> > Unless computer-automated translation
> >becomes cheap and effective within the next 20 or 30 years (unlikely, I
> This is highly likely. If current trends continue, in 30 years computers
> will be more than one million times more powerful. And computer
> is already used in niche markets such as law.
Well, I just have to comment on this one. In Finland we have
subtitles in all foreign films (which means almost every film)
and foreign TV-series (a major part of the content in TV too),
so I can compare the translation to my own translation and
I have to say that even the human translators are doing a
pretty poor job. Of course subtitles are a different thing,
because they have to be fast and compact, but the point is that
I don't *want* to relay on somebody else's translation.
I mean, learning another language is not a bad thing, is it?
Finland has two official languages because of a swedish-speaking
minority. Also it's small, so everybody has to learn at least two
foreign languages (one for at least 6 years, one for 3, if my
memory serves me right) and three foreign languages is more
than common. This doesn't degrade anybody's mother tongue,
it enriches it. Finnish has borrowed many words from swedish
and lately from english. Some people are worried about this,
but to me this is the natural way for languages to evolve. It just
shows that the language is alive and capable of adjusting to changes.
When we start to talk about national identities, that's a totally
different thing. But that's even farther away from typography :-)
Harri Granholm / [log in to unmask]