Odd but Understandable? Sorry, I don’t buy it.
A Dog Have I.
What do you think of this sentence? Bizarre? Incorrect grammar? Odd but understandable?

This is one of the examples from Post Editing Guidelines For BOLT Machine Translation Evaluation rule 3.5, indicating that this kind of sentence structure is “readily understandable“, and the rule suggests “DON’T rearrange the phrases just to improve the fluency“.
From my personal perspective, translation like “A dog have I” is NOT acceptable, at least not in English (Maybe in German it’s fine, “Ich habe einen Hund” = “Einen hund habe ich“). The question I’m having is: Where do we draw the line? Theoretically, a “dog” can be a subject in the sentence. Why can’t “I” be owned by a dog?
The other examples in the rule meet the requirement of “odd but understandable”, but what if the whole translation is full of those kind of sentences with chaotic word order? How would that impact the readability?
Maybe the reason why I’m having doubt is that I’m not a native English speaker. Interestingly, in Chinese, there was a similar popular test on the sequence of character order that I totally understand:
研表究明,汉字序顺并不定一影阅响读。(The study shows that the sequence of Chinese characters does not affect readability.)
The sentence above is not written with correct character order but Chinese people won’t have any trouble reading it. What happened here is that our brains auto-corrected the mistakes in the sequence. When we read Chinese, we tend to segment the sentences into several chunks. Each chunk consists of several characters. We absord information chunk by chunk and we pay less attention to individual characters.
Back to English. I have asked ChatGPT to generate a paragraph specifically with sentences that have wrong word order:

To be honest, this looks like a disaster to me. But I’m curious about what you (especially native English speakers) might think. Feel free to leave comments!

