LINGUIST List 3.550

Fri 03 Jul 1992

Qs: Classical Lists, Machine Trasnlation, Run-ons

Editor for this issue: <>


Directory

  1. Michael Sikillian/Annotext, Query: Lists
  2. Mari Olsen, Machine Translation
  3. stan kulikowski ii, run-on words?

Message 1: Query: Lists

Date: 30 Jun 92 12:55:37 EDT
From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323compuserve.com>
Subject: Query: Lists

Does anyone know any Bitnet or Internet lists dedicated to Classical
Greek or Latin? Thanks

Michael Sikillian
Annotext
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Machine Translation

Date: Tue, 30 Jun 92 23:24:00 EDMachine Translation
From: Mari Olsen <molsenastrid.ling.nwu.edu>
Subject: Machine Translation

I would like information for a friend about a company called Global
Link (Globalink?) out of Maclean, Virginia. Specifically, he wants to
know, from a linguistics perspective, how good their machine-aided
translation systems are, and whether it is likely they have the
technological and linguistic expertise to develop a Japanese-English
module, using kanji. Finally, he (and I) would like to know about
other companies producing commercially available machine-aided
translation systems, and whether any have a competitive
Japanese-English module.

Please send replies to molsenastrid.ling.nwu.edu and I will
summarize. Thank you.

Mari Broman Olsen
Northwestern University
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 3: run-on words?

Date: Thu, 02 Jul 92 16:12:57 CDrun-on words?
From: stan kulikowski ii <STANKULIUWF.BITNET>
Subject: run-on words?


 could anyone tell me why we have compound, run-on words in english
orthography, like 'something', 'someone', 'therefore', 'whereas', 'everyone'
and so on? is there any real linguistic phenomenon being captured here
by omitting the usual word boundary in the spelling? i find myself doing
it with words like 'realtime' and 'harddisk' and i don't know why.

 the reason i ask is that i have been working on a program which does syllable
counting. these run-on words with the silent-e in the middle of the word
cause the program to differ from human performance. it is easy to discount
english syllable counting for a final 'e' on a word with at least one other
vowel cluster, but the silent-e in the middle of a word can only be done with
a lookup table-- and that is a real drag for otherwise elegant programming.
how would i know if i got all the run-ons listed or not? does it get applied
every time there is an 'e' in the middle of a word?
 stan

 . stankuliUWF.bitnet
 ===
 : : close your eyes, my darling, or three of them at least
 --- -- old venusian lullaby
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue