-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Create a localization rule to highlight common errors that cause trouble for translators #515
Comments
LGTM. Localization issues defo deserve a place in the word-usage spotlight. |
Excerpt from Localization Newsletter Issue 8, April 2020 (internal Red Hat email) Localization-friendly Technical Writing Tips by JunkitoShould or Should Not Use "Should"The word "should" is a modal auxiliary verb that is commonly used in our documentation to express obligation/correctness or expectation/probability. Clear-cut Use Cases for "Should"I often see the word "should" in sentences like the following: Expressing expectation/probability
Expressing obligation/correctness
These are the clear-cut sentences that I don't have to think twice about. The Ambiguity of "Should"However, because "should" has multiple meanings as described above, a sentence containing "should" might be interpreted in multiple ways. Take a look at the following example:
For this example, I could not work out at first whether "the process is expected to continue" or "the process needs to continue." The former interpretation implies that the process itself will resume from where it stopped, whereas the latter interpretation implies that the process needs to resume from where it stopped, hinting that a form of intervention might be required to make this happen. Localization-friendly SuggestionsAfter a brief investigation, I concluded that "should" in this case was used to express expectation/probability ("the process is expected to continue"). It was also the case that machine translation selected the other interpretation (obligation/correctness: "the process needs to continue"). My localization-friendly suggestion is to use "will" instead of "should" in this particular example. "Will" is a more definite word that confirms the occurrence of an event. If you want to emphasize the possibility rather than the confirmation of an event to occur, I suggest using "might" instead of "will." |
@aireilly, would you add [email protected] as a repo member? |
@rolfedh done. Welcome @[email protected] :) On a side note, would be good to review existing rule terms and see if it makes sense to pull out other localization terms under this new rule. |
We're developing a set of guidelines and will bring others into the fold as the list grows. |
Excellent :) |
re: "should". IMO would be great to figure out where this is allowed and tune the rule to allow for correct usages. |
@[email protected] had spoke about this during the Oct 26th 2023 CSS Best practices meeting. She promised to come up with a draft listing all the words that can be avoided to make translation easier. Here's her presentation - https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1_1UOqZlRHqwajCRzzEUXtS5mrJKaIlkAA5_OQHS1dRU/edit#slide=id.g213857fa2d1_0_68 |
Considering the above, it might make sense to create a distinct and separate Red Hat Localization rule set. E.g.,
|
On it. |
Vale can help us produce content that makes localization easier. There are many English language usages that can cause problems for localization. For example, in the ISG, "should" is a use with caution word. "Should" can have multiple meanings depending on the context. This makes extra work for translators.
ISG:
We do catch "should" as a suggestion term, but it would be good to review existing rules, and pull current errors that affect localization into a single rule if possible, or a group of localization rules if not.
"Should" usage being just an example of the kind of errors we should investigate.
Additional context:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: