International Translation Day 2017

Join ProZ.com/TV for a FREE event on September 26-27th celebrating International Translation Day! 50+ hours of content, Chat, Live Q&A & more. Join 1,000's of linguists from around the globe as ProZ.com/TV celebrates International Translation Day.

Click for Full Participation

Discussion for ProZ.com & TAUS present: The Great Translation Debate session (2011): Translation automation is good for the translation profession

This discussion belongs to ProZ.com's Virtual Conferences » "Discussion for ProZ.com & TAUS present: The Great Translation Debate session (2011): Translation automation is good for the translation profession".
You can see the ProZ.com's virtual conferences page and participate in this discussion from there.

Adriana Adarve  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 10:01
English to Spanish
+ ...
Machine will never be able to replace humans Sep 29, 2011

Very interesting topic, but professional image is in jeopardy with the use of MT. A machine will never be able to replace a human, his/her professional, cultural touch, etc., and even less his/her intuitiveness. One of the things mentioned several times was the speed of translation; so, what is more important speed or quality? Another thing mentioned several times was monetary worries. So, what is more important, make tons of money no matter what or actually better communication with all human beings upholding the qualities and the value of languages?

I for one will never be able to agree with machine translations. It is definitely a No win-No win situation.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Stephanie Mitchel  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 10:01
French to English
The bottom line Sep 29, 2011

MT is good only insofar as it makes human translators look that much better. Otherwise it's useful only within extremely narrow contexts.

Direct link Reply with quote
 

mrkpl
Local time: 16:01
Machine will never be able to replace humans Sep 29, 2011

Adriana Adarve wrote:

what is more important speed or quality?


The use MT as productivity tool should not lead to lower quality. IMO the idea that post-editing is a completely different skill and should imply making only certain corrections but not others corresponds to the way MT technology was in the past. Unless used "raw" it should be there to help the translator produce high quality translations in shorter time.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Attila Piróth  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 16:01
Member
English to Hungarian
+ ...
Agree with Mirko... Sep 29, 2011

on that MT should be there to help the translator produce high quality translations in shorter time. When the translator is in full control of the MT environment, it can help improve their productivity - just like other tools (e.g., a CAT).

As far as actual usage of this tool is concerned, the parallel with CATs can be drawn further. While most translators agree that translation memories that contain only their own work usually improve their productivity and do not change their normal working methods, translators are often sent projects with large TMs created from many different translators' work. Whether this is a useful tool depends on the quality of the TM. "Well the TM may not be perfect but it was approved by the client, so please do not change it unless you encounter very serious blunders". In this case the TM is no longer the useful tool for the translator it is supposed to be, as you either say no to this assignment, arguing that you can put your skills to better use in projects where mediocre quality is not acceptable - or agree to be much more tolerant to errors.

When MT is used in a way that the first output is out of the control of the translator, the situation is identical, in my opinion. Am I expected to produce as good a work as I can? If not, it means that there are many more people who can also do it. Light postediting falls definitely into this category. High-profile translators are in a way overqualified for it - and they may lack some technical skills that would help them be more productive. Their skill set is not ideally suited to the task. Should they learn the new skills and abandon the old ones? Why not if it is a more lucrative field? But it is not.

In a commoditized setup where big companies own the language data - because develop a sufficiently similarly powerful MT solution is beyond the reach of a single translator - AND quality expectations are lowered, translators become very simply interchangeable. This is nothing new: the same situation already exists with CAT tools. High interchangeability increases the price pressure. So, if pro translators can avoid working in such a competitive market, they should head for their own niche.

Of course, this is not the direct consequence of the tool itself but the way it is used. I perfectly agree with most of the other panelists on that in other scenarios MT can be a very useful aide to the translator. Jeff Allen kindly sent me very detailed comments on his MT experience. By mastering and controlling the technology, he says he could keep high quality and increase productivity very significantly. Thumbs up! He also helped put MT to great use during the Haiti earthquake. Congratulations, it is fantastic stuff.

However, that's not the only way MT is used today. Who owns the tool and who is in control of the data is a crucial question. And a lot of translators who come into contact with MT and PE are in a completely different situation than Jeff. They don't own the tool and they don't control the data. They have language skills - and they may be required to make use of them only partially. And then what will determine their earning potential? Not by the service they provide, because it is a commodity, offered by many. Not by the value they add. But their productivity - and even that not in absolute terms but also compared to their peers.

This is the kind of scenario that most of the respondents to my survey find unattractive. If they can afford, they will move to a different market segment. If...

All this applies only to translators who have access to another market, where their high-quality services are thought. For many newcomers, this market does not open easily, and they may find the possibility of MT PE or other MT-related linguistic tasks a good career option. My fellow panelists can most probably give a better overview of such professions and the great potential they have; as the volume of translation processed by MT is expected to rise considerably ion the future, there are certainly great opportunities in this growing segment of the language-transfer industry.

Best,
Attila


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Aurora Humarán  Identity Verified
Local time: 11:01
Member (2015)
English to Spanish
No place for romanticism Sep 29, 2011

Machines are already replacing us. By themselves, the replacement is not complete, but provided slave translators post-edit that MT product, the combination of machine (increasingly better) PLUS translator is perfect, a great business for those interested in selling this scheme. And there is something much more imporant (not mentioned in the debate):

By feeding the machine, we are teaching her/him (not to be sexist), and we are going to be less and less necessary.

Saying that MT is an opportunity can be understood from the vendors' point of view, as it IS an opportunity for them. For us, translators, it's bad news.

I am in favor of PE if the software is owned/administered by individual translator as 1) nobody has been left without an assignment job (which is what happens everytime a machine translates, and which has ethical considerations that nobody is analyzing) 2) nobody is contributing to a huge corpus whose intention is to continually train the machine, which, in turn, will mean that fewer post editors (formerly, translators) will be necessary/justified.

This is a perfect plan for the vendors. This is a nightmare for the profession.

Au


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Kirti Vashee  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 07:01
Why more content is being translated Sep 29, 2011

what is more important, make tons of money no matter what or actually better communication with all human beings upholding the qualities and the value of languages?


One of the big new trends that global companies are finding is the impact of the web and social networks in particular on the way business is done.

Brian Solis has a new book coming out that describes the overall change quite succinctly. The End of Business As Usual (his new book) explores each layer of the complex consumer revolution that is changing the future of business, media, and culture. As consumers further connect with one another, a vast and efficient information network takes shape and begins to steer experiences, decisions, and markets. It is nothing short of disruptive.

For many companies in the IT and high technology arena this means that much more content needs to be translated to stay in touch with customers who are discussing products and services. Thus more support information needs to be made available and also it becomes important for companies to understand what these social network conversations are saying about their products. Thus this is where you are seeing the most aggressive use of MT. Look at the TAUS membership and the board and you can see who is most motivated to get MT working.

This expanding content often has a high-value for a very short time - maybe weeks or months at most. Thus new production processes are necessary e.g. when Microsoft introduces Windows 7 they need to put a lot of support information about how to deal with issues that are specific to this -- this becomes much less important 6 months later but is critical in the early days as the product is rolled out around the world.

I discuss this in much more detail on my blog http://kv-emptypages.blogspot.com

Kirti

Direct link Reply with quote
 
igna50  Identity Verified
Australia
Local time: 00:01
English to Spanish
The case for the negative Sep 29, 2011

It was a most interesting debate but I don’t think the case for the negative was put strongly enough. As the vote shows roughly half of the profession does not agree with the motion. In theory machines will take care of repetitive stuff to let us concentrate on the creative, but in practice what machines bring is “Trados discounts” and a lower price per word. The extra words per hour we may gain do not really compensate for this. The proof: we all know of experienced and talented colleagues who have left or are thinking of leaving a profession they loved.

[Edited at 2011-09-30 08:54 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:

Moderator(s) of this forum
Drew MacFadyen[Call to this topic]

You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Discussion for ProZ.com & TAUS present: The Great Translation Debate session (2011): Translation automation is good for the translation profession

Advanced search






PDF Translation - the Easy Way
TransPDF converts your PDFs to XLIFF ready for professional translation.

TransPDF converts your PDFs to XLIFF ready for professional translation. It also puts your translations back into the PDF to make new PDFs. Quicker and more accurate than hand-editing PDF. Includes free use of Infix PDF Editor with your translated PDFs.

More info »
SDL Trados Studio 2017 Freelance
The leading translation software used by over 250,000 translators.

SDL Trados Studio 2017 helps translators increase translation productivity whilst ensuring quality. Combining translation memory, terminology management and machine translation in one simple and easy-to-use environment.

More info »



Forums
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search