{"title":"Learning to Live with Machine Translation","authors":"Hoyt Long","doi":"10.1353/nlh.2022.a898327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Rapid advancements in technologies of text and image generation have increasingly put the perceived autonomy of human creativity under threat. Even before ChatGPT and other large-language models sent such anxieties into overdrive, literary critics were arguing for a hermeneutics of automatic writing and revisiting long-held assumptions about artistic originality. Few, however, gave much thought to these model's quirky cousins—a family branch that once ruled over the utopian dreams invested in AI: machine translation (MT). This essay reflects on why translation has been lost in all the recent talk about these models and offers a necessary corrective. It considers what a critical response to MT might look like when reframed around an understanding of current technologies and a vision of MT as potential collaborator rather than human replacement. First, it offers an overview of current neural-based MT and the theories of translation that underwrite it. It then uses literary texts as a limit case for surveying the technology's most visible gaps, providing a deep, qualitative analysis of Japanese literary texts machine translated into English. Finally, it takes a speculative turn and considers what \"good enough\" machine translation of a large corpus of world literature might be good for in a future of ubiquitous and ever more accessible MT. The results hint at more immediate ways that MT invites inquiry into the present conditions of world literature, but also to a future where the entanglement of human translation and agency with the material agency of the technology bring forth potentials in both.","PeriodicalId":19150,"journal":{"name":"New Literary History","volume":"54 1","pages":"721 - 753"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Literary History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2022.a898327","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract:Rapid advancements in technologies of text and image generation have increasingly put the perceived autonomy of human creativity under threat. Even before ChatGPT and other large-language models sent such anxieties into overdrive, literary critics were arguing for a hermeneutics of automatic writing and revisiting long-held assumptions about artistic originality. Few, however, gave much thought to these model's quirky cousins—a family branch that once ruled over the utopian dreams invested in AI: machine translation (MT). This essay reflects on why translation has been lost in all the recent talk about these models and offers a necessary corrective. It considers what a critical response to MT might look like when reframed around an understanding of current technologies and a vision of MT as potential collaborator rather than human replacement. First, it offers an overview of current neural-based MT and the theories of translation that underwrite it. It then uses literary texts as a limit case for surveying the technology's most visible gaps, providing a deep, qualitative analysis of Japanese literary texts machine translated into English. Finally, it takes a speculative turn and considers what "good enough" machine translation of a large corpus of world literature might be good for in a future of ubiquitous and ever more accessible MT. The results hint at more immediate ways that MT invites inquiry into the present conditions of world literature, but also to a future where the entanglement of human translation and agency with the material agency of the technology bring forth potentials in both.
期刊介绍:
New Literary History focuses on questions of theory, method, interpretation, and literary history. Rather than espousing a single ideology or intellectual framework, it canvasses a wide range of scholarly concerns. By examining the bases of criticism, the journal provokes debate on the relations between literary and cultural texts and present needs. A major international forum for scholarly exchange, New Literary History has received six awards from the Council of Editors of Learned Journals.