Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] >
The "Crime" of Using MT
Thread poster: Michelangela
Philippe Etienne
Philippe Etienne  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 02:04
Member
English to French
CAT tools have nothing to do with MT Jun 17, 2014

Michelangela wrote:
...Do you feel that it's better to fully translate directly, without the use of CAT (computer-aided translation) tools available today?
...

I translate with CAT tools but I don't use their MT plugins because I don't save any time or effort with them.
As regards using MT or not, why not if it boosts productivity. After all, it is the end result that matters. But I find that MT-processed texts often have the look and feel of MT, even with only slightly elaborated technical texts.

Philippe


 
Samuel Murray
Samuel Murray  Identity Verified
Netherlands
Local time: 02:04
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
My comments Jun 17, 2014

Michelangela wrote:
Is it a "crime" using MT (machine translations) as part of the translation process?


To some translators, all that matters in the end is whether the client gets a good-enough translation and whether the client's confidentiality was respected. But to others, the effect that using MT has on your own development is also important to take into account. Does using MT change the way you think, i.e. does it reduce your ability to do good, fast translations if MT is not available?

Do you feel that it's better to fully translate directly, without the use of CAT (computer-aided translation) tools available today?


Using CAT and using MT are two different things. I use CAT even for texts that have no repetition or fuzzy matches whatsoever, because I find that I work faster if text is segmented for me and because I can supplement my own memory with what I did in the past, to translate more consistently and/or to avoid having to re-research problem terminology and phrasings that are difficult to translate idiomatically.

==

Phil Hand wrote:
By providing you with a (bad) version, it interrupts your own natural thought processes. MT works on sentences; people write texts. If you're constantly looking at MT output, you never develop a flow, you never get into the feel of the text, so you don't produce a cohesive target.


Interesting theory. It would be hard to measure, though.

Revising MT just takes longer. Typing a new sentence doesn't take very long. Editing a sentence takes longer - for me, if there are more than two errors in a sentence, it would literally be quicker to type it from scratch than to use mouse/cursor keys to go to error 1, delete, correct, then use mouse/cursors to go to error 2, delete, correct.


This may depend on how fast you are on the keys (and how similar your languages are, and how good the MT is). I have measured myself and found that using Google Translate increases my speed by about 20-40% in the tests... though in reality it feel much more. I find that, with MT, I don't have to think as hard, which means that I can work longer hours.

And MT translations never have less than 2 errors per sentence. So physically, MT revision is always slower.


I'm not sure what qualifies as "errors" for you, but if you mean mistranslations that remain after all grammar and spelling have been fixed, then: I get about 1 or 2 of those per sentence. But that is why it is essential to compare source with target, and that means using MT inside an interface that allows you to compare source and target easily and effectively (this is why I personally absolutely can't use MT if the source/target fields are side-by-side columns).

So if you're going to rewrite completely, what's the benefit?
My process: 1) Read source 2) Write target
MT process: 1) Read source 2) Read target 3) Realise target is unusable 4) Delete target 5) Rewrite target


What you describe under "MT process" at #3 and #4 is what I sometimes experience when I don't use MT, if the source text is not simple and straight-forward.

==

Michelangela wrote:
Using MT is a matter of editing (read "typing") skills as well.


Yes. If you're not fast on the keys (and that includes the modifier keys and arrow keys!), you shouldn't use MT.

The huge benefit I see is that I feel that MT provides synonyms that work better than some words I come up with, initially. I'm not talking about translating novels or literature in general, but technical texts.


Yes, MT occasionally gives me words that I hadn't thought of previously, but the synonyms that MT such as Google Translate provides are viewed more often by me as terminological inconsistencies, not elegant variations. One of the important things for me when using MT is to ensure that I don't get caught up by the inconsistent use of words. It does not always enrich the text to have more than one word for something (particularly nouns).

==

Mikhail Kropotov wrote:
I don't mean to offend, but I'm afraid [that that shows that] you're just an inexperienced translator. If you cannot think of a synonym that MT can... given that MT only has 1 shot at it, and you have an unlimited number of attempts... well, you have a long way to go.


No, I disagree. You don't have "unlimited number of attempts" to get synonyms while you translate. You have one or maybe two attempts (depending on how many times you revise the sentence before moving on to the next sentence).

What's more, most of your attempts will be from your own memory, or if you're really stuck, from a dictionary. But MT translations sometimes provide synonyms that the dictionary doesn't even have, because dictionaries give the translation of words, not in-context phrases or sentences.

Perhaps the word "synonyms" is not the right word. It's not about synonyms in one language, but about alternative translation options in two languages. You're only as good as your own memory and your own experience with the language, from e.g. the books that you've read. The MT system gives you insight into literature that you would never have read by yourself.

Case in point, you should also brush up on your English grammar. You just mixed up two subjects by writing... "...by beautifying the language too much, the translation ends up with technical inaccuracies"; this wording suggests that the translation beautifies the language.


No, it doesn't. I agree that the sentence is ambiguous (one could mistakenly interpret it as you have interpreted it) but it is not ungrammatical.



[Edited at 2014-06-17 08:10 GMT]


 
Egils Turks
Egils Turks  Identity Verified
Latvia
Local time: 03:04
English to Latvian
+ ...
MT saves time if keyboard is less familiar Jun 17, 2014

I am used to Latin letter keyboard. However, I speak and read Russian close to native level, but I do not write in Russian very often because it's hard to use Russian keyboard, it simply takes too much time finding appropriate Russian letters.

And then MT helps much. I just have to correct/change some words and/or re-arrange them.


 
Jack Doughty
Jack Doughty  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:04
Russian to English
+ ...
In memoriam
To Egils Jun 17, 2014

I can send you files for a "Cyrillic YaWERTY" keyboard with the Russian letters positioned to match the equivalent Latin ones, if you think it might be useful to you. You can email me through my ProZ profile.

 
Sheila Wilson
Sheila Wilson  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 01:04
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
Have you read your profile? Jun 17, 2014

Michelangela wrote:
Is it a "crime" using MT (machine translations) as part of the translation process?


Do you feel that it's better to fully translate directly, without the use of CAT (computer-aided translation) tools available today?


Most of us use CAT tools nowadays. Why translate the exact same thing twice? Why search for a term when you've already searched for and found a good one (particularly where consistency of terminology is a requirement)?

But MT? Doesn't that just stifle the intellectual process? Why research for the best term when MT has provided you with one that will do? Why bother your brain and expand your knowledge, as research would, when with MT you can use that time to churn out a few more adequate words?

But why are you asking us? Your own profile says it perfectly!


 
Samuel Murray
Samuel Murray  Identity Verified
Netherlands
Local time: 02:04
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
What do you mean, Sheila? Jun 17, 2014

Sheila Wilson wrote:
But why are you asking us? Your own profile says it perfectly!


I've read Michelangela's profile page (now that you mention it), but I find nothing disconcerting or telling about it. What are you referring to?


[Edited at 2014-06-17 09:15 GMT]


 
Russell Jones
Russell Jones  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:04
Italian to English
One sided Jun 17, 2014

ProZ.com polls suggest that 40% of professional translators are using MT to some degree, most because they find it improves their productivity.

They tend not to declare it in these forums because they are vilified by those who consider it a "crime".


 
Peter Simon
Peter Simon  Identity Verified
Netherlands
Local time: 02:04
English to Hungarian
+ ...
Physicality Jun 17, 2014

This is also part of the process for me. I've found a lot of what you've added here highly valid, I agree with reasons both against and for using MT.

I've recently started a CAT tool also using the MT in it. It often doesn't speed up the process much (the CAT itself did once, very considerably), but I've had a bad back for a long time (origins related to sitting 15 hours for 3 days in front of the keyboard 20 years ago), and though my fingers are highly capable of doing things (I'v
... See more
This is also part of the process for me. I've found a lot of what you've added here highly valid, I agree with reasons both against and for using MT.

I've recently started a CAT tool also using the MT in it. It often doesn't speed up the process much (the CAT itself did once, very considerably), but I've had a bad back for a long time (origins related to sitting 15 hours for 3 days in front of the keyboard 20 years ago), and though my fingers are highly capable of doing things (I've been playing the piano for 50 years), recently I've noticed that, with age, I get cramps in my shoulder and hands more often as well. However, I've managed to reduce the amount of typing by only correcting what the MT gives me while translating into English, both from Hungarian and from Dutch, so I've found it very useful. From E into Hungarian, it gives me too much to correct as Hungarian also uses a lot of inflections, like Russian.

So it all depends, but more often than not, less physical strain is a bonus I can use for standing up from the computer and doing exercises. It does matter in the long run.
Collapse


 
Christine Andersen
Christine Andersen  Identity Verified
Denmark
Local time: 02:04
Member (2003)
Danish to English
+ ...
If you can get it to work, fine Jun 17, 2014

... but I am still in doubt.

I was recently asked to join a post-editing project, and I agreed on condition that I could pull out again if it was too bad.

It was borderline with a dedicated translation engine. From the samples I saw, I was beginning to regret joining, but it was not entirely hopeless.

I would prefer to proofread for a competent human, and the results were at the level of a none-too-competent non-native. Some of the terminology was OK, but s
... See more
... but I am still in doubt.

I was recently asked to join a post-editing project, and I agreed on condition that I could pull out again if it was too bad.

It was borderline with a dedicated translation engine. From the samples I saw, I was beginning to regret joining, but it was not entirely hopeless.

I would prefer to proofread for a competent human, and the results were at the level of a none-too-competent non-native. Some of the terminology was OK, but some was simply not translated! That should improve with time, however, as the database picks up feedback.

For better or worse, it turned out that the end client wanted State Authorised Translators, and I am not, so I happily withdrew!

BTW 'beautifying' the language should not introduce inaccuracies if you mean making it sound more natural.
On the contrary, expressing things in clunky, non-idiomatic syntax can make it very difficult to read, and when translating from Danish to English can actually introduce ambiguity due to the structure of the language. I think some of the same problems may arise with German, but I have not translated from German for at least 20 years.

I am too old to find MT useful, at least in my language pairs, although I am not against it in principle.
Collapse


 
DLyons
DLyons  Identity Verified
Ireland
Local time: 01:04
Spanish to English
+ ...
Non-native speaker of English. Jun 17, 2014

Samuel Murray wrote:

Sheila Wilson wrote:
But why are you asking us? Your own profile says it perfectly!


I've read Michelangela's profile page (now that you mention it), but I find nothing disconcerting or telling about it. What are you referring to?


[Edited at 2014-06-17 09:15 GMT]


Two mistakes and quite stilted.

Use of an apocryphal story is a different issue.


 
LilianNekipelov
LilianNekipelov  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 21:04
Russian to English
+ ...
Not a crime but more of a nuisance--and a disturbance. Jun 17, 2014

You cannot rely on it, and to check it takes usually more time than to do it from scratch, plus it deprives the translator of the joy of translating.

 
LilianNekipelov
LilianNekipelov  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 21:04
Russian to English
+ ...
How nasty Jun 17, 2014

DLyons wrote:

Samuel Murray wrote:

Sheila Wilson wrote:
But why are you asking us? Your own profile says it perfectly!


I've read Michelangela's profile page (now that you mention it), but I find nothing disconcerting or telling about it. What are you referring to?


[Edited at 2014-06-17 09:15 GMT]


Two mistakes and quite stilted.

Use of an apocryphal story is a different issue.

It depends in what types of expression--fora are more speech-like--a more relaxed type of exchange of information. Did anybody ask you to correct a professional translator's English?

[Edited at 2014-06-17 10:17 GMT]


 
Sheila Wilson
Sheila Wilson  Identity Verified
Spain
Local time: 01:04
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
Maybe it's because I'm a marketing specialist Jun 17, 2014

Samuel Murray wrote:

Sheila Wilson wrote:
But why are you asking us? Your own profile says it perfectly!


I've read Michelangela's profile page (now that you mention it), but I find nothing disconcerting or telling about it. What are you referring to?


There's nothing disconcerting about the profile text per se, Samuel. It's just that it seems to clash with what's being said here. Surely someone who makes a selling point of how bad MT is, and the damage it can do, should hardly be the same person who is openly proposing to use it, albeit after editing it.

The part of the profile text I'm referring to is:

A while back, a test was made of one of the automated translation systems. The famous phrase "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" was chosen for translation from English to Russian. To check the quality of the translation, the resulting phrase was translated back to English with the result: "The vodka is good, but the meat is rotten".


IMHO, it seems odd that a translator should on the one hand give an example of the sort of rubbish (to put it politely) that MT generates, and then on the other hand propose to use it, albeit after editing.

But maybe things work differently in the technical sectors - I don't go there.


 
Clive Phillips
Clive Phillips  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:04
Member (2009)
German to English
+ ...
MT is just one of many translator tools Jun 17, 2014

MT is useless for some translations.

MT may be very useful for gaining a general impression of the gist of a text.

Online MT (eg Google Translate) is ruled out for confidential, classified and protected translations or where a Non Disclosure Agreement has been signed or where there is any doubt whatsoever about permissibility of disclosure.

Statistical MT and Rule-Based MT vary in benefits/drawbacks.

A purchased MT engine (eg Systran) instal
... See more
MT is useless for some translations.

MT may be very useful for gaining a general impression of the gist of a text.

Online MT (eg Google Translate) is ruled out for confidential, classified and protected translations or where a Non Disclosure Agreement has been signed or where there is any doubt whatsoever about permissibility of disclosure.

Statistical MT and Rule-Based MT vary in benefits/drawbacks.

A purchased MT engine (eg Systran) installed on your PC, with a corpus built up over time in a well-defined technical specialist subject area and for 'easier' language pairs, will yield very different results from, say, Google Translate for a literary translation from English to Simplified Chinese.

Under specific limited conditions, MT may bring significant efficiency and effectiveness gains in the translation process.

Some experienced professional translators regard MT as one tool among many that, used with caution, selectiveness, wisdom and experience, may be a boon.

The usefulness of MT for professional translators, and particularly for companies (eg the automotive industry) and translation agencies, will rise in the medium term.

As an in-house translator, I used a network-installed Systran MT engine for two years for FR>EN translation. As the corpus grew, results improved significantly and post-editing effort declined substantially.

[Edited at 2014-06-17 17:53 GMT]
Collapse


 
DLyons
DLyons  Identity Verified
Ireland
Local time: 01:04
Spanish to English
+ ...
Nasty??? Jun 17, 2014

LilianNekipelov wrote:

DLyons wrote:

Samuel Murray wrote:

Sheila Wilson wrote:
But why are you asking us? Your own profile says it perfectly!


I've read Michelangela's profile page (now that you mention it), but I find nothing disconcerting or telling about it. What are you referring to?


[Edited at 2014-06-17 09:15 GMT]


Two mistakes and quite stilted.

Use of an apocryphal story is a different issue.

It depends in what types of expression--fora are more speech-like--a more relaxed exchange of information. Did anybody ask you to correct a professional translator's English?


Sheila pointed it out first, Samuel questioned her. I replied factually - what's nasty about that?

This relates to a Profile Page, not Fora! Potential clients will be reading it.

And there I leave it



[Edited at 2014-06-17 10:25 GMT]


 
Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] >


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


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

The "Crime" of Using MT







TM-Town
Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business

Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.

More info »
Trados Studio 2022 Freelance
The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.

Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.

More info »