| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | Proofread a translation done with googletranslator?! Thread poster: Alessandra Vanni
|
|---|
Laurent KRAULAND (X) 
France
Local time: 15:14
French to German
+ ...
| About a potential correct use of MT... | Sep 24, 2009 |
which imo shall not be confused with free automatic on-line translators: http://tinyurl.com/about-mt
This being said, I always have a good laugh at those button pushers who think MT is similar to a vending machine: put the coin in and get a product out.
[Edited at 2009-09-24 08:28 GMT]
| | | | | My point of view | Sep 24, 2009 |
Kevin Lossner wrote:
I am amazed, really, that anyone who has aspirations of being taken seriously as a professional could consider post-editing MT trash. Leave that to the students, housespouses with no marketable skills and the hopelessly incompetent who shouldn't be trusted with real texts.
Knowing some myself, I just want to add that there are several professional translators who are working on MT projects and paid good money for being 1st, 2nd or 3rd reviewer of machine translations. I personally do not think less of them for that reason nor do I doubt their professionalism - I actually find it rather interesting and would like to hear the result of such projects when enough data has been collected.
---
That being said I also want to add that there is a reason why there is a need for at least 3 reviewers on such MT project if the result is to be as good as the result of a human translation: Due to the nature of MTs and the incognitive word-for-word style the entire process of editing and keeping focus is interrupted again and again.
So to all of you who think you can edit (not retranslate!) a MT as well as a human translation, you might want to reconsider (if you want to deliver quality) and triple your price so you can afford to pay a second and third reviewer to review your job.
Topic starter: If you approach the situation like this, I think the client will find your normal translation rate pretty fair at the end
----
Hi Christine,
Yep, I suppose we have. Like your post
[Edited at 2009-09-24 09:14 GMT]
| | | | | It really depends on the text | Sep 24, 2009 |
I agree to a very large extent about most of the MT I have seen. Very often, I have simply refused to edit it, because it is impossible even to guess what it is supposed to mean.
But we will not be able to dismiss it out of hand for ever. It is NOT on the way to replacing translators, but there are contexts where it may work, at least in some language pairs.
Working from Danish to English I have seen trial texts where the MT was more related to TMs and fuzzy matches, or... See more I agree to a very large extent about most of the MT I have seen. Very often, I have simply refused to edit it, because it is impossible even to guess what it is supposed to mean.
But we will not be able to dismiss it out of hand for ever. It is NOT on the way to replacing translators, but there are contexts where it may work, at least in some language pairs.
Working from Danish to English I have seen trial texts where the MT was more related to TMs and fuzzy matches, or where whole sentences and phrases were retrieved mechanically rather than individual words, and the results are usable although far from perfect. Going the other way, there are some quite passable sentences from English to Danish between the gobbledegook.
Danish syntax is often clumsy, but not officially incorrect, if lifted direct to English, and one may have to read the sentence a couple of times to understand it. But by moving the time adverbial or making similar adjustments, the 'Danglish' element can be reduced considerably.
However, large numbers of these adjustments may be necessary, and it is tiring and time consuming to pick them out. But the same goes for some human writing I have seen. (Typically clients writing directly in English without a source text...)
Both humans and machines have trouble deciding whether to write different or differently etc.
Like German, the finite verb in a main clause must take second position, which it need not in English, and Danish only puts the time clause first for emphasis, while English does it far more often.
Admittedly, this can be a pain to edit, and it is probably easier to translate from scratch, but we have to face the fact that humans can do it too, when they are inexperienced, tired, or in a hurry.
I often wish clients would write in good Danish instead of attempting English and having it edited. The results are sometimes similar to MT, and take just as long to sort out as translating from scratch - or even longer if it involves calling the client to ask what they really meant...
I always send a file with the alterations marked in Track Changes, and if you hide what is deleted, it still shows a lot of red, but is easier to read.
I send a 'clean' file as well, with all the changes accepted, and once or twice this has persuaded clients to let me translate from scratch the next time. Especially when they get my invoice, and I charge by the hour...
I have also refused to edit a lot of texts written by humans too (and sometimes wished I had refused even more)!
So there is still a long way to go, but we do have to take MT seriously.
Happy translating!
Hi Anne!
I did not see your post until I posted mine - we must have written them simultaneously!
Christine
[Edited at 2009-09-24 09:05 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Better to burn than turn | Sep 24, 2009 |
Laurent KRAULAND wrote:
... potential correct use of MT
The problem is, Laurent, it's potential, like you have the potential to win the lottery. But the chances of winning the lottery are likely greater than finding a reasonable application of MT.
I've had the pleasure of being part of these discussions for years involving a well-known developer in the field who has created some superb tools for this and other language service applications. One of my agency clients is particularly enamored of this potential and has worked hard to get it in the door and running at key clients. In five years (maybe more now) I haven't seen any results that I would trade for my dead donkey.
The notion of "controlled" language as the gate key to MT Heaven is a swindle. You can control the language used by most technical writers about as well as you can perfect human beings in other ways and wipe away the legacy of Original Sin. Lots of people have tried this, yet people seem to have the same problems today that I read about in old Sumerian texts, and if these silly MT discussions are still going on long after we are all dead that should be no surprise.
@Anne: Tell me, are these professional translators who could fill their schedules with interesting translation work otherwise and choose to do MT editing out of a sense of adventure? Or are we talking red light linguistic professionals who will take anything to pay the bills? I could see doing something like that once out of curiosity (but as Voltaire remarked, "Once a philosopher, twice a pervert!"), but this is exactly the sort of drudgery which I find soul-numbing and prefer to leave to those for whom one can't distinguish a stupor from wakefulness.
With so many interesting texts to be translated or so many burgers to be flipped at McDonald's, why would I really want to live in MT Purgatory? No matter what rate you want to pay me.
| | |
|
|
|
Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 15:14
French to German
+ ...
Kevin Lossner wrote: Laurent KRAULAND wrote:
... potential correct use of MT The problem is, Laurent, it's potential, like you have the potential to win the lottery. But the chances of winning the lottery are likely greater than finding a reasonable application of MT. I've had the pleasure of being part of these discussions for years involving a well-known developer in the field who has created some superb tools for this and other language service applications. One of my agency clients is particularly enamored of this potential and has worked hard to get it in the door and running at key clients. In five years (maybe more now) I haven't seen any results that I would trade for my dead donkey. The notion of "controlled" language as the gate key to MT Heaven is a swindle.(...)
And definitively, I am not a player! I also remember discussions about some software (was it software, or were they just software bits?) called a "neuronal engine", which was said to be able to mimic the human brain for translating... Never heard about it since, or didn't follow the matter closely enough - who knows?
[Edited at 2009-09-24 12:13 GMT]
| | | |
Kevin Lossner wrote:
@Anne: Tell me, are these professional translators who could fill their schedules with interesting translation work quote]
"Interesting translation work" is a relevant term, Kevin. I believe that should answer your question
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Proofread a translation done with googletranslator?! | 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 » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
