Machine vs human translation: a new reality or a threat to professional Arabic–English translators

Q1 Social Sciences
Muneera Muftah
{"title":"Machine vs human translation: a new reality or a threat to professional Arabic–English translators","authors":"Muneera Muftah","doi":"10.1108/prr-02-2022-0024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeHow closely does the translation match the meaning of the reference has always been a key aspect of any machine translation (MT) service. Therefore, the primary goal of this research is to assess and compare translation adequacy in machine vs human translation (HT) from Arabic to English. The study looks into whether the MT product is adequate and more reliable than the HT. It also seeks to determine whether MT poses a real threat to professional Arabic–English translators.Design/methodology/approachSix different texts were chosen and translated from Arabic to English by two nonexpert undergraduate translation students as well as MT services, including Google Translate and Babylon Translation. The first system is free, whereas the second system is a fee-based service. Additionally, two expert translators developed a reference translation (RT) against which human and machine translations were compared and analyzed. Furthermore, the Sketch Engine software was utilized to examine the translations to determine if there is a significant difference between human and machine translations against the RT.FindingsThe findings indicated that when compared to the RT, there was no statistically significant difference between human and machine translations and that MTs were adequate translations. The human–machine relationship is mutually beneficial. However, MT will never be able to completely automated; rather, it will benefit rather than endanger humans. A translator who knows how to use MT will have an opportunity over those who are unfamiliar with the most up-to-date translation technology. As MTs improve, human translators may no longer be accurate translators, but rather editors and editing materials previously translated by machines.Practical implicationsThe findings of this study provide valuable and practical implications for research in the field of MTs and for anyone interested in conducting MT research.Originality/valueIn general, this study is significant as it is a serious attempt at getting a better understanding of the efficiency of MT vs HT in translating the Arabic–English texts, and it will be beneficial for translators, students, educators as well as scholars in the field of translation.","PeriodicalId":32387,"journal":{"name":"PSU Research Review","volume":"62 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSU Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/prr-02-2022-0024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

PurposeHow closely does the translation match the meaning of the reference has always been a key aspect of any machine translation (MT) service. Therefore, the primary goal of this research is to assess and compare translation adequacy in machine vs human translation (HT) from Arabic to English. The study looks into whether the MT product is adequate and more reliable than the HT. It also seeks to determine whether MT poses a real threat to professional Arabic–English translators.Design/methodology/approachSix different texts were chosen and translated from Arabic to English by two nonexpert undergraduate translation students as well as MT services, including Google Translate and Babylon Translation. The first system is free, whereas the second system is a fee-based service. Additionally, two expert translators developed a reference translation (RT) against which human and machine translations were compared and analyzed. Furthermore, the Sketch Engine software was utilized to examine the translations to determine if there is a significant difference between human and machine translations against the RT.FindingsThe findings indicated that when compared to the RT, there was no statistically significant difference between human and machine translations and that MTs were adequate translations. The human–machine relationship is mutually beneficial. However, MT will never be able to completely automated; rather, it will benefit rather than endanger humans. A translator who knows how to use MT will have an opportunity over those who are unfamiliar with the most up-to-date translation technology. As MTs improve, human translators may no longer be accurate translators, but rather editors and editing materials previously translated by machines.Practical implicationsThe findings of this study provide valuable and practical implications for research in the field of MTs and for anyone interested in conducting MT research.Originality/valueIn general, this study is significant as it is a serious attempt at getting a better understanding of the efficiency of MT vs HT in translating the Arabic–English texts, and it will be beneficial for translators, students, educators as well as scholars in the field of translation.
机器与人工翻译:对专业阿拉伯-英语翻译的新现实或威胁
目的译文与参考文献的含义的匹配程度如何一直是任何机器翻译(MT)服务的关键方面。因此,本研究的主要目的是评估和比较阿拉伯语到英语的机器翻译和人工翻译(HT)的翻译充分性。该研究调查了MT产品是否足够,是否比HT更可靠。它还试图确定机器翻译是否对专业阿拉伯语-英语翻译构成真正的威胁。设计/方法/方法选择了六个不同的文本,并由两个非专业的本科翻译学生以及MT服务(包括Google翻译和巴比伦翻译)将其从阿拉伯语翻译成英语。第一个系统是免费的,而第二个系统是收费的。此外,两位专家翻译开发了参考翻译(RT),对比和分析了人类和机器翻译。此外,Sketch Engine软件被用来检查翻译,以确定人类和机器翻译与RT之间是否存在显着差异。发现结果表明,与RT相比,人类和机器翻译之间没有统计学上的显着差异,mt是足够的翻译。人机关系是互利的。然而,机器翻译永远不可能完全自动化;相反,它将造福而不是危害人类。一个知道如何使用机器翻译的翻译人员将比那些不熟悉最新翻译技术的翻译人员有机会。随着mt的改进,人工翻译可能不再是准确的翻译,而是编辑和编辑以前由机器翻译的材料。实际意义本研究的发现对医学医学领域的研究以及对医学医学研究感兴趣的人提供了有价值的和实际的意义。总的来说,本研究意义重大,因为它是一个认真的尝试,以更好地了解机器翻译与HT翻译在阿拉伯语-英语文本中的效率,这将有利于翻译工作者,学生,教育工作者和翻译领域的学者。
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
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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
小红书