Tag Archives: adjective accordance

French ‘fin’ followed by a year number: fixed

Tagger improvement: fixed this issue. French ‘l’Empire allemand’ now translates properly into l’Imperu alimanu (the German Empire). French word ‘fin’ is now identified as a preposition when followed by a year number.

The above excerpt is translated into the ‘sartinesu’ variant of Corsican language.

This issue relates to the more general problem of the grammatical status of numbers, a problem to which we shall return later.

Double adjective accordance: scoring 98.43%

Now scoring 1 – 2/128 = 98.43%. There are only two related errors, of a special case of adjective accordance: ‘aux xxie et XXe siècles’  (in the 21st and 20th centuries) should translate into: à i XIXu è XXu seculi. There are 3 ambiguous words here:

  • ‘aux’ i.e. ‘à les’ (in the): à i (masculine plural)/à e (feminine plural)
  • ‘xxie’ i.e. ‘vingt-et-unième’ (21st): XIXu (masculine singular)/XIXa (feminine singular)
  • ‘xxe’ i.e. ‘vingtième’ (20th): XXu (masculine singular)/XXa (feminine singular)

Proper accordance should be performed as follows:

  • ‘aux’ : à i (masculine plural): depends on ‘siècles’ (centuries), masculine plural
  • ‘xxie’ i.e. vingt-et-unième (21st): XIXu (masculine singular)
  • ‘xxe’ i.e. vingtième (20th): XXu (masculine singular)

Of the same type are:

  • ‘les langues italienne et française’: e lingue taliana è francesathe Italian and French languages (English is ambiguous in this case, since ‘les langues italiennes et françaises’ translate the same, although the meaning is different, referring explicitly to the several varieties of Italian anf French languages. In French, the ambiguity only concerns oral text, since the written sentence is unambiguous. In Corsican language, both written and oral sentences are unambiguous.)
  • ‘les codes pénal et civil’: i codici penale è civilethe penal and civil codes

Now should it be considered an instance of a successful Feigenbaum test? Arguably, yes (although this is debatable). These two errors can not be considered as gross errors, from a Feigenbaum test perspective. They can be considered as some errors a human could do.

But caution: at present time, this is only one exceptional case of successful instance. Call it Feigenbaum hit. What we are intested in is regular successful  Feigenbaum test. For the moment the software is not capable of that. New target: 99% and/or more frequent successful Feigenbaum hits.