Pertti Hietaranta Jul 2, 2018:

I'll do that as soon as the new version of IATE is out sometime later this year, possibly even this summer. It will then be a lot easier for the operators to modify IATE content than it is now, and the way (proposed) changes to IATE content can be audited for accuracy and quality will also be more user-friendly.

finnword1 Jul 2, 2018:

Since you are a "regular user/contributor" to the IATE database, here is a wonderful opportunity for you to do us all a favor and add your translation silppu = scrap.

Pertti Hietaranta Jul 2, 2018:

Still no foundry-compatible context.

I'm fully aware of the IATE database as I'm a regular user/contributor and therefore know that the only industry-related "chaff" entry in the database is based on two sources neither of which is related to metallurgy in foundry-related contexts.

One is from an agriculture-related source (jute industry) while the other is not from an English-language source at all but from the more than twenty-year old (1997 edition and thus now partially even outdated) bilingual "CD-Perussanakirja" by the Finnish publisher Edita, which similarly makes no reference to foundry-compatible contexts.

(There is also another industry-related entry, but it is even more incompatible with foundry contexts because it relates to biological contamination and is thus, because of its agricultural affiliation, of no relevance here.)

IRMC

finnword1 Jul 1, 2018:

http://iate.europa.eu/SearchByQuery.do;jsessionid=pvdXIfn2fZ...

Pertti Hietaranta Jul 1, 2018:

I was also talking about the Google search engine - of course. I didn't even mention Google Translator.

If you need some references to see some of the quite serious limitations and biases of any Google type search engine, take a look at the following for a start:

Spink, Amanda & Zimmer, Michael (eds.), (2008), Web Search: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Berlin: Springer. Especially the article "Search Engine Bias and the Demise of Search Engine Utopianism" by E. Goldman is worth reading.

Brophy, Jand & Bawden, David (2005), "Is Google enough? Comparison of an internet search engine with academic library resources," Aslib Proceddings New Information Perspectives 57: 498 - 512.

Vaughan, Liwen & Thelwall, Mike (2004), "Search engine coverage bias: evidence and possible causes," Information Processing & Management 40: 693 - 707.

I'll he happy to continue the discussion (with references to some superior special language dictionaries in the technical field) as soon as I see you refute the views expressed in these references as well as those supported by the data in the Cambridge and Oxford dictionaries I cited earlier.

Till then, to repeat myself, I rest my case.

finnword1 Jun 30, 2018:

Still waiting to see the name for the "more modern and comprehensive" replacement for Talvitie.

finnword1 Jun 30, 2018:

Sorry, if I confused you. I wasn't referring Google Translator but the search engine, to find dictionaries, specialized glossaries, articles, etc. Give it a try!

Pertti Hietaranta Jun 30, 2018:

"Kannattaa laittaa googlen hakuun "silppu englanniksi"

You obviously don't know the meaning and significance of the notion of context. If you did, you would not post a suggestion like this.

There's a very good reason why professional translators don't use Google as their special language dictionary. If you had professional translator training and/or sufficiently many years of professional experience, you would know why this is so.

However, since you make suggestions like the one above, you are obviously not a professional translator, so continuing this discussion would not serve any useful purpose.

Ergo, I rest my case.

finnword1 Jun 30, 2018:

"Talvitie, in particular, is not the most modern or the most comprehensive dictionary in the field".
Why don't you name some good alternatives?

finnword1 Jun 30, 2018:

Kannattaa laittaa googlen hakuun "silppu englanniksi"

Pertti Hietaranta Jun 29, 2018:

Talvitie as a reference: two short comments Just two short comments on the value of Talvitie (or any other single dictionary) as a reference.

1. As all professional translators and even many other people know, all dictionaries have their limitations, and suffer from inaccuracies, inadvertent omissions and even plain errors (and Talvitie is no exception in this regard), which is why a single reference by itself does not necessarily constitute a definite proof of anything.

2. As all professional translators and many other people also know, it is not a particularly good idea to try to settle a translation issue by consulting a bilingual dictionary alone. Typically, you also need a respectable monolingual dictionary of the language in question to reach an informed decision. And as such this has nothing to do with the fact that Talvitie, in particular, is not the most modern or the most comprehensive dictionary in the field. If you consult e.g. Cambridge Dictionary (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/) or OED (http://www.oed.com/), you can see that outside radar jamming contexts, "chaff" is typically used as an equivalent to the Finnish "silppu" in agricultural contexts but not in texts dealing with foundries.