Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] >
What's your opinion on machine translation and quality?
Thread poster: Daniela Zambrini
Bernhard Sulzer
Bernhard Sulzer  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 09:20
English to German
+ ...
Food for thought Jul 1, 2014

SDL Support wrote:

...
More seriously though Bernhard, I'm not going to try and answer every point you made here because in general terms I think you have missed the point I was making altogether. The question was why would people want to waste time creating machines to do things that people can do anyway... or this was the essence of the question I was answering.


I am not against machines helping people, I am not against tools replacing certain tasks we do or all if it turns out to be possible. I wasn't arguing against that.

SDL Support wrote:
I use MT on a daily basis. I use it to translate tweets from Chinese or Russian so I can make enough sense of it to point someone in the right direction; I use it when I'm looking for a hotel, or buying a product, to read the reviews (I'm not interested in the "glossy" advertising that's already been translated); I use it to translate a manual for some foreign goods I own where the manufacturer didn't deliver it in English; I use it when I purchase an incredible amount of stuff in Germany because they seem to provide stuff in German, Italian and Polish... but not English! I could probably go on, and I don't think I'm that different to many others either.


If that works for you, fine. Maybe it will for the rest of the world. It will depend on what kind of information you think you (or anyone) need(s) and what kind of quality of information you think you need or really need. I see it from a translator's point of view who will give a client a product which is supposed to be accurate in order to help that client meet his/her objectives.

I don't agree that you should simply use MT to have entire manuals translated incorrectly, nor do I find that a good idea. Again, I wouldn't be able to offer an incorrect translation, people would laugh me off the web.

As far as all the uses are concerned you mentioned and possibly a hundred else - I'm sure you agree that there is never a guarantee that the MT you use will give you the accurate meaning -if you're unlucky, you'll get the complete opposite. But you seem to be content with picking out info that you think is correct.

I also think that too many people think they should trust certain contents to MT only - I mentioned city websites - now I don't recommend to a city to have their website translated in all or many languages. But a few would certainly make sense - and those should be done professionally. It just makes good business sense.

As far as personal use of MT is concerned - it will depend -you as a savvy professional will be able to get something out of MT - using it as a tool and then you add your own knowledge to use that information.
What I get ticked off about is people telling us we are so much better off in OUR job using MT and should think about giving discounts. That's one main point for you and I don't think I missed it.


Your example:

SDL Support wrote:
...

But if I take as an example TripAdvisor. They run approximately two billion words a month through SDL BeGlobal. The scale of this is quite hard to grasp, and it's not unique to TripAdvisor. There is content being produced all over the place in multiple languages that people may want to read, but it would be far too expensive, and far too slow, to do it manually with human translators. This type of material is also not important enough to warrant a perfect translation, but deemed too important to ignore.



On the SDLwebsite, it says:

"SDL BeGlobal’s translation engines automatically translate multiple types of digital content in your enterprise, from support documentation & website content, to chat conversations & email. Our translation engines are trained in multiple domains and come with TrustScore ranked outputs – our patent pending algorithm for ensuring that your quality needs are met."

I checked out TripAdvisor. When you change languages/countries, you don't necessarily get the translation of these original texts - but you'll find a good amount of original text put in by the speakers/writers of that language. So, I would definitely look at texts written by human speakers of English and German, the two languages I speak fluently,and French possibly since I learned it in school. I believe there is original correct text in all languages offered on that website. And the pace with which these real reviews are put in is fine with me. I don't need any of these super fast machine translations. I did see some "translations" and they were the usual ones you would expect from a machine with wrong word order and endings and wrong sentence structure etc., but with luck, you can get some info. Machines don't think, they don't "translate", automatically or otherwise. They are machines programmed by humans. These machines follow algorithms. They pick things/words and structures based on algorithms. There's never a guarantee the content is correct unless a person checks (translates) it.

I understand there's a market for all kinds of software, and much can be very helpful to a translator. But I am not convinced about the need to have all those billions of words "MT-translated" into word-mixes of many or all other languages or make it sound as if these word-mixes can replace human translation/translators or that many of the billions of words have to be translated immediately.

Food for thought?


B

[Edited at 2014-07-01 21:25 GMT]


 
Siegfried Armbruster
Siegfried Armbruster  Identity Verified
Germany
Local time: 14:20
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam
Discounts are great - MT is great - Life Is Beautiful Jul 1, 2014

Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
I see it from a translator's point of view who will give a client a product which is supposed to be accurate in order to help that client meet his/her objectives.
.................................................
What I get ticked off about is people telling us we are so much better off in OUR job using MT and should think about giving discounts.


Ok, today I translated about 17 k words, all in a specialty that will be checked by various official and regulatory bodies. There is no place for substandard quality. This was only possible using all the machine features my system offers. You might notice that I am not talking about automated machine translation. I am talking about machine supported translation using Alignment, TMs, automated Fuzzy Correction, TermInjector, glossaries, AutoSuggest and last but not least Speech Recognition. I consider all of these features "Machine Features" and they help me to translate faster, more consistent and to produce better quality.

Ok, and now the discounts. Let's say you translate 3000 words per day and you get USD 0.20/source word = USD 600.-, fine with me, good job.

Now, let's say I do 17000 words a day and will get my discounted rate of USD 0.10/source word - I'll leaf the math to you. - I love my discounted rate.

I have stopped long ago "thinking" in word rates, for me, "word rates" are a "hollow concept", they mean nothing. All I am interested is how much I make per hour/per day and this can vary dramatically depending on my/your productivity. The machine is only a means to improve my productivity without compromising quality.

By the way, yes, I do know that there are certain translations where it is difficult to improve the productivity by using more hard- and software.



[Edited at 2014-07-01 19:09 GMT]


 
Bernhard Sulzer
Bernhard Sulzer  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 09:20
English to German
+ ...
MT and other software Jul 1, 2014

Siegfried Armbruster wrote:

Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
I see it from a translator's point of view who will give a client a product which is supposed to be accurate in order to help that client meet his/her objectives.
.................................................
What I get ticked off about is people telling us we are so much better off in OUR job using MT and should think about giving discounts.


Ok, and now the discounts. Let's say you translate 3000 words per day and you get USD 0.20/source word = USD 600.-, fine with me, good job.

Now, let's say I do 17000 words a day and will get my discounted rate of USD 0.10/source word - I'll leaf the math to you. - I love my discounted rate.


Hi Siegfried,

Just to clarify, there's nothing wrong with giving discounts if you so decide, I agree.*
But when people try to argue that the machine did all the work and I only have to post-edit an automated "translation" and that's why it has to be cheaper, I can't agree. It's not that easy. I also distinguish between MT and other CAT tools. And I am sure you agree that the use of certain tools and software packages doesn't automatically warrant a discount, the opposite is possible as well. It's the professional translator who decides when and why to give discounts, if any.

*Add-on: I can't say I have ever given a discount like the one you mentioned above. Why should the use of CAT tools helping you deliver faster and even better be discounted at all? Extra speed and quality are additional goodies for your clients, aren't they? I'll hang up my translator coat if I have to compete with people who do the same work in less than half the time, charging (less than) half of some original price for it? You're saying because you can do much more faster and with the same quality, you are applying an incredible discount. To me, that math doesn't add up. The productivity increase you mentioned in your example also seems very large. I am sure that's not the norm. Maybe this is a special project allowing for such increase through the tools you mentioned. But as I see it, if you are delivering great products in such a short time, I would see it as an extra service you provide with tools you bought and learned to use.
I don't see myself reaching such productivity despite CAT tools. At least not in my fields. And if I did, I'm not sure I would charge so much less or less at all. Where would that spiraling trend end? There is a ceiling for the productivity levels in our industry when quality counts. It also depends on the fields and many other project-specific aspects.
I believe the human translator will always be needed to create quality translations and check them and I do advocate the use of CAT tools to assist him/her but I don't believe in the utter deterioration of our prices.
Your example reminds me of car production. But the cars aren't getting that much cheaper either. At least good cars don't. There are always new features and the production keeps changing as well. But now you've got me comparing translating with the "production" of cars. I better stop.

Sorry about the long add-on.

Just thinking.

[Edited at 2014-07-02 05:40 GMT]


 
Dan Lucas
Dan Lucas  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:20
Member (2014)
Japanese to English
You may have a point about productivity Jul 1, 2014

Siegfried Armbruster wrote:
All I am interested is how much I make per hour/per day and this can vary dramatically depending on my/your productivity. The machine is only a means to improve my productivity without compromising quality.

I don't have the specific experience that would allow me to agree or disagree with you, but this is an interesting perspective. At a more abstract level, I think tool use is hugely important.

In my previous work I invested heavily in certain tools and used them aggressively. They not only improved my productivity but also made certain things easy that would otherwise have been impossible.

Most of my competitors weren't even aware that these options existed. For them, Excel was sophisticated. Had they seen what I was doing with the tools I used, they would have probably argued that my projects fell outside the traditional scope of my role. They may have been right, but clients liked it anyway.


 
Bernhard Sulzer
Bernhard Sulzer  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 09:20
English to German
+ ...
Productivity and discounts Jul 1, 2014

Dan Lucas wrote:

Siegfried Armbruster wrote:
All I am interested is how much I make per hour/per day and this can vary dramatically depending on my/your productivity. The machine is only a means to improve my productivity without compromising quality.

I don't have the specific experience that would allow me to agree or disagree with you, but this is an interesting perspective. At a more abstract level, I think tool use is hugely important.

In my previous work I invested heavily in certain tools and used them aggressively. They not only improved my productivity but also made certain things easy that would otherwise have been impossible.

Most of my competitors weren't even aware that these options existed. For them, Excel was sophisticated. Had they seen what I was doing with the tools I used, they would have probably argued that my projects fell outside the traditional scope of my role. They may have been right, but clients liked it anyway.


Just because you can now do things with tools that you couldn't do before and are now faster, doesn't mean you have to work cheaper. That's a misconception as far as I'm concerned.
What counts in the end is always quality. If you deliver earlier or more and faster, even better. That should be worth something to the client. Let's not get drawn into the ridiculous argument that the more tools you use and the more quickly you deliver, the less money per unit you should make.

And it's a long way from tools that speed up one aspect of translating, typing etc.to the finished quality product.

An increase in productivity doesn't automatically equate to discounts.
If at all, it's the translators who decide what kind of discount is warranted and why, or how much extra charge.


[Edited at 2014-07-01 22:17 GMT]


 
Dan Lucas
Dan Lucas  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:20
Member (2014)
Japanese to English
Yes and no Jul 1, 2014

Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Just because you can now do things with tools that you couldn't do before and are now faster, doesn't mean you have to work cheaper. That's a misconception as far as I'm concerned.

No, you don't have to. But from a business perspective, if (this is after all a hypothesis) you were able to use tools to translate more quickly and thus raise your effective hourly rate, then you would have the option of strategically choosing a lower rate per word to encourage your clients to use you in preference to your competition. That would be an important advantage in most markets. However, I agree that it's probably something for the translator to decide.





[Edited at 2014-07-02 06:35 GMT]


 
Phil Hand
Phil Hand  Identity Verified
China
Local time: 21:20
Chinese to English
That's what I'm talking about Jul 2, 2014

Siegfried Armbruster wrote:

I am talking about machine supported translation using Alignment, TMs, automated Fuzzy Correction, TermInjector, glossaries, AutoSuggest and last but not least Speech Recognition. I consider all of these features "Machine Features" and they help me to translate faster, more consistent and to produce better quality.

I agree with all of this. These are precisely the tools we should be using - mostly word-level tools and task-specific tools (e.g. voice input). The job of the translator is to coordinate all of these tools at the high level. That's the bit of the job that MT doesn't succeed in doing. It will get better and better at it, but machine supported translation gets better through the addition of more "dumb" units, until all of a sudden you realise it's started to do something quite smart.


 
Michele Fauble
Michele Fauble  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 06:20
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
Economics Jul 2, 2014

Dan Lucas wrote:

Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Just because you can now do things with tools that you couldn't do before and are now faster, doesn't mean you have to work cheaper. That's a misconception as far as I'm concerned.

No, you don't have to. But from a business perspective, if (this is after all a hypothesis) you were able to use tools to translate more quickly and thus raise your effective hourly rate, then you would have the option of strategically choosing a lower rate per word to encourage your clients to use you in preference to your competition. That would be an important advantage in most markets. However, I agree that it's probably something for the translator to decide.





[Edited at 2014-07-02 06:35 GMT]


Exactly. Too many of these discussions ignore the concepts of supply and demand and competitive advantage.


[Edited at 2014-07-02 15:38 GMT]


 
Bernhard Sulzer
Bernhard Sulzer  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 09:20
English to German
+ ...
Exactly? Jul 2, 2014

Michele Fauble wrote:

Dan Lucas wrote:

Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Just because you can now do things with tools that you couldn't do before and are now faster, doesn't mean you have to work cheaper. That's a misconception as far as I'm concerned.

No, you don't have to. But from a business perspective, if (this is after all a hypothesis) you were able to use tools to translate more quickly and thus raise your effective hourly rate, then you would have the option of strategically choosing a lower rate per word to encourage your clients to use you in preference to your competition. That would be an important advantage in most markets. However, I agree that it's probably something for the translator to decide.




[Edited at 2014-07-02 06:35 GMT]


Exactly. Too many of these discussions ignore the concepts of supply and demand and competitive advantage.


[Edited at 2014-07-02 15:38 GMT]


Not exactly. "Competitive" advantage does not automatically equate to lowering your rates.

http://wiki.proz.com/wiki/index.php/Determining_your_rates_and_fees_as_a_translator
Unfortunately, the reality is that more and more translators are acquiescing and agree too willingly to the lower rates just to get the work.




[Edited at 2014-07-02 17:34 GMT]


 
Dan Lucas
Dan Lucas  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:20
Member (2014)
Japanese to English
Perhaps some roll over too easily? Jul 2, 2014

Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Not exactly. "Competitive" advantage does not automatically equate to lowering your rates.
http://wiki.proz.com/wiki/index.php/Determining_your_rates_and_fees_as_a_translator
Unfortunately, the reality is that more and more translators are acquiescing and agree too willingly to the lower rates just to get the work.

I agree, it does not automatically equate to that. And I'm sure there are niches in the market that are relatively insensitive to cost and that are, therefore, lucrative without the use of CAT and related tools. It also seems to me that some translators have no confidence in their ability to negotiate terms and just give in to client demands, but rationalise this as being inevitable due to "market forces".

On a related point, last weekend I was listening to a senior and successful translator arguing that there is a cult of poverty among some translators, people who make a virtue of not getting paid because "they love their work". Getting paid and enjoying what you do are not necessarily mutually exclusive!

As for success - I'm sure there are many definitions of what constitutes success and many routes to that destination in this industry.


 
Dan Lucas
Dan Lucas  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:20
Member (2014)
Japanese to English
How does voice recognition fit in? Jul 3, 2014

Siegfried Armbruster wrote:
I am talking about machine supported translation using Alignment, TMs, automated Fuzzy Correction, TermInjector, glossaries, AutoSuggest and last but not least Speech Recognition.

I have seen several people mention speech recognition. I am a fair typist - about 60-70wpm - and the problem for me is not that my typing cannot keep up but that my thinking cannot keep up with my typing. That is, I need time to think about the translation. Even typing at a pedestrian 30wpm you should be able to get 1800 words an hour, which is probably more than most people can safely translate. So why and how do you use voice recognition? Do you have or want to avoid RSI? Or are you one of those who never got to grips with touch typing? Or do you have a super-customised setup that improves your output dramatically? Enquiring minds want to know!


 
Orrin Cummins
Orrin Cummins  Identity Verified
Japan
Local time: 22:20
Japanese to English
+ ...
Talking is faster because it is an innate ability Jul 3, 2014

Dan Lucas wrote:

Siegfried Armbruster wrote:
I am talking about machine supported translation using Alignment, TMs, automated Fuzzy Correction, TermInjector, glossaries, AutoSuggest and last but not least Speech Recognition.

I have seen several people mention speech recognition. I am a fair typist - about 60-70wpm - and the problem for me is not that my typing cannot keep up but that my thinking cannot keep up with my typing. That is, I need time to think about the translation. Even typing at a pedestrian 30wpm you should be able to get 1800 words an hour, which is probably more than most people can safely translate. So why and how do you use voice recognition? Do you have or want to avoid RSI? Or are you one of those who never got to grips with touch typing? Or do you have a super-customised setup that improves your output dramatically? Enquiring minds want to know!


I type over 80 wpm in English and voice recognition is still a lot faster for me than typing. I believe this is because I have been speaking for many more years than I have been typing. My vocal cords are integrated into my body, whereas typing requires interfacing with a foreign object (a keyboard).

When I go to translate a sentence, it works something like this:

1. If typing, I look at the source text while typing the translation. Typing requires a nontrivial amount of concentration, which then cannot be spent on thinking about the source sentence. I find myself looking back and forth between the source text and the target text I am inputting. Realizing that I made a mistake in typing the sentence can derail my whole train of thought, which costs extra time.

2. If using voice recognition, I am 100% focused on the source text. I rarely look at what is being input into the target text area until after I have finished the whole sentence or segment. This allows my brain to bring its full power to bear on the translation, rather than diverting some concentration to the mundane task of physical input.

So in my experience, voice recognition offers gains beyond those noticed by comparing raw input speeds. Remember, we aren't just dictating/typing some document verbatim as we read it; the translation process is there in the middle. Allowing yourself to devote your full mental resources to that most important process will increase your productivity - although it may take a little time to get used to the way it works. It took me all of about a week, for what it's worth.


 
Dan Lucas
Dan Lucas  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:20
Member (2014)
Japanese to English
Enlightening Jul 3, 2014

Orrin Cummins wrote:
So in my experience, voice recognition offers gains beyond those noticed by comparing raw input speeds.

Thank you Orrin, some excellent points there that I hadn't really considered.


 
Phil Hand
Phil Hand  Identity Verified
China
Local time: 21:20
Chinese to English
Written vs spoken language Jul 3, 2014

Orrin, Siegfried: On the speech recognition thing, have you just trained yourself to speak in written text language? I use speech recognition for some things, but for most tasks I find that my spoken register and written register are noticeably different. I'm more verbose when I speak, and use more passive constructions that I'd smooth out in writing. I haven't really managed to integrate it into my workflow for most types of text.

Another issue is foreign names - inevitably we have
... See more
Orrin, Siegfried: On the speech recognition thing, have you just trained yourself to speak in written text language? I use speech recognition for some things, but for most tasks I find that my spoken register and written register are noticeably different. I'm more verbose when I speak, and use more passive constructions that I'd smooth out in writing. I haven't really managed to integrate it into my workflow for most types of text.

Another issue is foreign names - inevitably we have lots of foreign names in translated texts, which the software can't pick up. So the error rate is relatively high, and I find it a hassle to go back and fix...

Can all these problems be dealt with? I'd love to switch to more voice recognition if I could get off the ground with it.
Collapse


 
wayralune
wayralune
Brazil
Local time: 10:20
Spanish to English
+ ...
Never use MT Jul 3, 2014

MT can't replace such a complex task. In most cases, it's even more time-consuming having to correct all the mistakes when using it. Translation also implies the subjective part languages have, which is a translator's duty to decode, re-interpret or re-create: a MT actually won't be able to do so.

 
Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] >


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


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

What's your opinion on machine translation and quality?






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 »
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 »