[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: contest dependeded meanings for yes and no

Hi Praveen, thanks for raising this point. Sorry I couldn't respond to it before.

On 05/01/2007, at 12:11 AM, പ്രവീണ്‍‌|Praveen wrote:

I would like to know how other teams have solved the issue of context-sensitive meaning for 'yes' and 'no'. For example when we have different translations for yes/no choices depending on the question like

do you have it?
is it correct?
do you want it?

each will have a separate 'yes' and 'no'.

So does my language.

Q. "Do you have it?" (implies "yet")
A. "Already" or "Not yet"

Q. "Is it correct?"
A. "Correct" or "Incorrect"

Q. "Do you want it?"
A. "Yes" or "No"

I'm stuck at this. Currently I have chosen one of the context but it doesn't suit other contexts. Does plural forms has someting to do with this?

No. This is more to do with the syntax of our languages, which comes back to cultural structures. I think you will find many Asian languages have the same issue.

Translators currently simply use "Yes" or "No" as replies for all three kinds of questions, however incorrect that might be.

I am unsure how useful it would be to modify our locales' LC_MESSAGES files to include the other answers. Mine currently has:

which covers the abbreviated "Yes" and "No" in both English and Vietnamese. I don't know if adding the longer forms, plus the extra forms,

would work in all cases, because in many cases, the answers to questions are simply text strings, not necessarily classified by the program as affirmative or negative replies in interactive situations.

Could someone who understands the behaviour of programs in these situations please comment?

Can we add further terms to our locales for "Yes" and "No", and have that cover all affirmative or negative answers to questions posed by the program?

from Clytie (vi-VN, Vietnamese free-software translation team / nhóm Việt hóa phần mềm tự do)

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: