Pages in topic:   < [1 2]
petition Open Letter to the EC, requesting to address the multilingual challenge in their forthcom
Thread poster: Gordana Podvezanec
Aurora Humarán
Aurora Humarán  Identity Verified
Local time: 07:02
English to Spanish
... Mar 24, 2015

Attila Piróth wrote:

unless there is a strong reason to keep the discussion "off-topic". In the latter case I would appreciate a short explanation why this is beyond the scope of business issues.

To me, this seems to be a highly important business issue. The EC spends massive amounts of money on funding translation-related projects. Such funding distorts free competition and has direct or indirect consequences on our profession (and beyond).

I agree with Diana: associations should voice their concerns about (or support for) the public funding of such technologies. For my part, I think that instead of subsidizing MT development, the EC should should devote much more significant resources to other translation-related projects (literary translation, for example).


Amen


 
neilmac
neilmac
Spain
Local time: 11:02
Spanish to English
+ ...
No thanks / Nein Danke / No Gracias /Non merci / Нет, спасибо Mar 24, 2015

I think MT will do just fine without any help from my hard-earned taxes thank you very much all the same.

"You cannot be serious".


 
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:02
Member (2004)
English to Italian
Hold on, hold on... Mar 24, 2015

somebody is going to use the taxes I pay to invest in a technology which will take my job away? Mmmmm......

 
Shai Navé
Shai Navé  Identity Verified
Israel
Local time: 13:02
English to Hebrew
+ ...
Agree with the do not sign advice Mar 24, 2015

I completely agree with those who commented so far questioning the merit of this open letter.

On the face of it this seems as a commercial issue more than anything else. Or in other words, an attempt or expectation to get public funding for private commercial development that will later be sold on the commercial market (and possibly to those who indirectly invested in it without their consent).

It is no longer a secret that private investors are not as keen about invest
... See more
I completely agree with those who commented so far questioning the merit of this open letter.

On the face of it this seems as a commercial issue more than anything else. Or in other words, an attempt or expectation to get public funding for private commercial development that will later be sold on the commercial market (and possibly to those who indirectly invested in it without their consent).

It is no longer a secret that private investors are not as keen about investing in MpT (Machine pseudo-Translation) as before, after realizing the dissonance between what MpT is designed for (a professional tool, much like speech recognition for example) and the way it is was advertised to them (a be-all, end-all solution that will not only disrupt some market segments, but will completely take them over). This doesn't mean that public funds should replace private funds anymore than should be handed out as no-strings-attached grants to small business owners (i.e. translators) to help them run their business.

Translation is not about removing a language barrier, it is all about removing a communication barrier, and the solution for the lack of truly qualified and competent translators (which in small part is the result of the irresponsible way some players - including some technology developers - have behaved in the market for the last decade or so, and still behaving to this day) is multilayered and far more complex than throwing some random "technology" at it. Technology is a tool that helps professionals do their work better, not an alchemical black box solution.

In my opinion, signing this petition would be very irresponsible from a professional viewpoint. Not because the unfounded fear that MpT development should be stopped lest it will replace translators, but because the premise of this appeal has no professional merit or value. This approach won't serve anyone in the long term, except for the developers maybe.

Furthermore, they seem to have taken the liberty to speak on behalf of our profession, which I find inappropriate, to say the least.

[Edited at 2015-03-24 16:55 GMT]
Collapse


 
Vadim Pogulyaev
Vadim Pogulyaev  Identity Verified
Thailand
Local time: 17:02
Member (2007)
English to Russian
Wow Mar 24, 2015

Tax-funded welfare for translation agencies? What a marvelous idea, with euro zone falling apart it will get a lot of support I'm sure!
On the other hand... Once governments take over MT we will never hear about it again, they'll just keep throwing money into the oven, without asking, or expecting any results whatsoever, might be worth it.


 
Some comments. Mar 25, 2015

Dear all,

please allow me a private remark first. I have studied Computational Linguistics at a language department because language is one of my favourite subjects. I have a 2-year-old daughter and I enjoy how she gains new territory every day.

Now for my thoughts about the discussion, partly rephrasing what has been said before. My personal line of argumentation is briefly this:

- Multilingualism is important for social peace in Europe.

- Too
... See more
Dear all,

please allow me a private remark first. I have studied Computational Linguistics at a language department because language is one of my favourite subjects. I have a 2-year-old daughter and I enjoy how she gains new territory every day.

Now for my thoughts about the discussion, partly rephrasing what has been said before. My personal line of argumentation is briefly this:

- Multilingualism is important for social peace in Europe.

- Too little is being translated. People who only speak, say Basque or Maltese, have the same right to enjoy literature, news, movies, clips on youtube, web pages, interfaces to tools, etc. than people who are lucky speak French, English, or German, for example.

- Today’s MT technology for information gisting like Google Translate does not solve Europe's language problem:
a) Performance is too bad in most cases to be useful for end users,
b) Unlike TM output, which is helpful in certain areas, this gisting type of MT output most of the time does not support professional translators in doing their job efficiently.

- It is a law that anything that is technically doable (and interesting for someone) will come. Even if we would all decide that MT is evil and would ignore it, it will come.

- The question thus is: Do we want to be part of the development and create the best technology to address the language problems we have in Europe in a mix of human translation and creativity, complemented and optimally supported by MT for repetitive content or content that would not have been translated otherwise (including mixed forms like raw MT for information filtering, light post-editing for fast access, full translation of relevant documents, etc.)?

If people decide that they do not want to deal with a certain technology, it is of course their own decision. But then they should not complain later that new technology developed by some global company is not useful, way to expensive, our data is monitored by the CIA, jobs are created only abroad, etc.
Collapse


 
Shai Navé
Shai Navé  Identity Verified
Israel
Local time: 13:02
English to Hebrew
+ ...
A comment Mar 25, 2015

The discussion here is not about the usefulness, limitations, and shortcomings of Machine pseudo-Translation technology. It is not even about its wide-spread abuse in some market segments. These are separate topics.

The question here is why should MpT developers enjoy government funding that could give them an unfair business advantage?
Why not invest this money in other translation-related programs or priorities?

Aljoscha Burchardt wrote:
- Too little is being translated. People who only speak, say Basque or Maltese, have the same right to enjoy literature, news, movies, clips on youtube, web pages, interfaces to tools, etc. than people who are lucky speak French, English, or German, for example.

Any claim for an altruistic motive is just an old and very lazy (yet effective, I'll give you that) attempt to play the false "charity" card to shame people from expressing valid concerns.


- It is a law that anything that is technically doable (and interesting for someone) will come. Even if we would all decide that MT is evil and would ignore it, it will come.



If people decide that they do not want to deal with a certain technology, it is of course their own decision. But then they should not complain later that new technology developed by some global company is not useful, way to expensive, our data is monitored by the CIA, jobs are created only abroad, etc.


Are these threats?
I thought we "linguists" are all in this together, working shoulder-to-shoulder helping the poor and the needed, without any commercial aspirations and motives.
Now I'm confused.

[Edited at 2015-03-25 13:48 GMT]


 
Siegfried Armbruster
Siegfried Armbruster  Identity Verified
Germany
Local time: 11:02
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam
I agree Mar 25, 2015

Aljoscha Burchardt wrote:
- It is a law that anything that is technically doable (and interesting for someone) will come. Even if we would all decide that MT is evil and would ignore it, it will come.


I agree that everything that is technically doable will come. Scientist are telling us since the 1970s that MT is doable and that it is actually just around the corner. If you can show me any evidence that this is actually true within the next 5-10 years, I am prepared to join the club.

However, when talking to experts like Prof. Koehn and others in this field, they are painting a different picture. As I see it, MT is nowhere to replace human translators in the coming years. It is a interesting tool and some of its features can be used to enhance the productivity of human translators. The rest is marketing waffle, produced by a myriad of companies that need fresh funding to keep their "groundbreaking" developments in MT going.

I see no reason to support this.


 
paula arturo
paula arturo  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 06:02
Spanish to English
+ ...
The atomic bomb was also "technically doable"...does that make it desirable? Apr 1, 2015

Aljoscha Burchardt wrote:
- It is a law that anything that is technically doable (and interesting for someone) will come. Even if we would all decide that MT is evil and would ignore it, it will come.


Logical fallacy #1: All that is possible is desirable: The atomic bomb, the holocaust, torture chambers... were all "technically doable", but I think we can all agree they have very little merit and we would probably have preferred government resources to be invested elsewhere. The fact that machine pseudo-translation is doable does not make it automatically desirable. If you want to convince translators to support your cause, you're going to have to do a lot better than "because we can".

Logical fallacy #2: False dilemma (a.k.a. false dichotomy): The fact that I don't support your cause does not mean in any way that I think MT is "evil" or that I want it to "go away".

What I want when deciding whether or not to support a cause are solid, logically valid arguments coupled with transparent, honest, peer reviewed data that can help me make an informed decision. I will not support a cause that is presented in a way that is unclear and riddled with holes, which this "open letter" is.

What I want to know is:
1) What are the PROVEN merits/benefits of MT and why should we support it? And by PROVEN merits I don't mean marketing hype, I mean actual serious peer reviewed studies that support MT, including methodology.

2) What specific needs are we tackling and how does MT help with that specific need? Again, no marketing hypes, actual data!

3) What is the exact purpose of this petition? It is sadly very unclear what you expect from this petition.

4) Who exactly is behind this petition and are there any potential conflicts of interest? In other words, I'm asking for the transparency this petition lacks.

5) What exactly am I to understand by "our field" in this context?

In other words, what I'm asking you is: Why should I support this as a professional translator? And don't give me that peace in Europe stuff or altruistic arguments of appeal to emotion. Give me compelling FACTS and DATA if you want me to support you.


 
Riccardo Schiaffino
Riccardo Schiaffino  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 04:02
Member (2003)
English to Italian
+ ...
A simpler solution, then Apr 2, 2015

Aljoscha Burchardt wrote:


- Too little is being translated. People who only speak, say Basque or Maltese, have the same right to enjoy literature, news, movies, clips on youtube, web pages, interfaces to tools, etc. than people who are lucky speak French, English, or German, for example.


Let's provide founds, then, for teaching other languages to the poor Basque and Maltese monolingual speakers. That is simpler, certainly more doable (human beings have been teaching and learning foreign languages for millenia - so we know very well how to do it), and would increase occupation for foreign language graduates (think of all the wonderful opportunities for language teachers).

anything that is technically doable (and interesting for someone) will come. Even if we would all decide that MT is evil and would ignore it, it will come.


That assumes that human-quality MT is actually technically doable. I am not at all convinced that it is so, despite all the assurances to the contrary made by various snake-oil providers, who have a big vested interest in pretending that human-quality MT is actually doable, instead of whishful thinking.

Also

it is a law that anything that is technically doable ... will come


Oh is it a law? Care to point us to the author of that law, and to any demonstrations of its validity?

Stating that something "is a law" doesn't make it so. Again: wishful thinking.


 
Cilian O'Tuama
Cilian O'Tuama  Identity Verified
Germany
Local time: 11:02
German to English
+ ...
Dear Original Poster, Apr 3, 2015

Who exactly is "we"?

 
Pages in topic:   < [1 2]


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


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

petition Open Letter to the EC, requesting to address the multilingual challenge in their forthcom







Anycount & Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000

Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.

More info »
Trados Business Manager Lite
Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio

Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.

More info »