Example of neural MT versus human translation દોર પોસ્ટ કરનાર: Jeff Whittaker
|
|---|
Jeff Whittaker 
યૂનાઇટેડ સ્ટેટસ્
Local time: 23:59
સ્પેનીશ થી અંગ્રેજી
+ ...
| Jean Lachaud
યૂનાઇટેડ સ્ટેટસ્
Local time: 23:59
અંગ્રેજી થી ફ્રેન્ચ
+ ...
To be filled under "What else is new?"
| | | | | Interesting... | Apr 2, 2019 |
Thanks!
| | | | Samuel Murray
નેધરલેન્ડ્સ
Local time: 05:59
સભ્ય (2006)
અંગ્રેજી થી આફ્રીકાન્સ
+ ...
LegalTranslatr2 wrote:
Google Translate...
DeepL...
Human (from 13 years ago)...
So, the MT systems got it right. The human in this example desired a translation for a very specific application, and so obviously the translation he might use would be of a specialist nature. Google and DeepL give you the translation for generic purposes. All three these terms mean "access control" and it is likely that translations of texts that use these terms would all use "access control" in English. Only someone who doesn't know anything about languages will believe that three distinct terms in German should always have three distinct equivalents in English. Don't you agree? We are not terminologists. We are translators.
[Edited at 2019-04-02 16:54 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Jeff Whittaker
યૂનાઇટેડ સ્ટેટસ્
Local time: 23:59
સ્પેનીશ થી અંગ્રેજી
+ ...
વિષયની શરૂઆત કરનાર
You are focusing too much on cutting down the specific example and missing the point. Perhaps this is true if these terms were used in isolation, but all three terms are used in EU-mandated Data Protection documents. Is the difference significant? That's beside the point. The overall point is that MT translation will only take you so far and only humans can know when and if further distinction is required. The monolingual reader of the MT output will be left without this choice.
Samuel Murray wrote:
LegalTranslatr2 wrote:
Google Translate...
DeepL...
Human (from 13 years ago)...
So, the MT systems got it right. The human in this example desired a translation for a very specific application, and so obviously the translation he might use would be of a specialist nature. Google and DeepL give you the translation for generic purposes. All three these terms mean "access control" and it is likely that translations of texts that use these terms would all use "access control" in English. Only someone who doesn't know anything about languages will believe that three distinct terms in German should always have three distinct equivalents in English. Don't you agree? We are not terminologists. We are translators. [Edited at 2019-04-02 16:54 GMT]
[Edited at 2019-04-02 17:01 GMT]
[Edited at 2019-04-02 17:01 GMT]
[Edited at 2019-04-02 17:02 GMT]
| | | | Samuel Murray
નેધરલેન્ડ્સ
Local time: 05:59
સભ્ય (2006)
અંગ્રેજી થી આફ્રીકાન્સ
+ ...
LegalTranslatr2 wrote:
You are focusing too much on cutting down the specific example and missing the point. ... The overall point is that MT translation will only take you so far...
I did not realise that that was the point you were trying to make. Did you think it was obvious? (-:
| | | | Heinrich Pesch
ફીનલેન્ડ
Local time: 06:59
સભ્ય (2003)
ફિન્નિશ થી જર્મન
+ ...
| Very nice exemple | Apr 3, 2019 |
It shows the semantic strength of German. It distinguishes between taking a step into somewhere, moving somewhere or take a grip at something.
But there is no reason why MT should not learn to understand the meanings and apply appropriate translations.
| | | |
Samuel Murray wrote:
LegalTranslatr2 wrote:
Google Translate...
DeepL...
Human (from 13 years ago)...
So, the MT systems got it right.
The MT systems don't appear to have been given the extra information that was provided to the human translator: namely, that three different target phrases were required for the three terms.
The ProZ asker acknowledges that humans would probably have come up with the same result as the MT if he had adhered strictly to KudoZ rules.
I'm not a fan of MT either, but this is hardly a fair comparison.
[Edited at 2019-04-03 05:28 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Jeff Whittaker
યૂનાઇટેડ સ્ટેટસ્
Local time: 23:59
સ્પેનીશ થી અંગ્રેજી
+ ...
વિષયની શરૂઆત કરનાર
Of course, this data, for this particular example, could be entered into the system (but it hasn't been in 12 years). However, there will always be things like this and it would be impossible to cover every situation.
That's the problem with pointing out defects in MT, as soon as you try to come up with an example as to why the system won't work, people attack the specific example and how the system could be tweaked to rectify this particular error, rather than the big picture that ... See more Of course, this data, for this particular example, could be entered into the system (but it hasn't been in 12 years). However, there will always be things like this and it would be impossible to cover every situation.
That's the problem with pointing out defects in MT, as soon as you try to come up with an example as to why the system won't work, people attack the specific example and how the system could be tweaked to rectify this particular error, rather than the big picture that there are an unlimited number of situations where the system does not have the data or real-world experience to come up with a suitable translation.
Philip Lees wrote:
The MT systems don't appear to have been given the extra information that was provided to the human translator: namely, that three different target phrases were required for the three terms.
The ProZ asker acknowledges that humans would probably have come up with the same result as the MT if he had adhered strictly to KudoZ rules.
I'm not a fan of MT either, but this is hardly a fair comparison.
[Edited at 2019-04-03 05:28 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
નેધરલેન્ડ્સ
Local time: 05:59
સભ્ય (2006)
અંગ્રેજી થી આફ્રીકાન્સ
+ ...
LegalTranslatr2 wrote:
That's the problem with pointing out defects in MT, as soon as you try to come up with an example as to why the system won't work, people attack the specific example...
I think the problem here was that you did not make any point yourself, but simply gave three examples, and left it to us to draw our conclusions about what it was that you were hoping we would discuss. Had I known at the time when I read your first post what point you were trying to make, my reply would have been different.
| | | | | Better examples | Apr 4, 2019 |
LegalTranslatr2 wrote:
That's the problem with pointing out defects in MT, as soon as you try to come up with an example as to why the system won't work, people attack the specific example and how the system could be tweaked to rectify this particular error
Then it would perhaps be better to use examples that really do illustrate the inherent defects of MT, rather than ones that don't.
They're not difficult to find, after all. There are some in another forum thread, along with a discussion of MT versus human errors.
[Edited at 2019-04-04 06:27 GMT]
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Example of neural MT versus human translation | 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 » |
| | Protemos translation business management system |
|---|
Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
