (action): Indef. Passive T.:
The works are usually ended at midnight.
(c) (action) Contin. Passive T.: The work is being ended.
The inspektor will have to wait.
(d) (action) Perf. Passive T.:
The works have just been ended by the
technicians.
3.
Conditional
Sentence
(a)
If you ended (should end, were
to end) investigations, we should start the project.
But we shall not end them soon.
(b)
If we have ended investigations, we should
have started the ... But we have not ended
them till now. 4. participle
in verb phrase, active v. (a) (simult.) (b) (preced.)
5.
participle
in verb phrase, passive v., imperf-ve
(a)
(real) (b) (irrelative)
|
b) in English a verb, in
context, may express one of the following meanings to which
at Russian the separate grammatical forms conform ([12]):
-
(imperf-ve),
(perf-ve) … a verb in the Infinitive or Indefinite
Tense form, not having special grammatical forms of the
imperfective or the perfective, expresses, in context, an
action of imperfective or of perfective; this should be
considered during translation, for example, into Russian,
in which verbs have separate imperfective and perfective
forms;
- (action) the fact or process of doing, (state) the existing
condition in which an object is …
a phrase in the Passive
Voice expresses an action performed on an object or a state
of an object, except when some other meaning characterizing
an action is not indicated, for example, (imperf-ve)
or (perf-ve);
- (indicative), (subjunctive) … the verb in the form of Indefinite
Infinitive or Perfect Infinitive in combination with the
verb "should" expresses an action in the form
of Indicative or Subjunctive Mood.
Also
in English the participle (in a combination with
a context) may express one of the following meanings to
which in Russian the separate grammatical forms conform
([12].p. 279-287):
- (simult.) … the participial form expresses an action, which is simultaneous
with the action of a predicate;
- (preced.) … the participial form expresses
an action, which precedes the
action of a predicate;
- (imperf-ve), (perf-ve) … the participial form expresses an action of Imperfective or
of Perfective.
Examples of differentiated (morphological)
meanings are presented below in a coordinated dictionary
entry of the verb to ask:
| English c.e.d.
3. should+Indef.
Inf., Perf. Inf. (a) (indicative): You should
have asked her.
(b) (subjunctive): You should
have at first asked
her.
4. participle in verb phrase (a) (simult.) (b) (preced.) (c) (imperf-ve) (d) (perf-ve)
|
English-Russian c.b.d.
(morphm) 1. (a) (несоверш): Я знаю его недостат. хорошо,
чтобы просить его о бескорыстной помощи. (b) (соверш): …чтобы попросить выступить на семинаре.
2. страдат. (a) (состояние):
Гости приглашены на встр. (b) (действ.): Гостей приглашают
на встр. сотр. (-ся … сотр.) (c) (несоверш.)
(d) (соверш.)
|
3)
the some nouns which in the source language have
no forms of a singular and a plural, while in translation
to those or other target languages they acquire, depending
on a context, separate forms of a singular and a plural.
In the all cases, mentioned above, the author should carefully examine the context so as to add to the
word the actual differentiated (morphological) meaning -
it will provide a true translation
into target languages.
2. The differentiated (syntactic) meanings.
The
meanings which express possible syntactic links of a given
word with other words in a sentence are also presented in
the dictionary entries.
The
specified syntactic links characterize some of the predicative
relations (regarding a predicate) and non-predicative syntactic
relations (attributive, objective, adverbial).
Use
of the differentiated (syntactic) meanings in semantic coding
allows to exclude syntactic errors in machine translation
of such source sentences that have syntactic ambiguity or
syntactical incompleteness; in particular, such source sentences
that contain remote or isolated explanatory appendices (attributive,
adverbial), which, in turn, contain their own additions.
Examples
of such appendices may be: isolated attributes removed from
an object (a noun, a pronoun), isolated adverbial modifiers,
removed from a predicate (as opposed to uniform members
of a sentence which are in identical syntactic attitudes
with one member of sentence, they act as one syntactic function
and are united with each other by enumeration or by means
of coordinative conjunctions [12*]).
For
example, in Russian the syntactic relations are often based on the fact
that words – an removed, isolated attributes (adjectives,
participles) of some contextual word - have grammatical
characteristics reflecting the gender and / or grammatical
number of the word being defined (it concerns also the additional
attributive sentences and nominal parts of compound predicates
etc.); meanwhile, the translations of these words into target
languages may not have the specified attributes , i.e. the
syntactical relations entirely depend on word order.
Such
differences in languages may lead to syntactical ambiguity
or incompleteness of the translated phrases.
Known
programs of machine translation in many cases distort the
meanings in translating phrases containing syntactically
complex forms.
The differentiated (syntactic) meanings are presented in the
dictionary entries in the form of separate sections (syntaxm)
that follow those semantic word meanings to which they are
general. These sections may deal with syntactic links of
the following types of words:
-
an adjective which may be a removed, isolated attribute/
apposition (its part) to some contextual word (c.w.);
-
an adjectival participle, which may be part of a participial
phrase, acting the part of the removed, isolated attribute/
apposition to some c.w.;
-
a verbal adverb which may be part of a dangling participle
acting the part of the removed, isolated adverbial modifier
to the c.w. expressing the action.
The following designations are hereinafter accepted in the sections
of differentiated
(syntactic) meanings: c.w.*
/ к.с.* - the
concrete contextual word which the author should mark in
the source text (in all cases, concerning the identification
of syntactic links of words).
Some
characteristic examples of dictionary entries are presented
below:
| English c.e.d. (with using [6])
refer v.t. pass on, direct
v.i. 1 have recourse 2
allude; cite
(morphm)
…
|
English-Russian c.b.d.
|
|
|
|
|
реш|ать, -ить 1
прийти к выводу … 2 найти ответ
(morphm) …
(syntaxm) (a) реша|ющий,-емый,-вший,
реш|ённый,-ивший
часть обособл. определ./ приложения к к.с.*
(b) реш|ая, -ив часть обособл. обстоят. к к.с.*, выражающему
действие |
Russian – English c.b.d.
реш... 1 to decide 2 to solve, to settle
(morphm)
…
(syntaxm) (a) a separated attribute/ apposition
(its part) to c.w.*
(b)
a separated
adverbial modifier (its part) to c.w.* |
All
that’s required is for the author to carefully examine the
context and to include, in addition to the given word, the
actual differentiated (syntactic) meaning, and to mark the
proper contextual word / контекстное слово
(c.w.*/ к.с.*). During translation this
will guarantee true syntactic link between words.
An
expanded example of coordinated dictionary entries of the
verb to take was presented above.
Examples
of the various fragments of the dictionary entries are presented
in the second part of given article.
The
following describes the sequences of operations of semantic
coding and translation.
The
semantic coding of the source text.
This
process is performed on the computer of the author of the
source text, using a service program containing the coordinated
explanatory dictionary of the source language.
The
author analyzes the source text and marks the next word,
using a particular font in those cases where, in the opinion
of the author, (or, sometimes, of the service program),
a given word possesses at least one of following characteristics:
a)
the given word is polysemous word; its combination with
the neighbouring words does not provide enough information
for selecting the semantic meaning closest to the source
text;
b)
its grammatical form, together with connected words, does
not reflect a particular nuance/shade of actual sense of
the source text, though in translation into those or other
target languages the given word and /or the connected words
may have specific grammatical forms; their choice strictly
depends on the context (as seen in the above examples of
the differentiated (morphological) meanings);
c)
it may, the given word, together with its some neighbouring
words, represents a word-combination. In order to translate
such word-combination it is necessary to search the known
word-combinations related to the given word. It is also
possible that there are lexical or structural differences,
which, although do not influence the allegorical meaning
of a word-combination, but complicate or do impossible a
machine search. For example:
-
some attributes or adverbial modifiers may have been wedged
into the word-combination, giving it a more specific meaning
as a whole,
-
or parenthetical words may have been added,
-
variable components may have been added at the beginning
or at the end of the word-combination,
-
those either other own words or their sequence have been
changed, etc. [4];
in
this connection, it is necessary to define which words belong
to the word-combination, to find the borders inside the
phrase, to define the key word and, at last, to choose the
meaning corresponding to the context;
d)
it may, the given word, together with some neighbouring
words, represents a polysemous word-combination;
e)
it may, the given word has several closely-related semantic
meanings which may have the inadequate translations or translations
with inadequate forms of the use (with respect to the general
orientation of the source text or the character of actions
and circumstances).
In
many cases the correct translation of a part of a phrase,
or the whole phrase, may only be achievable by selecting
the most suitable ill.e. Use of this ill.e. may,
in the subsequent translation of the source phrase into
the target languages, allow to select the correct variant
of the translation of the given word, as well as properly
reflect the specifics of the use of the word, and also to
reflect features of use of a word, for example, features
of the syntactic structure specific to phrases of similar
type in this target language, or feature of verbal forms,
etc.
f)
it may, the given word, together with some neighbouring
words, may contain the removed / separated apposition (attributive,
adverbial), which may inside have their own additions.
Further the service
program finds in c.e.d. the dictionary entry corresponding
to the word which was marked by author; then author fixes
meaning of this word, comparing the source text with those
or other elements of dictionary entry; for this purpose
he carries out following operations:
a)
in case the given word together with the neighboring words
coincides with one of word-combinations of phraseological
character (set expression, idiom, in English language it
can be as well a phrasal verb) or corresponds to the structural
formula characterizing lexical variability, the author marks
one of the next elements of dictionary entry :
-
the concrete word-combination,
-
or the structural formula,
-
or the concrete semantic meaning, closest to the source
text,
-
or the ill.e. in which the using of the word-combination
coincides with the source text, corresponds to character
of the described actions and the adverbial modifiers.
The
author also marks the specified elements when there are
a lexical or structural distinctions between a word-combination
in the source text and in the dictionary entry.
Then
author by means of the service program places as the addition
to the given word: the headword, the word-combination or
its structural formula, the its semantic meaning or the
ill.e. at this semantic meaning.
Author
also marks in the source text by special (bold) font the
given word and other words which are a part of the word-combination
(except for the wedged words), and, besides, by means of
special boundary symbols designates the left and right bounds
of the word-combination in the given sentence (for example,
by angular brackets);
b) but in case the given word does not belong to any of a phraseological
word-combinations (set expressions, idioms), author marks
the concrete semantic meaning of the word, closest to the
source text, on condition that the grammatical features
characterizing changeable forms and forms of the government
in other words, do not contradict the source text (it is
a question of the following grammatical features: form of
verb's using - in Imperfective or in Perfective; form of
verb's government, including the prepositions, declensional
endings; form of noun's using- attributive, predicative,
etc.);
c) if the given word together with the neighboring words coincides
with one of non-phraseological word-combinations at this
meaning of word, author marks this word-combination; then author marks these
words in the source text by a special font and boundary
symbols, as it is described above;
d)
if the given word not figures in one of these word-combinations,
but in the group of the ill.e.(s)
at this meaning
of word it is possible to find
the concrete ill.e. with the analogous using
of the word and with the analogous character of the described
actions and adverbial modifiers, author marks this ill.e.;
e) if in the dictionary entry there is a section of differentiated
(morphological) meanings (morphm), author may mark the
meaning corresponding to a gender and/or a number, a person
or an inanimate object, a character of action or a state,
etc., etc.; in case it is necessary to identify the concrete
pronoun, author also marks c.w. which replace this
pronoun;
f) at last,
if in the dictionary entry there is a section of the differentiated
(syntactic) meanings (syntaxm),
author may mark the meaning specifying that this word is a part of attribute or adverbial
modifier isolated / removed from c.w. with which
it is connected syntactically, and marks this c.w.
In
some cases author marks the concrete ill.e. in the
dictionary entry of one of the neighboring words connected
with the given word, provided that the specified ill.e.
corresponds to the semantic meaning and all grammatical
features mentioned above.
Then
the service program transfers into the source text the headword
and those elements which are marked in the dictionary entry,
placing all in the form of the semantic additions to the
given word.
In
case the c.w. was marked, the service program places
this c.w. in the semantic addition (or the service
program counts up an ordinal number of this word in the
given sentence and places this number in the semantic addition).
If
some group of the contextual words was marked, the service
program places this group of words in the addition.
Then
author marks in the source text the next word possessing
one of described above features, etc. – up to the end of
the text.
In the end, the received coded text is ready to translation into
other languages.
The scheme reflecting the process of universal semantic coding
is presented on Fig.3.
further see: continuation
References.
Special sources:
1. US Patent 5,285,386 Machine translation apparatus having means
for translating polysemous words using
dominated codes.
2. US Patent 5,845,306 Context based system for accessing
dictionary entries.
3. Universal Networking Language (UNL) Specifications.
Version 2005. Universal Networking Digital Language
Foundation, www.undl.org/unlsys/unl/unl2005/
3*. UNL home page http://www.unl.ias.unu.edu/
Explanatory Dictionaries:
5. Большой толковый словарь
русского языка (2000), НОРИНТ, С.-Петербург
6. Oxford Advanced Learner’s
Dictionary of current English (1989), Oxford University
Press
7. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of current English
(1995), Clarendon Press Oxford
14. Langenscheidts Großwörterbuch
Deutsch als Fremdsprache (1998), Neubearbeitung
11**. The Concise Sapphire Dictionary,
Editor in Chief: Eitan Avneyon, (1997), Israel
Bilingual Dictionaries:
8. Oxford Russian Dictionary, Russian-English, English-Russian
(2000), Oxford University Press
9. Рымашевская Э.Л., Немецко-русский
и русско-немецкий словарь // Русский язык, М.:1990.
9* Langenscheidts Taschenwörterbuch
Russisch (Russisch - Deutsch, Deutsch – Russisch), Langenscheidt
10. Смирницкий А.И. и др. (2002)
Большой русско-английский словарь, Русский язык, М. / Comprehensive
Russian –English
Dictionary,
A. I.
Smirnitsky (2002),
Russky Yazyk
Publishers,
Moscow
11. Русско – Ивритский словарь под редакцией Подольского Б. (1992), Русский
язык, М.
11***. The Сomplete Hebrew – English
Dictionary by Reuben Alcalay, Massada Publishing Co.
Ramat-Gan-Jerusalem
15. Мюллер В.К. (2000) Англо – русский словарь, Золотой
век, Диамант, С.-П. / English – Russian Dictionary, V.K.
Müller (2000), “Zolotoi Vek”, “Diamant” St.-Petersburg
The others
sources:
4. Кунин
А. В. (1967), Англо-русский фразеологический словарь, Советская энциклопедия, М., 1233
– 1264
13. Циммерман М., Веденеева К. (1999) Русско – английский
научно – технический словарь переводчика, Наука, М.
/ Mikhail Zimmerman, Claudia Vedeneeva
(1999), Russian - English Translators Dictionary (A Guide
to Scientific and Technical Usage), John Wiley & Sons,
50, 340, 509
11*. Склонение предлогов и др. частей
речи с помощью местоименных суффиксов (1992), Дфус Эфи,
Израиль, Т.-А.
12. Качалова К. Н., Израилевич Е. Е. (1999), Практическая
грамматика английского языка, ЮНВЕСТ ЛИСТ, М., 72-76, 113-162,
166-184, 214-216, § 131, 279-287, 439-445
12* Современный русский язык, под ред. Д.Е. Розенталя (1979),
Часть 2, Синтаксис. М., Высшая школа, 123-135
16. И.М. Богуславский, Л.Л. Иомдин, А.В. Лазурский, Л.Г.
Митюшин, А.С. Бердичевский
(2005): Интерактивное разрешение неоднозначности различных
типов в машинном переводе, труды конференции Диалог 2005, Секция Разрешение
неоднозначностей http://www.dialog-21.ru
16*. Интерактивное разрешение лексической
и синтаксической неоднозначности в системах автоматической
обработки естественного языка. Лазурский А.В., Бердичевский
А.С. ., Крейдлин Л.Г., МитюшинЛ.Г. ., Сизов В.Г. Институт
проблем передачи информации РАН, http://company.yandex.ru/grant/2005/01_Lazursky_102921.pdf
17. Панич Ю.В. Предварительная идентификация смысловых значений
слов и словосочетаний и основанный на ней машинный перевод
исходного текста с родного языка на конкретный целевой язык
(8-я конференц. «Творческие поиски учёных Израиля», Ашкел.,
2004)
18. Панич Ю.В. Метод машинного перевода и система согласованных
словарей (9-я конференц. «Творческие поиски учёных Израиля»,
Ашкел., 2005)
19. Панич Ю.В. Универсальное смысловое кодирование исходного
текста и его перевод с использованием системы согласованных
словарей (I,II), http://www.elektron2000.com 2007.
19*. Panich
Iuli. UNIVERSAL SEMANTIC CODING OF POLYSEMOUS TEXT AND ITS TRANSLATION INTO OTHER LANGUAGES USING A SYSTEM OF COORDINATED
DICTIONARIES (I,II) http://semanticod07.googlepages.com
Panich Iuli
Academic Degrees: Engineer-mechanic specializing in the
automation of chemical Industry, Technological Institute,
Leningrad
Ph. D., Technical cybernetics, Institute of Control Problems,
Moscow
Research Institute of Automation, Leningrad, head of laboratory
– senior researcher.
Ashqelon, Israel, Technological Industry, head of laboratory
- manager of project
Fields of interest:
Adaptive control systems. Identification of objects, an
increase of stability of a control system.
New Fields of interest:
Linguistics and Translation. Identification of semantic
meanings, an increase of accuracy of translations from one
language into others.
Publications:
The articles in different scientific Journals, 32 patents.
He can be reached at:
adil-enline@hotmail.com
Published - July 2008
See also:
"Experience of preliminary identification
and translation of the text's fragments with use of the system
of coordinated dictionaries" by Panich Iuli
Read
more articles - Free!
E-mail
this article to your colleague!
Need
more translation jobs? Click here!
Translation
agencies are welcome to register here - Free!
Freelance
translators are welcome to register here - Free!
Subscribe
to TranslationDirectory.com newsletter - Free!
Take
part in TranslationDirectory.com poll - your voice counts!
|
