Translation:To use the microphone, change the setting.
No, seriously, we change the settings not 'the setting', there is no such thing as "the setting". Believe me, I'm a software guy. Either you specify which exactly setting you are talking about, or use the plural.
It is possible to change a single setting to make something work on a computer or multiple. However I agree both should be accepted.
French sentence can be "Pour utiliser le micro, changer le paramètre." with the same sound and almost the same meaning
The infinitive form "Pour utiliser le micro, changer le paramètre." should be accepted, as of 30/07/2019 it's not the case, and the report button does not give the choice "my answer should be accepted".
Well that's the exact sentence I used in the exercise yesterday, and it was not accepted.
EDIT: Tried again today:
Remember that for the dictation exercise, the system compares your answer with the original, French sentence and not with the back-translations from the English main translation. This is why "changer" is not accepted even if it is accepted in translation. Homophones are a pain in the neck but the developers still have not found a smart way of by-passing them.
Ok, but it's still a matter of adding the sentence in the list of accepted answers right? I've seen other exercises with homophones that are handled correctly in at least some cases, so it seems that it's something they handle. I'm not saying it's an easy job, but correct answers should be accepted nonetheless, and not having "my answer should be accepted" in the report window doesn't help the situation unfortunately.
"Changer" and "modifier" are on the list of accepted answers (in back-translation), but this list is not used by the grading system. The way the dictation exercise works is that the unique source and reference for grading is the original French sentence. There must be a good reason why the system cannot use the list of back-translations.
The sentences where homophones are handled correctly are old sentences the volunteers had already written and reported, and that the developers had uploaded. The current issue is not only DL still has not found a quick and easy solution for homophones (applicable as of the creation of any new sentence) but developers don't seem to have the time to identify the long list of homophones there are in the new course, nor to upload those the volunteers have been listing for them (and we cannot follow all sentences). Also, remember the staff does not read the sentence discussion forums nor the reports.
I knew they didn't read the forum threads, but I didn't know they also didn't read the reports, I've had one or two reports I made accepted a few months ago (although they were made years before that). I only thought they had such a long list that it takes a very long time for them to evaluate reports. But if they don't even read the reports, then how are the exercises going to be corrected? I knew the correction part of DL had problems, but not to this extent.
Well, I don't think that should be accepted because it sounds more like a phrase rather than a full sentence, which sounds like In order to use the microphone, changing the parameter in English.
It should be accepted, that's not debatable, the infinitive form can be used for instructions in French, you can find it in manuals or recipes for example (although the imperative form can also be used).
In English it would be translated as "To use the microphone, change the parameter."
I don't know about manuals or recipes, but the following is what it reads on a French website (https://customer.onetsolutions.net/clientarea.php): Connexion
Pour continuer, veuillez vous authentifier. whereas on another one (https://console.online.net/fr/login): Connexion
Se connecter avec un compte existant Note that this one going w/o a full stop is a phrase rather than a full sentence, corresponding to Connecting with an Existing Account in English.
On the buttons following the words above that are pressed to sign in, the first website writes Se connecter -> whereas the second one writes CONNEXION It indicates that the infinitive verb is equivalent to a noun or a gerund (as in English), rather than an imperative form of verb.
As I said, the imperative form is fine too, that's not the point, it's just not debatable that the infinitive form works fine as well. If you want examples on the internet, search for "recettes" or something like that and you'll find online recipes with infinitive form on French websites (for example marmiton.org). And you'll surely find some recipes with the imperative form as well.
No, it's fine to use the infinitive form for any instruction. Do your research, I gave you somewhere to start, it's not debatable, I'm a native French speaker, I'm not going to spend my time trying to explain that any further. Have a good day.
Well I guess I will waste some of it after all.
"In case you didn't know, nothing is so-called undebatable here."
There are indeed things that are not debatable, but it's not about the place, it's about the people and the issue, in this case, you and me. Its not debatable because it's not just a matter of opinion whether the infinitive is used by native French speakers for instructions, you're just wrong to argue that it's only used for listing items or titles, you just either don't know it yet, or refuse to acknowledge that you are, either way, it's not my issue anymore because instead of taking my explanation and following on the examples of use I gave, you try to keep arguing despite the evidence provided.
"I've ever seen some French grammar posts from some real native speaker where a couple of his points are disputed by people, and his defense was no more than Those points are just what I was taught."
No, I gave you an example of where you could find the infinitive form being used for instructions by native speakers, you just refused to follow through on my evidence. Do you want me to pull up a recipe from the website myself? Would that convince you? Not only is it what I was taught, but it's also how it's being used today (as shown in the example I provided), both of which are valid arguments to defend a position on a language. What do you have on your side? That the imperative form can also be used? Which was never denied by anyone?
"Your arrogance dissuades me from believing that you're a well-qualified Moderator here and I just hope you'd do a better job to help improve the quality of the screwed-up translation of this course."
It's not arrogance, it's just a fact that you're wrong on this issue. What may make you think it's arrogance is because I don't sugarcoat it for you, but it certainly doesn't make me feel superior to you, being right is not a form of superiority, it's just more useful.
As for my qualifications as a moderator, it's irrelevant to this issue, but feel free to question them all you want.
I don't belong to the team who made this course but I'm sure they'll be glad to read your feedback on the quality of their work. And I'm indeed trying to improve the translations, for example by submitting answers which should be accepted such as in this exercise. Usually I don't need the forums to do so because "My answer should be accepted" is available in the report window, but it wasn't the case this time.
Again, it's totally fine to use infinitive verbs as titles or listed items. Otherwise, the imperative form should be used to make a sentence.
In case you didn't know, nothing is so-called undebatable here. I've ever seen some French grammar posts from some real native speaker where a couple of his points are disputed by people, and his defense was no more than Those points are just what I was taught. Your arrogance dissuades me from believing that you're a well-qualified Moderator here and I just hope you'd do a better job to help improve the quality of the screwed-up translation of this course.