| Pages in topic: [1 2] > | I'm not a cyborg Thread poster: Maria Teresa Borges de Almeida
|
|---|
At my age, I don't run the risk of having to turn into a cyborg. I reproduce below with due respect an article published in last week's 'The Economist' under "Culture", page 74:
"Rise of the cyborgs
The translator of the future is a human-machine hybrid
This first paragraph can read a bit oddly. As an experiment, Johnson wrote it in English, and then ran it through Google Translate to turn it into French, before running it through the same process in revers... See more At my age, I don't run the risk of having to turn into a cyborg. I reproduce below with due respect an article published in last week's 'The Economist' under "Culture", page 74:
"Rise of the cyborgs
The translator of the future is a human-machine hybrid
This first paragraph can read a bit oddly. As an experiment, Johnson wrote it in English, and then ran it through Google Translate to turn it into French, before running it through the same process in reverse, to render it back to English.
But the prose is only slightly odd. The software has turned the original “may” into “can”, which made the first sentence sound a little off. In the second, the original “has written” became “a écrit” in French, which was then translated as “wrote” in English—accurately, but with a small change in emphasis.
Once such round-trip translations were an endless source of humour. Some people took serious texts and put them through this two-way process yielding hilarious results. And bad computerised translation is hardly consigned to the past. “Chinglish” signs are still a source of amusement for English-speakers visiting the Chinese-speaking world. On one menu, sour black-eyed peas with snails becomes “acid fry cowpea screw meat”. The joke cuts both ways: Westerners sometimes botch the Chinese characters in their tattoos.
Yet as Johnson’s experiment shows, for most workaday purposes machine translation (MT) has got a lot better in the past five years or so. The biggest source of improvement has been the deployment of “deep learning” in training such systems, which are meant to mimic the action of a brain’s neurons.
But improvement in automated translation for business purposes has also come about through a proliferation of clever companies solving individual tasks. Some have created specialist dictionaries so that important terms can be translated accurately and consistently. An entire mt engine can now be trained only on data from a professional domain (such as law or medicine), improving accuracy further. Other gizmos integrate MT with a human translator’s editing tools. This means many of those humans spend most of their time checking and refining MT output, rather than doing the bulk of the translating themselves.
Being a machine’s editor may sound depressing. For some translators, indeed it is. This can be seen the other way round, however. A human repeatedly translating identical formulae is in principle little different from a machine trained to do the same. Such work can be drudgery. Allowing the machine to do the easy bits—the chunks that are translated the same way, over and over—frees the translator to apply specialised linguistic and subject-matter knowledge, solving more intellectually satisfying problems.
What are those problems? One Madrid-based translator for a big law firm describes some recent tasks. One was finding a cultural example to replace a reference to a short story that is famous in Spain but little-known to English-speakers. Another involved catching a fairly fine-grained but critical distinction: a Spanish word (dolo) that is properly translated as “wilful misconduct”, but which was translated only as “malice” by software. Since the law in question considerably magnifies penalties when the misconduct is “wilful”, the omission was potentially disastrous—and could only have been caught by someone with the right combination of legal and linguistic nous.
That technology has upended translation is well-known. Many translators have been silently (and guiltily) relying on computers for years. What is newer is the willingness of translation firms, and individual translators, to be out and proud about using mt, not as a crutch but as a means to cut costs and turnaround times. Part of the job becomes knowing what can be automated and what cannot. Invoices and instruction manuals can be left to mt. Ditto, for the most part, contracts, which have lots of boilerplate language, so long as a human makes sure that slips like the dolo case above are avoided. A novel legal argument, says the translator in Madrid, needs to be almost entirely translated by hand.
This is not doable by someone who merely knows Spanish and English and took a few translation classes. The bad news for some translators is that a spigot of repeatable, easy work is being turned off. The good news is that what remains will be brain-challenging stuff for people who have a knowledge of a language and something else.
Tales of artificial intelligence usually pit humans against encroaching machines, “Terminator”-style. But the translators of the future will be neither entirely human nor machine. They will be human beings with mechanical enhancements. Call them cyborgs." ▲ Collapse
| | | | | No offence taken... | Dec 10, 2022 |
Dear Teresa,
What a strange coincidence! I happen to read this very article published by The Economist last week.
Although I unreservedly share your concern about the prospect of becoming a "Cyborg translator" in the near future (although it seems this future is already at our doorstep...), I found this article much more heartening than disheartening.
Actually, the author left me under the impression that he was rather advocating the paramount role of huma... See more Dear Teresa,
What a strange coincidence! I happen to read this very article published by The Economist last week.
Although I unreservedly share your concern about the prospect of becoming a "Cyborg translator" in the near future (although it seems this future is already at our doorstep...), I found this article much more heartening than disheartening.
Actually, the author left me under the impression that he was rather advocating the paramount role of human translators vs. translation machine, whatever the widespread and increasing power of the latter in the foreseable future.
Instead of telling human translators they are digging their own grave in face of translation machines growing performances, the author conveys to us - at least in my opinion - a well welcomed message what could be encapsulated in one single word: proficiency.
In other words, there will be soon no future for basic human translators when it comes to basic translations indeed. But there will always be room for proficient and seasoned translators who can claim a master command of some specific and high-level areas of expertise (such as biological, pharmaceutical, medical, law, engeneering, etc...), of which the machine won't never ever make out all the niceties and nuances of the language source, and sometimes will lose its bearings up to the point of producing idiotic expressions (if not, funny ones most of the time...).
Translation machine is not replacing humans translators. And never won't.
Take a short comparison with carmakers industry. Even though robots have long replaced most of the human workforce on assembling chains all over the world since Ford's Century (refer to fordism concept), let's face the facts: there are nowadays thousands of workers still working on assembling chains though. Why? Because robots still need human hands, brains and intelligence, simply to make the machine work out well.
The same example applies with airlines pilots. Nowadays every airliner is equipped with tons of computers, online data, displays, screens and lights embarked on the cockpit, flashing like a Chrismas tree and, on top of that, with an "automatic pilot" (quite the same as an "automatic translator", all things compared). As far as I know, there are still always humans pilots on board all the same.
Ultimately, it's not the machine that commands humans. It's human beings that command the machine.
The translation industry is not living an upside down revolution. It simply follows the common flow toward modernity worldwide. Nothing new under the sun.
It's up to all of us to adapt.
[Modifié le 2022-12-10 22:12 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Maria Teresa Borges de Almeida wrote:
But the translators of the future will be neither entirely human nor machine. They will be human beings with mechanical enhancements. Call them cyborgs."
Translators of the present are human beings with mechanical enhancements. Call them whatever you like.
How many of you here don't use a computer for your translations? Come on! Hands up.
How many of you here don't use the internet for your translations? Hands up.
How many of you here still use carrier pigeons to communicate with your clients? Hands up.
Hmm. I can't see many hands. I wonder why.
How many times do we have to say this? Machine translation is just another tool. Like dictionaries. Like spell checkers. Like web search engines.
Use it if it helps you. Otherwise do not.
But please let's not fall for this "cyborg" nonsense.
| | | |
As an addendum to my previous post, I just tried out the Chat GPT writing AI, which is attracting a lot of interest lately.
It does rather well responding to simple writing requests, but less so when a degree of creativity is required.
Me: write a limerick about Harry and Meghan
ChatGP... See more As an addendum to my previous post, I just tried out the Chat GPT writing AI, which is attracting a lot of interest lately.
It does rather well responding to simple writing requests, but less so when a degree of creativity is required.
Me: write a limerick about Harry and Meghan
ChatGPT:
There once was a couple named Harry and Meghan,
Who left the royal scene in a great fluster,
They sought out some peace,
In a land that's quite breezy,
And now live a quiet life, free from royal muster.
So when it comes to poetry, Chat GPT performs at about the level of E.J. Thribb.
I'm not worried yet. Maybe in another 5-10 years. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
expressisverbis
Portugal
Local time: 18:55
Member (2015)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| We aren't "terminated" | Dec 11, 2022 |
As long as I don't turn into a hyper alloy combat chassis, microprocessor-controlled, fully armoured, I'm not worried...
We depend on technology and we believe it makes our life easier and advances our world. Yes, on the other hand, we must keep in mind that all technology can have adverse side effects if not used properly.
But, like everything, we must find a balance between the good and the bad.
We just need to use translation-related technology for doing good. MT it's just a... See more As long as I don't turn into a hyper alloy combat chassis, microprocessor-controlled, fully armoured, I'm not worried...
We depend on technology and we believe it makes our life easier and advances our world. Yes, on the other hand, we must keep in mind that all technology can have adverse side effects if not used properly.
But, like everything, we must find a balance between the good and the bad.
We just need to use translation-related technology for doing good. MT it's just a tool...
"The translator of the future is a human-machine hybrid"?
No, of course not!
No, we aren't "terminated".
"Hasta la vista, baby!" ▲ Collapse
| | | | Lingua 5B 
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Local time: 19:55
Member (2009)
English to Croatian
+ ...
| Just a tool? | Dec 11, 2022 |
There is a difference. Nobody asked me to drag my price down to $0.01/word on the basis of using the internet, a dictionary, electricity and other means of technology. On the other hand, all clients with post-editing projects asked and expected me to work for $0.01 or lower on the basis of MT technology.
A huge difference.
Technology is not there to serve as a tool or as a toy to play with. It’s there to cut someone’s costs. The article argues it cuts down costs and... See more There is a difference. Nobody asked me to drag my price down to $0.01/word on the basis of using the internet, a dictionary, electricity and other means of technology. On the other hand, all clients with post-editing projects asked and expected me to work for $0.01 or lower on the basis of MT technology.
A huge difference.
Technology is not there to serve as a tool or as a toy to play with. It’s there to cut someone’s costs. The article argues it cuts down costs and turnaround time for translators. How on Earth is that beneficial for translators if $0.01 price is expected in return?
[Edited at 2022-12-11 15:08 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | expressisverbis
Portugal
Local time: 18:55
Member (2015)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
Lingua 5B wrote:
There is a difference. Nobody asked me to drag my price down to $0.01/word on the basis of using the internet, a dictionary, electricity and other means of technology. On the other hand, all clients with post-editing projects asked and expected me to work for $0.01 or lower on the basis of MT technology.
A huge difference.
Technology is not there to serve as a tool or as a toy to play with. It’s there to cut someone’s costs. The article argues it cuts down costs and turnaround time for translators. How on Earth is that beneficial for translators if $0.01 price is expected in return?
[Edited at 2022-12-11 15:08 GMT]
Yes, for me it's just a tool like any other that can help me to streamline my work, and I don't consider or use it as "toy". I have invested efforts, time and money to be a reasonable CAT tool user.
If there are translators who work with that rate it's their own business. (A disgrace...!)
I don't do it, obviously, and the agencies I work with don't offer me that ridiculous rate.
There are translators with high levels of self-esteem and professional pride and self-proclaimed translators who don't give a damn and are ready to work for peanuts.
On the other hand, I think that some translation agencies, in particular those that emerge on the market have no idea about actual translation processes and because of that they apply methods/rates that devalue the translator's profession and work.
The problem is not translation assistance tools, the problem is those translators who accept those rates and those translation agencies that can underestimate our profession - this is the huge and the main difference.
MT can't be the root of all evils or Pandora's box.
| | | | Lingua 5B
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Local time: 19:55
Member (2009)
English to Croatian
+ ...
expressisverbis wrote:
Lingua 5B wrote:
There is a difference. Nobody asked me to drag my price down to $0.01/word on the basis of using the internet, a dictionary, electricity and other means of technology. On the other hand, all clients with post-editing projects asked and expected me to work for $0.01 or lower on the basis of MT technology.
A huge difference.
Technology is not there to serve as a tool or as a toy to play with. It’s there to cut someone’s costs. The article argues it cuts down costs and turnaround time for translators. How on Earth is that beneficial for translators if $0.01 price is expected in return?
[Edited at 2022-12-11 15:08 GMT]
Yes, for me it's just a tool like any other that can help me to streamline my work, and I don't consider or use it as "toy". I have invested efforts, time and money to be a reasonable CAT tool user.
All good, but I wasn’t talking about CAT tools.
| | |
|
|
|
expressisverbis
Portugal
Local time: 18:55
Member (2015)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| Neither do I | Dec 11, 2022 |
Lingua 5B wrote:
All good, but I wasn’t talking about CAT tools.
I wasn't talking about "CAT tools" either, I only mentioned my experience and education in that area.
You can, as we all know, combine or not MT engines and CAT tools, but I wasn't talking about the latter...
[Edited at 2022-12-11 16:34 GMT]
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:55
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Last night I ate my dinner with a fork. I fear that I am becoming dependent on forks. It's the end of civilisation as we know it.
| | | |
Tom in London wrote:
Last night I ate my dinner with a fork. I fear that I am becoming dependent on forks. It's the end of civilisation as we know it.
Sounds really serious. I would advice, try chopsticks for a change.
| | | | | There is an emergency exit: massively dismiss every MTPE project | Dec 11, 2022 |
expressisverbis wrote:
If there are translators who work with that rate it's their own business. (A disgrace...!)
I don't do it, obviously, and the agencies I work with don't offer me that ridiculous rate.
There are translators with high levels of self-esteem and professional pride and self-proclaimed translators who don't give a damn and are ready to work for peanuts.
On the other hand, I think that some translation agencies, in particular those that emerge on the market have no idea about actual translation processes and because of that they apply methods/rates that devalue the translator's profession and work.
The problem is not translation assistance tools, the problem is those translators who accept those rates and those translation agencies that can underestimate our profession - this is the huge and the main difference.
MT can't be the root of all evils or Pandora's box.
I couldn't agree more!
The only way for translators to reverse - if not, mitigate - the self-devaluating impact that some unscrupulous emerging agencies are increasingly taking over the translation industry is to simply massively dismiss every MTPE project. Once and for all.
I must confess that I tried to explain and defend politely my position with those agencies at the beginning. But it sooner appeared to me it was pissing in the wind - pardon my French...
As far I can remember, the very last message I came to send answering such a pitifull MTPE project was "Do you know where you can stuff your lousy job? I'm not a beggar..." or something of a kind - again pardon my French.
Now, I don't even give a damn. I no longer take time to answer.
Could every translator over the world do the same as regards MTPE projects, those so-called emerging "cyborg" agencies wouldn't emerge for long...
It's not only a question of ethics and dignity. It's also - and primarily - a question of unity and solidarity between all of us.
[Modifié le 2022-12-11 19:43 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| No, we won't become cyborgs | Dec 11, 2022 |
MT is a tool, but in the hands of the 'wrong' people, also a competitor. It costs us jobs! Did anybody receive a simple survey to translate lately?
@Laurent
Please let us make a short comparison with the car industry. The robots have replaced most of the human workforce on assembling chains, and yes human hands, brains and intelligence are still needed, but not so many as before.
Same will apply for airlines pilots, they are already working on it. I fear its just ... See more MT is a tool, but in the hands of the 'wrong' people, also a competitor. It costs us jobs! Did anybody receive a simple survey to translate lately?
@Laurent
Please let us make a short comparison with the car industry. The robots have replaced most of the human workforce on assembling chains, and yes human hands, brains and intelligence are still needed, but not so many as before.
Same will apply for airlines pilots, they are already working on it. I fear its just a matter of time.
[Edited at 2022-12-11 19:19 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Lingua 5B wrote:
There is a difference. Nobody asked me to drag my price down to $0.01/word on the basis of using the internet, a dictionary, electricity and other means of technology.
Well, speaking only for myself I can say that I have never received such an "offer". If I ever did, I would just say, "No."
There is the precedent of CAT tools, though. It has somehow become standard practice for translators to offer a discount - sometimes a substantial one - because a computer program classifies part of a source text as a "repetition" or "match".
This applies even when the translator has bought the software and invested time (and sometimes money) to learn how to use it effectively.
The people who are to blame for these bad deals are not the businessmen who propose them - they are just doing their job - but the translators who answer "Yes" instead of "No."
| | | | | Offering a discount? Not quite. | Dec 12, 2022 |
Philip Lees wrote:
It has somehow become standard practice for translators to offer a discount - sometimes a substantial one - because a computer program classifies part of a source text as a "repetition" or "match".
Offer? No, it has become standard practice for outsourcers to extort a discount. I have yet to see an agency agreeing to modify their discount grid. Amazingly, some agencies are willing to raise the base price instead, but never a discount percentage.
| | | | | Pages in topic: [1 2] > | There is no moderator assigned specifically to this forum. To report site rules violations or get help, please contact site staff » I'm not a cyborg | 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! » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
