Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Brazilian Portuguese translation"

From Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
(Redundancy)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
There should be one basic Portuguese translation, and then if there are different terms in each, a series of {{Tl|Translation/term}} entries specifying the differing terms. To have both is creating more work for anyone interested in translating into this important language. [[User:Rolando|Rolando]] 19:07, 2 March 2008 (PST)
 
There should be one basic Portuguese translation, and then if there are different terms in each, a series of {{Tl|Translation/term}} entries specifying the differing terms. To have both is creating more work for anyone interested in translating into this important language. [[User:Rolando|Rolando]] 19:07, 2 March 2008 (PST)
  
 +
==Portugal translation is awful!==
 
I understand this concern that you have explained and almost agree, since the Brazilian translation would be used as the official translation. The horrible Portugal version, at the part that not was simply copied from the Brazilian translation, was translated with script translators (like Google Translate) and has shameful syntax and misspelling errors. Also the brazilian one uses more neutral terms and tone, wich makes it more useful.
 
I understand this concern that you have explained and almost agree, since the Brazilian translation would be used as the official translation. The horrible Portugal version, at the part that not was simply copied from the Brazilian translation, was translated with script translators (like Google Translate) and has shameful syntax and misspelling errors. Also the brazilian one uses more neutral terms and tone, wich makes it more useful.
 +
[[User:GianOp|GianOp]] 02:58, 22 September 2008 (PST)

Revision as of 05:59, 22 September 2008

Redundancy

Though I appreciate the differences between the Portuguese spoken in Portugal from that in Brazil, it really makes little sense to have both a {{Portuguese translation}} and a {{Brazilian Portuguese translation}}. It is like having an English translation for England or Australia. Terms differ, but speakers of each dialect can read the other with little difficulty.

There should be one basic Portuguese translation, and then if there are different terms in each, a series of {{Translation/term}} entries specifying the differing terms. To have both is creating more work for anyone interested in translating into this important language. Rolando 19:07, 2 March 2008 (PST)

Portugal translation is awful!

I understand this concern that you have explained and almost agree, since the Brazilian translation would be used as the official translation. The horrible Portugal version, at the part that not was simply copied from the Brazilian translation, was translated with script translators (like Google Translate) and has shameful syntax and misspelling errors. Also the brazilian one uses more neutral terms and tone, wich makes it more useful. GianOp 02:58, 22 September 2008 (PST)

Personal tools