Export Reviews, Discussions, Author Feedback and Meta-Reviews

First provide a summary of the paper, and then address the following criteria: Quality, clarity, originality and significance. On the plus side: the paper has an interesting and novel idea, and I believe the experimental investigation is competent and complete. On the minus side: I am skeptical that this idea could be a practical solution to MT, and I think your last translated-sentence example kind of shows the kind of weirdness that can result. In my mind, a solution has to be scalable in principle to long sentences, and I think it's clear that your method cannot. Q2: Please summarize your review in 1-2 sentences Accept but not very strongest accept.