Hola! As we work to ramp up our sentence moderation efforts, we’ve noticed reported sentences (submitted via the red button with a flag icon bottom right while playing) sometimes include questions, or aspects of the sentence that are actually correct but would benefit from an explanation.
What do you think is best way to respond to such questions and provide explanations?
Here are some options we’re considering:
Add a brief explanation in the Notes field for that sentence which is shown after answering the sentence (fix for Android coming soon) and will be included in the notification to the users who reported the sentence once the sentence is marked as resolved.
Post a comment for that sentence in the Sentence Discussion section of the forum (which will also appear for that sentence while playing) and send the user who reported the sentence a link to the discussion.
We could also just send an explanation to the users who reported the sentence, but we’re thinking a public explanation would be ideal so everyone can benefit. 2 and 3 might be more beneficial in that longer explanations can be added along with useful links, but 1 might be the quickest/easiest to access.
Curious to hear if anyone has any thoughts! We’re also open of course to ideas besides the three listed above. Thanks for any input!
I use the Notes field for my own purpose (to store a copy of the word with an accent mark). I’ve already marked up dozens, possibly hundreds of words that way, so option 1 would not make me very happy. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere ("Pronunciation" field useless for Russian, but could be made useful - Russian - Clozemaster), I would rather that the Pronunciation field contain this information instead of an automatically generated pronunciation that is generally useless and often incorrect (for Russian, at least). But in the meantime, the Notes field is what I have to work with.
I saw a sentence like the one you showed (“Вот вам!”), perhaps the same one. There’s something else I wanted to mention that is relevant to this discussion: the comment made in the note is not correct. I think what happened is that the sentence was originally translated as “There you are!” which, I believe is one possible correct translation. However, a Russian speaker objected to it, interpreting the English “There you are!” as “So that’s where you are!”, which would match “А вот и вы” or “Вот вы где”. Instead the translation “Have at you!” (which feels to me very British and not necessarily something a US English speaker would understand) was provided.
I mention this because Q&A-type comments are likely to be very “unfiltered”, sometimes incorrect, and potentially distracting. This should be taken into account when deciding how to display them.
Blatantly incorrect would be an issue. Hopefully, these would be caught and corrected by other members in a respectful manner. I love how you pointed out a translation felt British just by reading it. I wonder if it is even possible for a second language learner to acquire that ability. We seem to learn that by being told. I was thinking that the unfiltered nature of Q&A-type comments might be really good at exposing those type of “regionally” incorrect translations
You need to watch more 1930s Errol Flynn type swashbuckling movies. But in the meantime you may find this reference useful. As you can see from that it was pretty common in Shakespeare’s time, but has fallen out of favour along with the use of swords in combat.
Hi Lucius! Well I’ll be…! In all me born days, m’lord, with all the books I’ve read, and the miles I’ve travelled, forsooth and nay, tis more attention I must pay to the trusty perhaps rusty scabbard of learning. Thank thee mightily for said scroll of Errol enlightenment!
On another well-known site, we are allowed to correct the English of non-E speakers and I wince at some of the incorrect English offered by other non-E speakers and by, ouch, native E speakers! So yes, a Q&A would need some thought and much tact.
I for one definitely misunderstood this, and have found it’s not possibly to change/increment one’s vote, once you’ve cast it (even if you hadn’t even selected the maximum number of available options yet).
I would also very much appreciate this option in retrospect