Thank you, but I do not think Google Translate is very reliable, at least not in this document. Many of the sentences that I think are key seem unintelligible in that translation. For example, here is the portion I quoted above, with the question, as translated by Google, in bold: Do you think that has created much expectation to couples who suffer the divorced and remarried, homosexuals, believed to have expectations that go beyond what later you will be able to achieve? The divorced and remarried can communicate, how big will the acceptance for the world of homosexuals?
I think you have unrealistic expectations, is not it? The Synod of the family did not want it myself. What would the Lord. Among the problems I sense with this translation, first up is the phrase “expectation to couples who suffer the divorced and remarried.” The image that comes to mind is of men and women enduring couples who are divorced and remarried. I do not think the interviewer was trying to communicate that. It is a bizarre image to me, and typically I think of actions as being endured, not people.
Another problem I sense with this translation is in this phrase: “the divorced and remarried, homosexuals, believed to have expectations that go beyond what later you will be able to achieve?” This phrase appears to need an auxiliary verb that is missing. At first it seems reasonable to supply the auxiliary verb “are” between “homosexuals” and “believed,” but then that breeds a new problem: to me, it makes it sound like homosexuals and the divorced + remarried are believed to have expectations. I don’t think the interviewer was trying to imply that they have expectations, but that others have expectations about them and how they will be treated.
Another problem I have is with this phrase: “The divorced and remarried can communicate.” Is that really what the interviewer said? Because it appears to be a false statement. I would expect that it would at least be phrased hypothetically. Moreover, it appears to use the word “communicate” to mean “take communion,” but I think that is an unusual way to say that in English.
Then there is the phrase “how big will the acceptance for the world of homosexuals?” That is also unusual in English.
In the answer portion, we start out with this sentence: “I think you have unrealistic expectations, is not it?” I do not think the Spanish sentence contains the word “you” or an equivalent, and I think the phrase “is not it?” is unintelligible in English.
The next sentence is translated, “The Synod of the family did not want it myself.” The word “myself” appears to be out of place there, and appears to identify the Synod as himself reflexively. That seems unlikely. I think it is more likely that the sentence is supposed to be translated, “I did not want the Synod on the Family,” using “no lo quise yo” as a simple past tense singular first person phrase. But on the other hand, that translation also seems unlikely, because it seems unlikely that the Holy Father would claim he didn’t want the Synod on the Family. If he didn’t want it, why did it happen? Thus, I am unsure of my translation, and I would like someone else to translate.
Then there is this translation: “What would the Lord.” The Spanish is: “Lo quiso el Senor.” That seems to be a simple past tense third person phrase with “el Senor” (the Lord) as the subject and “lo” (it) as the direct object. I have no idea how Google Translate managed to turn that into “What would the Lord,” which seems incomplete and unintelligible.
So those are some of my problems with that translation, and I hope that helps you see why I don’t think the Google Translate version of the document is acceptable.