The Discrepancies of Online Translation-Machine Performances: A Mini-Test on Object Language and Metalanguage

J. Jumanto, Sarif Syamsu Rizal, Rahmanti Asmarani, Haryati Sulistyorini
{"title":"The Discrepancies of Online Translation-Machine Performances: A Mini-Test on Object Language and Metalanguage","authors":"J. Jumanto, Sarif Syamsu Rizal, Rahmanti Asmarani, Haryati Sulistyorini","doi":"10.1109/iSemantic55962.2022.9920394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research has explored the discrepancies in online translation-machine performances through a mini-test on object language and metalanguage translation. Within this framework, object language is the verbal language with its literal meaning or denotation, as it factually is, while metalanguage is the language with its figurative meaning or connotation, which results from human creative imagination. The words sitting duck as a duck which is sitting (bebek duduk) is an object language while sitting duck as an easy target (sasaran empuk) is a metalanguage. This research has gone through six methods: online observation, online-machine translation, auto-expert judgment, verification, classification, and interpretation. The discrepancies within this quasi-qualitative research are obtained from verification on four set-up aspects of 10 corpus data, i.e. object language alone, object language within context, metalanguage alone, and metalanguage within context. Upon the analyses of English-Indonesian translation performances by Google Translate, Bing Microsoft Translator, Yandex Translate, and Systran Translate, the high-percentage discrepancies of translation machine performances mostly happen in the translations of metalanguage, while the translations of object language are successful enough with low-percentage discrepancies. Upon the findings of this research, online translation should be developed and improved within the aspects of metalanguage in the target language. Theoretically, the findings propose the inclusion of object language and metalanguage in the online translation machines, while empirically they challenge more metalanguage words to exercise the appropriacy of online translation machines for their better service ahead. This study can also be a research model for other languages in the world in the context of online translationmachine performances.","PeriodicalId":360042,"journal":{"name":"2022 International Seminar on Application for Technology of Information and Communication (iSemantic)","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 International Seminar on Application for Technology of Information and Communication (iSemantic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/iSemantic55962.2022.9920394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This research has explored the discrepancies in online translation-machine performances through a mini-test on object language and metalanguage translation. Within this framework, object language is the verbal language with its literal meaning or denotation, as it factually is, while metalanguage is the language with its figurative meaning or connotation, which results from human creative imagination. The words sitting duck as a duck which is sitting (bebek duduk) is an object language while sitting duck as an easy target (sasaran empuk) is a metalanguage. This research has gone through six methods: online observation, online-machine translation, auto-expert judgment, verification, classification, and interpretation. The discrepancies within this quasi-qualitative research are obtained from verification on four set-up aspects of 10 corpus data, i.e. object language alone, object language within context, metalanguage alone, and metalanguage within context. Upon the analyses of English-Indonesian translation performances by Google Translate, Bing Microsoft Translator, Yandex Translate, and Systran Translate, the high-percentage discrepancies of translation machine performances mostly happen in the translations of metalanguage, while the translations of object language are successful enough with low-percentage discrepancies. Upon the findings of this research, online translation should be developed and improved within the aspects of metalanguage in the target language. Theoretically, the findings propose the inclusion of object language and metalanguage in the online translation machines, while empirically they challenge more metalanguage words to exercise the appropriacy of online translation machines for their better service ahead. This study can also be a research model for other languages in the world in the context of online translationmachine performances.
在线翻译机器表现的差异:一个对象语言和元语言的小测试
本研究通过对象语言和元语言翻译的小型测试,探讨了在线翻译机在翻译性能上的差异。在这一框架下,对象语言是具有字面意义或外延的言语语言,而元语言是具有比喻意义或内涵的语言,是人类创造性想象的结果。“sitting duck asa duck which is sitting”(bebek duduk)是对象语言,而“sitting duck asa easy target”(sasaran empuk)是元语言。本研究经历了在线观察、在线机器翻译、自动专家判断、验证、分类和口译六种方法。准定性研究的差异是通过对10个语料库数据的四个设置方面的验证得出的,即单独的对象语言、上下文中的对象语言、单独的元语言和上下文中的元语言。通过对Google Translate、Bing Microsoft Translator、Yandex Translate、Systran Translate等英印尼语翻译性能的分析,翻译机器性能的高百分比差异主要发生在元语言的翻译上,而目标语言的翻译则是足够成功的,差异比例很低。根据研究结果,网络翻译应该在译语元语言方面得到发展和完善。从理论上讲,研究结果建议在在线翻译机器中包含对象语言和元语言,而从经验上来说,他们挑战了更多的元语言单词,以锻炼在线翻译机器的适当性,以便更好地为他们提供服务。本研究也可以为世界上其他语言在在线翻译机器表现的背景下的研究提供一个模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信