It is dedicated to comparing translation, and I will illustrate a few features here.
Yeah, I have to do the show, sorry.
This is not my computer, okay.
No, sorry, I should have done this earlier.
No, gosh.
Right.
Yeah, you can see something.
All right, so my name is Severn Ghezman.
I work at Priyant Laboratory in Atteau and Estellion.
It's a laboratory, it's a pretty huge lab, that gathers a lot of different profile researchers
coming from economy, philosophy, gender.
All common point is that they are studying political thought,
and the team I'm working with is focusing more on the languages
and how they are explored, and how they are used in political texts.
The main project I was working on is with researcher Jean-Claude Zancarini.
He was working on Machiavelli's political concepts,
how they were perceived throughout Europe in the 16th century.
For this reason, he was asking me to design a tool, or ask for tooling,
to address linguistic issues on that purpose.
So we have been testing a first corpus with the work Il Principe, Machiavelli's work,
with the Italian version, Blado's Italian Princess Edition, 1532.
We were comparing this Italian version with the first four French translations of the 16th century,
by Jacques de Ventimi, 1546, Gaspar de Verne, 1553, and Guillaume Capelle as well,
and Jaguarie in 1571.
So this corpus, should we say, is a parallel corpus,
because it has been designing to align with the Italian version, all the French versions.
The work environment that was specified required one function feature,
a main feature which was to see as many as possible parallel texts side by side.
So that's what I'm calling synnotic parallel view.
We have a good illustration with the versioning machine, who already does that work.
For example, here I've been showing the prophecy of Marlene,
and the three editions, the English editions, Dublin, Oxford, and Cambridge.
So that was the kind of thing they were asking me to do.
But of course, because they want to explore and study,
they needed to perform other functionalities like bilingual search,
which is the basic function that you need when studying parallel copra.
But of course, also editing equivalences, translation equivalences,
and have some other kind of views apart from the text view.
So I'm going to show, illustrate some graph views of those equivalences that they have been editing.
You can also see if you want a demo later on,
that there's some additional functionalities like manual text alignments and lexical tagging.
But because those researchers were not very friendly with the TI community at first,
they were afraid to use oxygen tooling, for example,
they were asking me to do a WYSIWYG tool.
Well, I came up with the idea of designing a WYSIWYG tool,
and driving them more and more as time goes by to TI world and XML pure editor.
But for the moment, it's a Java desktop application that I've been developing,
and supporting formats are text format for, if you want to align text,
then this is the important format.
Then T-MAX is a special format for translation memory copra and TI.
No, this is part of the show, actually.
You're going to see that then we're coming back to this thing.
It's normal that they overlaps, I'm sorry.
And then there's some feature like lexical tagging.
I've been adding the implementation of TreeTogger.
The storage is with SQLite and direct encoding, writing, reading TI copra and dictionaries.
And for the views, I've been using a prefused library,
which encodes in XML file, like graphML format.
So this is what it looks like, hyper-micron looks like.
It is divided into three panes.
The left pane is a tree pane, and it shows the common structure of all the texts.
Node by node, you can see the different nesting information.
So chapter gathers some segments, and segments might gather,
some collect some other sub-segments.
There's also a dictionary review that we'll show later.
And whenever you select one node, you have the direct presentation of the versions you want to see.
So here I've been showing the four versions, the Italian and the first four French versions.
And on the bottom panel, you have the working space,
where you have the bilingual search editor, and results, and graph views also.
I was talking about lexical features, but I'm probably going to skip it a little bit,
because I don't have much time.
It's just that we've been laminizing the copra with TreeTogger,
and so we are able to manually correct the laminization.
The tool mostly enables the normalization, because we are dealing with ancient texts,
so the writings are very various, you're going to see.
And two views are enabling those corrections and investigation.
The vocabulary review, for example here, we have a table with all the forms of one language.
So for example, here we have four texts in the French language.
So the four texts will be displayed as columns, and you have all the forms here,
and with the frequency they appear in those texts.
You can see there are lots of variations for toujours, for example, the word toujours in French.
Here we have three differences, with SI, SGJ, and SJ without S in the end.
And you see who uses the most, which version he uses the most.
But of course they are referring to the same toujours words,
so this is part of the normalization process that we can do within the tool.
Then there's the dictionary view on the left here, that shows all the lemmas.
I've been focusing here, for example, to illustrate with stato.
There are four kinds of different spellings, stati, stati with S capital or not.
And there's also two expressions here.
You say, well, those are not forms, they are expressions, referring to stato.
That's part of the equivalency's editing.
The authors wanted to highlight the fact that they were referring to stato,
and so they added to the dictionary, but maybe this is not where it should come.
This is one feature that is maybe less interesting.
But the main idea of the tool is to work with equivalencies,
so how we start doing the equivalencies and how we conclude on those results.
So to start with, you do bilingual search.
And then the bilingual search, of course,
is showing co-presences of source and target items that you are asking.
But they're also showing the occurrences found alone, source or either target.
So, for example, specie in Italian and espace in French gives that kind of result table
with, again, the text represented as columns, where they appear, chapters.
And you can see the co-presence of specie, espace, on the third line highlighted in yellow.
This is a proposition table of the results from the bilingual search.
Of course, then the annotator has to do the work of validating.
If it's true that there are really translation equivalences or not,
so this is a fastegious work, very long work.
To end with, they can see the resulting of those translation editing here
by asking to see our DNA, for example, has a graph and table view.
I'm going to be very quick on this.
Let's say that we can see the differences, the different strategies here with those tables.
But I don't have the time to show you the tables.
But we can really highlight two kind of strategies.
First strategy is to be consistent within the translation
after always counts on the polysemy of the text to explicit the concept
so he only uses one or a few translation.
The second strategy is to be doing lots of variations to convey the same source word.
This is one graph of the translation more complex,
showing in blue, in the center, our DNA.
And his equivalence is in yellow in French.
We are ranked two, which means that we are seeing equivalences of the source, our DNA,
and also the equivalences of the French, so the Italian equivalences in blue,
which are on the outskirts.
This graph shows how they are interlinking
and how it highlights semantic themes that are related to our DNA.
For example, and the next one, you see Gouverneur in the bottom,
but next to our DNA you see Gouverneur on the right and Armare.
So those are not synonyms, of course, but they are near in the text,
and they are referring to the thematic group of our DNA.
Anyway, I'm concluding with the fact that the tool is not yet generalized,
it still needs some work to do, especially to incorporate TI-CoPRA
with other kind of alignment scheme.
TreeTiger is only working for Italian and French here,
because this is the tested CoPRA, so we need to integrate more languages.
And future features would be some.
But I'll just conclude that you can see the results of this CoPRA
at Iberprasse.net.
They are going to do some additional texts to align Latin versions
and other French versions.
They're going to work also on the Art of the War CoPRA.
And Ibermacher, it's a free software so you are welcome to collaborate with me
and contact me to do some demonstration or add some CoPRA.
That's what mainly I wanted to deliver as a message.
Thank you.