Socratic ParadoxHow did the Romans say “good night”?Is “urgeo inurgor” a correct Latin phrase, meaning “to squeeze the unsqeezable”?What does the clause “quae suae salvationis causa exstitit” mean?Can you please translate these paragraphs (13th & 14th century)?cum/tum and the Latin version of HerodotusSemper Veritas, Semper Veritatem, or something else?Translation of “May Change Nourish Me”English translation of Erasmus's “Qui sit modus repetendae lectionis”Is it acceptable/regular to use diacritics (macron) in written texts?Translating Jefferson's quote on priests and science
Why does Kathryn say this in 12 Monkeys?
What can plausibly explain many of my very long and low-tech bridges?
Incremental Ranges!
Managing libraries hosted on EmacsWiki
SF novella separating the dumb majority from the intelligent part of mankind
What is the advantage of carrying a tripod and ND-filters when you could use image stacking instead?
The economics of a "no deal" Brexit
Why does the Schrödinger equation work so well for the Hydrogen atom despite the relativistic boundary at the nucleus?
Avoiding cliches when writing gods
How to skip replacing first occurrence of a character in each line?
How did students remember what to practise between lessons without any sheet music?
Russian equivalent of the French expression "broyer du noir"
Why don’t airliners have temporary liveries?
How to generate random points without duplication?
How to make thick Asian sauces?
After the loss of Challenger, why weren’t Galileo and Ulysses launched by Centaurs on expendable boosters?
When conversion from Integer to Single may lose precision
How do I write "Show, Don't Tell" as a person with Asperger Syndrome?
Last survivors from different time periods living together
How to make a setting relevant?
Does the first version of Linux developed by Linus Torvalds have a GUI?
How do photons get into the eyes?
How hard would it be to convert a glider into an powered electric aircraft?
PostgreSQL - Array of overlapping Polygon Ids
Socratic Paradox
How did the Romans say “good night”?Is “urgeo inurgor” a correct Latin phrase, meaning “to squeeze the unsqeezable”?What does the clause “quae suae salvationis causa exstitit” mean?Can you please translate these paragraphs (13th & 14th century)?cum/tum and the Latin version of HerodotusSemper Veritas, Semper Veritatem, or something else?Translation of “May Change Nourish Me”English translation of Erasmus's “Qui sit modus repetendae lectionis”Is it acceptable/regular to use diacritics (macron) in written texts?Translating Jefferson's quote on priests and science
According to the Wikipedia page of the Socratic paradox 'I know that I know nothing', Latin version of the same is — 'Scio me nescire' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing).
However, Google Translate says that English translation of 'Scio me nescire' is 'I know I know'.
Why is their a difference between the info of the 2 sources and which one is right?
idiom translation-check latin-to-english-translation
edited May 29 at 9:39
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
49.9k1271300
asked May 28 at 6:35
user83683user83683
242
New contributor
user83683 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
According to the Wikipedia page of the Socratic paradox 'I know that I know nothing', Latin version of the same is — 'Scio me nescire' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing).
However, Google Translate says that English translation of 'Scio me nescire' is 'I know I know'.
Why is their a difference between the info of the 2 sources and which one is right?
idiom translation-check latin-to-english-translation
edited May 29 at 9:39
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
49.9k1271300
asked May 28 at 6:35
user83683user83683
242
New contributor
user83683 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
Computer translation programs are well known for being wrong. It's not that they just make mistakes (like humans are known for) -- it's that they calculate their translations (much like a math problem), but they lack the ability to suspect that their translations could be wrong. (At the very least, if they're programmed to have the ability to suspect wrong translations, they don't (yet) communicate it to the human user.) So always take computer translations with a grain of salt! (Meaning that you are allowed to be skeptical of them.)
– J-L
May 28 at 17:10
add a comment |
According to the Wikipedia page of the Socratic paradox 'I know that I know nothing', Latin version of the same is — 'Scio me nescire' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing).
However, Google Translate says that English translation of 'Scio me nescire' is 'I know I know'.
Why is their a difference between the info of the 2 sources and which one is right?
idiom translation-check latin-to-english-translation
edited May 29 at 9:39
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
49.9k1271300
asked May 28 at 6:35
user83683user83683
242
New contributor
user83683 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
According to the Wikipedia page of the Socratic paradox 'I know that I know nothing', Latin version of the same is — 'Scio me nescire' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing).
However, Google Translate says that English translation of 'Scio me nescire' is 'I know I know'.
Why is their a difference between the info of the 2 sources and which one is right?
idiom translation-check latin-to-english-translation
idiom translation-check latin-to-english-translation
edited May 29 at 9:39
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
49.9k1271300
asked May 28 at 6:35
user83683user83683
242
New contributor
user83683 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited May 29 at 9:39
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
49.9k1271300
asked May 28 at 6:35
user83683user83683
242
New contributor
user83683 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited May 29 at 9:39
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
49.9k1271300
edited May 29 at 9:39
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
49.9k1271300
edited May 29 at 9:39
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
49.9k1271300
49.9k1271300
asked May 28 at 6:35
user83683user83683
242
New contributor
user83683 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked May 28 at 6:35
user83683user83683
242
asked May 28 at 6:35
user83683user83683
242
242
New contributor
user83683 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
user83683 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
Computer translation programs are well known for being wrong. It's not that they just make mistakes (like humans are known for) -- it's that they calculate their translations (much like a math problem), but they lack the ability to suspect that their translations could be wrong. (At the very least, if they're programmed to have the ability to suspect wrong translations, they don't (yet) communicate it to the human user.) So always take computer translations with a grain of salt! (Meaning that you are allowed to be skeptical of them.)
– J-L
May 28 at 17:10
add a comment |
2
Computer translation programs are well known for being wrong. It's not that they just make mistakes (like humans are known for) -- it's that they calculate their translations (much like a math problem), but they lack the ability to suspect that their translations could be wrong. (At the very least, if they're programmed to have the ability to suspect wrong translations, they don't (yet) communicate it to the human user.) So always take computer translations with a grain of salt! (Meaning that you are allowed to be skeptical of them.)
– J-L
May 28 at 17:10
2
2
Computer translation programs are well known for being wrong. It's not that they just make mistakes (like humans are known for) -- it's that they calculate their translations (much like a math problem), but they lack the ability to suspect that their translations could be wrong. (At the very least, if they're programmed to have the ability to suspect wrong translations, they don't (yet) communicate it to the human user.) So always take computer translations with a grain of salt! (Meaning that you are allowed to be skeptical of them.)
– J-L
May 28 at 17:10
Computer translation programs are well known for being wrong. It's not that they just make mistakes (like humans are known for) -- it's that they calculate their translations (much like a math problem), but they lack the ability to suspect that their translations could be wrong. (At the very least, if they're programmed to have the ability to suspect wrong translations, they don't (yet) communicate it to the human user.) So always take computer translations with a grain of salt! (Meaning that you are allowed to be skeptical of them.)
– J-L
May 28 at 17:10
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Because Google Translate is wrong. It does not, (or not only) use the dictionary meaning of words, but learns phrases in context. In many cases this can help create a natural translation but (especially for short phrases out of context) it can lead to nonsense.
Nescire ("ne scire") means "to not know".
Scio me nescire is literally "I know myself to not know" - this is the normal way in Latin of expressing "I know that ...".
So a faithful translation into normal English is "I know that I do not know".
answered May 28 at 10:36
Colin FineColin Fine
4065
1
What is more, Google Translate doesn't use any model of grammar at all, or at least not until recently; I read they were surprised at how quickly and easily a small company created a superior translation website (DeepL), which does use a model or grammar, and so Google finally tried to integrate some grammatical model as well, although I don't know how well and to what extent they have done or are doing that. P.S. DeepL doesn't have Latin, but it is mostly superior to Google in the languages it does have.
– Cerberus♦
May 28 at 15:04
1
I feel like this almost isn't complete without mentioning the connection between scio and nescire; that scio comes from scire ("to know") and nescire ("to not know") is literally just ne scire .
– Raphael Schmitz
May 28 at 15:34
1
Added, @RaphaelSchmitz
– Colin Fine
May 28 at 16:13
@Cerberus It's a big controversy in machine translation, whether to use rule based (i.e. human extracted syntax rules) or data-based (statistically learned patterns). Rather, currently it is not controversial at all because recent statistical based methods (DL, LSTM, BERT) are so much more successful. There's the classic quip by Jelinek, a speech recognition researcher: "Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up"
– Mitch
May 28 at 17:37
@Mitch: Noöne suggests only one method should be used, but, from what I read, Google's disregard of grammatical models has proved inferior to that of DeepL, which no doubt combines models with statistical methods.
– Cerberus♦
May 29 at 0:21
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "644"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
user83683 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f10862%2fsocratic-paradox%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Because Google Translate is wrong. It does not, (or not only) use the dictionary meaning of words, but learns phrases in context. In many cases this can help create a natural translation but (especially for short phrases out of context) it can lead to nonsense.
Nescire ("ne scire") means "to not know".
Scio me nescire is literally "I know myself to not know" - this is the normal way in Latin of expressing "I know that ...".
So a faithful translation into normal English is "I know that I do not know".
answered May 28 at 10:36
Colin FineColin Fine
4065
1
What is more, Google Translate doesn't use any model of grammar at all, or at least not until recently; I read they were surprised at how quickly and easily a small company created a superior translation website (DeepL), which does use a model or grammar, and so Google finally tried to integrate some grammatical model as well, although I don't know how well and to what extent they have done or are doing that. P.S. DeepL doesn't have Latin, but it is mostly superior to Google in the languages it does have.
– Cerberus♦
May 28 at 15:04
1
I feel like this almost isn't complete without mentioning the connection between scio and nescire; that scio comes from scire ("to know") and nescire ("to not know") is literally just ne scire .
– Raphael Schmitz
May 28 at 15:34
1
Added, @RaphaelSchmitz
– Colin Fine
May 28 at 16:13
@Cerberus It's a big controversy in machine translation, whether to use rule based (i.e. human extracted syntax rules) or data-based (statistically learned patterns). Rather, currently it is not controversial at all because recent statistical based methods (DL, LSTM, BERT) are so much more successful. There's the classic quip by Jelinek, a speech recognition researcher: "Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up"
– Mitch
May 28 at 17:37
@Mitch: Noöne suggests only one method should be used, but, from what I read, Google's disregard of grammatical models has proved inferior to that of DeepL, which no doubt combines models with statistical methods.
– Cerberus♦
May 29 at 0:21
add a comment |
Because Google Translate is wrong. It does not, (or not only) use the dictionary meaning of words, but learns phrases in context. In many cases this can help create a natural translation but (especially for short phrases out of context) it can lead to nonsense.
Nescire ("ne scire") means "to not know".
Scio me nescire is literally "I know myself to not know" - this is the normal way in Latin of expressing "I know that ...".
So a faithful translation into normal English is "I know that I do not know".
answered May 28 at 10:36
Colin FineColin Fine
4065
1
What is more, Google Translate doesn't use any model of grammar at all, or at least not until recently; I read they were surprised at how quickly and easily a small company created a superior translation website (DeepL), which does use a model or grammar, and so Google finally tried to integrate some grammatical model as well, although I don't know how well and to what extent they have done or are doing that. P.S. DeepL doesn't have Latin, but it is mostly superior to Google in the languages it does have.
– Cerberus♦
May 28 at 15:04
1
I feel like this almost isn't complete without mentioning the connection between scio and nescire; that scio comes from scire ("to know") and nescire ("to not know") is literally just ne scire .
– Raphael Schmitz
May 28 at 15:34
1
Added, @RaphaelSchmitz
– Colin Fine
May 28 at 16:13
@Cerberus It's a big controversy in machine translation, whether to use rule based (i.e. human extracted syntax rules) or data-based (statistically learned patterns). Rather, currently it is not controversial at all because recent statistical based methods (DL, LSTM, BERT) are so much more successful. There's the classic quip by Jelinek, a speech recognition researcher: "Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up"
– Mitch
May 28 at 17:37
@Mitch: Noöne suggests only one method should be used, but, from what I read, Google's disregard of grammatical models has proved inferior to that of DeepL, which no doubt combines models with statistical methods.
– Cerberus♦
May 29 at 0:21
add a comment |
Because Google Translate is wrong. It does not, (or not only) use the dictionary meaning of words, but learns phrases in context. In many cases this can help create a natural translation but (especially for short phrases out of context) it can lead to nonsense.
Nescire ("ne scire") means "to not know".
Scio me nescire is literally "I know myself to not know" - this is the normal way in Latin of expressing "I know that ...".
So a faithful translation into normal English is "I know that I do not know".
answered May 28 at 10:36
Colin FineColin Fine
4065
Because Google Translate is wrong. It does not, (or not only) use the dictionary meaning of words, but learns phrases in context. In many cases this can help create a natural translation but (especially for short phrases out of context) it can lead to nonsense.
Nescire ("ne scire") means "to not know".
Scio me nescire is literally "I know myself to not know" - this is the normal way in Latin of expressing "I know that ...".
So a faithful translation into normal English is "I know that I do not know".
answered May 28 at 10:36
Colin FineColin Fine
4065
edited May 28 at 16:13
answered May 28 at 10:36
Colin FineColin Fine
4065
answered May 28 at 10:36
Colin FineColin Fine
4065
answered May 28 at 10:36
Colin FineColin Fine
4065
4065
1
What is more, Google Translate doesn't use any model of grammar at all, or at least not until recently; I read they were surprised at how quickly and easily a small company created a superior translation website (DeepL), which does use a model or grammar, and so Google finally tried to integrate some grammatical model as well, although I don't know how well and to what extent they have done or are doing that. P.S. DeepL doesn't have Latin, but it is mostly superior to Google in the languages it does have.
– Cerberus♦
May 28 at 15:04
1
I feel like this almost isn't complete without mentioning the connection between scio and nescire; that scio comes from scire ("to know") and nescire ("to not know") is literally just ne scire .
– Raphael Schmitz
May 28 at 15:34
1
Added, @RaphaelSchmitz
– Colin Fine
May 28 at 16:13
@Cerberus It's a big controversy in machine translation, whether to use rule based (i.e. human extracted syntax rules) or data-based (statistically learned patterns). Rather, currently it is not controversial at all because recent statistical based methods (DL, LSTM, BERT) are so much more successful. There's the classic quip by Jelinek, a speech recognition researcher: "Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up"
– Mitch
May 28 at 17:37
@Mitch: Noöne suggests only one method should be used, but, from what I read, Google's disregard of grammatical models has proved inferior to that of DeepL, which no doubt combines models with statistical methods.
– Cerberus♦
May 29 at 0:21
add a comment |
1
What is more, Google Translate doesn't use any model of grammar at all, or at least not until recently; I read they were surprised at how quickly and easily a small company created a superior translation website (DeepL), which does use a model or grammar, and so Google finally tried to integrate some grammatical model as well, although I don't know how well and to what extent they have done or are doing that. P.S. DeepL doesn't have Latin, but it is mostly superior to Google in the languages it does have.
– Cerberus♦
May 28 at 15:04
1
I feel like this almost isn't complete without mentioning the connection between scio and nescire; that scio comes from scire ("to know") and nescire ("to not know") is literally just ne scire .
– Raphael Schmitz
May 28 at 15:34
1
Added, @RaphaelSchmitz
– Colin Fine
May 28 at 16:13
@Cerberus It's a big controversy in machine translation, whether to use rule based (i.e. human extracted syntax rules) or data-based (statistically learned patterns). Rather, currently it is not controversial at all because recent statistical based methods (DL, LSTM, BERT) are so much more successful. There's the classic quip by Jelinek, a speech recognition researcher: "Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up"
– Mitch
May 28 at 17:37
@Mitch: Noöne suggests only one method should be used, but, from what I read, Google's disregard of grammatical models has proved inferior to that of DeepL, which no doubt combines models with statistical methods.
– Cerberus♦
May 29 at 0:21
1
1
What is more, Google Translate doesn't use any model of grammar at all, or at least not until recently; I read they were surprised at how quickly and easily a small company created a superior translation website (DeepL), which does use a model or grammar, and so Google finally tried to integrate some grammatical model as well, although I don't know how well and to what extent they have done or are doing that. P.S. DeepL doesn't have Latin, but it is mostly superior to Google in the languages it does have.
– Cerberus♦
May 28 at 15:04
What is more, Google Translate doesn't use any model of grammar at all, or at least not until recently; I read they were surprised at how quickly and easily a small company created a superior translation website (DeepL), which does use a model or grammar, and so Google finally tried to integrate some grammatical model as well, although I don't know how well and to what extent they have done or are doing that. P.S. DeepL doesn't have Latin, but it is mostly superior to Google in the languages it does have.
– Cerberus♦
May 28 at 15:04
1
1
I feel like this almost isn't complete without mentioning the connection between scio and nescire; that scio comes from scire ("to know") and nescire ("to not know") is literally just ne scire .
– Raphael Schmitz
May 28 at 15:34
I feel like this almost isn't complete without mentioning the connection between scio and nescire; that scio comes from scire ("to know") and nescire ("to not know") is literally just ne scire .
– Raphael Schmitz
May 28 at 15:34
1
1
Added, @RaphaelSchmitz
– Colin Fine
May 28 at 16:13
Added, @RaphaelSchmitz
– Colin Fine
May 28 at 16:13
@Cerberus It's a big controversy in machine translation, whether to use rule based (i.e. human extracted syntax rules) or data-based (statistically learned patterns). Rather, currently it is not controversial at all because recent statistical based methods (DL, LSTM, BERT) are so much more successful. There's the classic quip by Jelinek, a speech recognition researcher: "Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up"
– Mitch
May 28 at 17:37
@Cerberus It's a big controversy in machine translation, whether to use rule based (i.e. human extracted syntax rules) or data-based (statistically learned patterns). Rather, currently it is not controversial at all because recent statistical based methods (DL, LSTM, BERT) are so much more successful. There's the classic quip by Jelinek, a speech recognition researcher: "Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up"
– Mitch
May 28 at 17:37
@Mitch: Noöne suggests only one method should be used, but, from what I read, Google's disregard of grammatical models has proved inferior to that of DeepL, which no doubt combines models with statistical methods.
– Cerberus♦
May 29 at 0:21
@Mitch: Noöne suggests only one method should be used, but, from what I read, Google's disregard of grammatical models has proved inferior to that of DeepL, which no doubt combines models with statistical methods.
– Cerberus♦
May 29 at 0:21
add a comment |
user83683 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user83683 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user83683 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user83683 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Latin Language Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f10862%2fsocratic-paradox%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Computer translation programs are well known for being wrong. It's not that they just make mistakes (like humans are known for) -- it's that they calculate their translations (much like a math problem), but they lack the ability to suspect that their translations could be wrong. (At the very least, if they're programmed to have the ability to suspect wrong translations, they don't (yet) communicate it to the human user.) So always take computer translations with a grain of salt! (Meaning that you are allowed to be skeptical of them.)
– J-L
May 28 at 17:10