Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2015 June 23

= June 23 =

English to Malay Translation Error
I am not sure if this is the right place to ask about this. But anyway, there is some issue with Wikipedia translating an item in the infobox.

The current translation for 'ratio' from English to Malay is 'Pelajar kepada nisbah guru'. However, the correct translation should be 'Nisbah pelajar kepada guru'. See, not much wrong there but an obvious grammatical error. It makes sense if you translate it back to English, as if it was translated by Google Translate.

Anyway I can fix this (or anyone else if this is something above my power), other than using free text? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeongQiJin (talk • contribs) 11:00, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Can you tell us on which article you've seen this error? I'm finding no instances of "Pelajar kepada nisbah guru" on the whole of the English Wikipedia.  If the offending article is on the Malay Wikipedia, then you'll have to raise it there.  Rojomoke (talk) 12:02, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh, it is on the Malay Wikipedia. Any idea how to fix that? It is not an error in the article, but a site-wide translation error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeongQiJin (talk • contribs) 12:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Here is a link to the Help Desk on the Malay Wikipedia. Try asking there, though you will be expected to communicate in Malay.  Marco polo (talk) 13:33, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The only instance I can find of that particular phrase is at ms:Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Taman Desa. In that case, the text is an infobox field, so you would need to modify the template ms:Templat:Kotak info sekolah. Large-scale find-and-replace can be done by a bot, but the others are right; you should bring it up with the editors there, perhaps at the Kedai Kopi. Most small wikis will welcome the extra help. Lesgles (talk) 13:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Modification how if possible
Your answers and opinions as to the literature, principles, or explanations that describe about the principles of modifications in relation to  relativizer,  complementizer,  conjunction, subordinate conjunction, and preposition? By giving first an answer as to whether such a modification is first of all possible and then giving an explanation in their ‘yes’ and ‘no’ cases, perhaps? HowardReview (talk) 13:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you are asking. We have articles on relativizer and complementizer. Both of these are sort of newer categories, and previously would have just been called conjunctions. "That" can be used as a complementizer or relativizer, depending on the syntax. So four of the terms you link are all closely related to the notion of conjunction, but prepositions are a different thing altogether. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:41, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Please ask your question again in your native language. μηδείς (talk) 19:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)