ARABIC MORPHEMES AND MACHINE TRANSLATION
This articleaims to familiarize lecturers and researchers with the ambiguities of theMachine translation and to make understand the importance of the morphemesfunctions to identify words and later sentences’ syntax, grammar and meanings.This manner to do is also useful to learn or teach Arabic, because it givesanother way to approach linguistics or simply languages. Therefore, for theArabic language, letters and short vowels are important for lexical andsyntactic understanding, for that we should not neglect any of them. For theTurkish language, machine translation encounters same difficulties and more,because of its unusual syntax for Arabs and European people, so we need tothink differently to resolve teaching and translation problems. We have thelexical ambiguity, which is introducing word into the syntax, which should beable to link between syntax’s words to give the appropriate meaning. This workis trying to open a window to look through it to the language as machine canlook and see it. The MachineTranslation is one application among many ones what concern languages’engineering. All of them use languages’ process. ……. I begin by introducing an example to illustrate this bigscience. The problem of the Machine Translation or any processing system is tobe able to identify words individually in sentence and combine between them toget the possible meanings. Therefore, there are many problems, to reach thisgoal. We call these problems ambiguities. I had definedin my researches, in Lucien Tesnière researches centre, a typology ofambiguities that we encounter in Machine Translation, with goals to improvetranslation’s quality. One of these ambiguities is the segmental ambiguity; itmeans how we should segment a word that we want to identify or we cannotidentify, as a unit. We take this lexis to illustrate this ambiguity. Thisword: “أقال” How it should be identified? The system(the computer) will identify it as one word that means “Dismiss”, but dependingof its syntax, this identification can be an error. So lexical identificationscan be limited by their syntaxes and meanings. If we say“أقال المدير الموظف”, if this sentence is limited to theses vocabulary, ourfirst identification (dismiss=أقال) is right; and in this case, it means, “The director dismissed theemployee.” Moreover, this is a right translation. But if the sentence is “أقال الطالب ال
Baudouin Joseph-Gabriel, (2011), Morphemes and grammatical functions in Arabic, SOAS LFG meeting, 05 March 2011, London, UK. Baudouin Joseph-Gabriel, (2010), Les ambiguïtés de la langue arabe pour un traitement automatique, Éditions Universitaires Européennes, Sarrebruck, Allemagne. Baudouin Joseph-Gabriel, (2008), Désamiguïsation morphologique de l'arabe (Arabic’s morphological disambiguation), Deuxième colloque international en traductologie et TAL, 7-8 juin 2008, Oran, Algérie. Baudouin Joseph-Gabriel, (2007), La lexie, sa graphie, sa morphologie, ses affixations, sa syntaxe, sa grammaire et sa sémantique (Lexis, its written form, its morphology, its affixations, its syntax, its grammar and its semantics), Colloque international en traductologie et TAL, 9-11.04.2007, Oran, Algérie. Al-Labdī Mohammad, le dictionnaire de la terminologie grammaticale (Mucğam al-muṣṭalaḥāt an-naḥawiyya wa aṣ-ṣarfiyya), Beyrouth, Mu'asasat ar-risala, 1986 Chenfour Noureddine, Harti Mostafa, Tahir Youssef, Modélisation à objets d’une base de données morphologique pour la langue arabe, JEP-TALN 2004, Traitement Automatique de l’Arabe, Fès, 19-22 avril 2004. Aloulou Chafik, Analyse syntaxique de l’Arabe : Le système MASPAR, Récital 2003, Batz-sur-Mer, 11-12 juin 2003. http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/irin/taln2003/articels/aloulou.pdf.