One thought: if you save each translated fragment (one or several sentences) in its own line, the vim scrollbind , cursorbind and a simple vertical split will help you keep the âsynchronizedâ fragment. This is very similar to what vimdiff does by default. Then the files should have the same number of lines, and you donât even need to switch windows!
But this is not entirely fine, because the wrapped lines are usually a bit confused. If your translation wraps more than two or three virtual lines than the source text, the visual correlation disappears, because the lines are no longer separate. I could not find a solution or script to fix this behavior.
Another suggestion that I would like to offer is to translate the translation into the original. This approaches the diff method of the Benoit method. After the original is broken into pieces (one fragment per line), I would prefer >> or similar on each line. The translation of one fragment begins with o . The file will look like this:
>> This is an example sentence. Tämä on esimerkkilause. >> In this format editing is easy. Tässä muodossa muokkaaminen on helppoa.
And I would increase readability by doing :match Comment /^>>.*$/ or the like, regardless of what looks beautiful with your color scheme. It would probably be useful to write an area :syn , which prohibits spell checking for the source text. Finally, as a detail, I would snap <Cj> to 2j and <Ck> to 2k to allow easy jumping between important parts.
The pluses for this latter approach also include the fact that you can wrap things in 80 columns if you feel like I am doing it :) It would be trivial to write <Cj/k> to go between translations.
Cons: Buffer filling suffers as it now completes both the source and translated words. English words, I hope, do not occur in translations, which are often! :) But this is as great as it turns out. A simple grep will clear the source code after you are done.
progo source share