| Pages in topic: [1 2] > | After machine translation, here comes machine interpreting! Thread poster: Csaba Ban
|
|---|
Csaba Ban 
Hungary
Local time: 15:04
Member (2002)
English to Hungarian
+ ...
| sivtufte
Norway
Local time: 15:04
English to Norwegian (Bokmal)
+ ...
| Useful if are articulated :) | Nov 6, 2009 |
It will be of use for household amusement but no doubt a great developement - if you don't have an interpenter...
However, the words that read the same may get in the way - hopefylly not as badly (or amusing) as in this service;
http://www.translationparty.com
I use this if I find work hard or impossible - to remind me of how great I really am!
Enjoy it.
... See more It will be of use for household amusement but no doubt a great developement - if you don't have an interpenter...
However, the words that read the same may get in the way - hopefylly not as badly (or amusing) as in this service;
http://www.translationparty.com
I use this if I find work hard or impossible - to remind me of how great I really am!
Enjoy it.
 ▲ Collapse
| | | | L.G.F. (X)
Spain
English to Spanish
+ ...
| Machines will never make our hard and valuable job | Nov 6, 2009 |
Well, I am really shocked after reading that article from the Daily Telegraph. I do actually think Japanese are obsessed with the idea of inventing a device substituting our job as translators and interpreters. Please, pay attention to the following extract from the article:
"The Japanese manufacturer admits that the device's translation capabilities are limited at the moment (...)"
This type of things makes me laugh, it is impossible a device has the same capabilities than human bei... See more Well, I am really shocked after reading that article from the Daily Telegraph. I do actually think Japanese are obsessed with the idea of inventing a device substituting our job as translators and interpreters. Please, pay attention to the following extract from the article:
"The Japanese manufacturer admits that the device's translation capabilities are limited at the moment (...)"
This type of things makes me laugh, it is impossible a device has the same capabilities than human beings. We cannot forget wonderful automatic translation machines, absolutely unuseful (I am not going to give you any examples, I would not like to be sued for that .) ▲ Collapse
| | | | | CAT vs. Human translation | Nov 6, 2009 |
The CAT vs. Human translation topic has been discussed at length, but not put to the test AFAIK.
Now you can try for youself
Using the above link try translating:
All CATs can do much better than humans.
Have fun!
Marek
| | |
|
|
|
Williamson
United Kingdom
Local time: 14:04
Flemish to English
+ ...
Lucas González Fernández wrote: Well, I am really shocked after reading that article from the Daily Telegraph. I do actually think Japanese are obsessed with the idea of inventing a device substituting our job as translators and interpreters. Please, pay attention to the following extract from the article: "The Japanese manufacturer admits that the device's translation capabilities are limited at the moment (...)" This type of things makes me laugh, it is impossible a device has the same capabilities than human beings. We cannot forget wonderful automatic translation machines, absolutely unuseful (I am not going to give you any examples, I would not like to be sued for that .)
Never say never. The Japanese are more advanced in robotics. A robot is device that has some human capabilities. Those who laugh now, will laugh less within now and say 15 years, but then I will not be my problem any longer. Imagine how much international institutions can cut on their budgets if such tools become more efficient. Where was the pc in 1980: 16 Kb member, no Microsoft,...
Where is the pc now?
| | | | Claudio Porcellana (X)
Italy
| machine interpreting ..... | Nov 6, 2009 |
I guessed as much! ....
now even interpreters have their share ...
LOL
but why stopping only here?
software companies can even create a MP (machine proofreader)
so, a machine will translate the text and another machine will proofread it ... GREAT!
finally a robot will read its (his ?) own robot's manual
abdicate completely to machines and you'll be done for, mankind !
;-(((
Claudio
| | | | | it IS possible, and maybe sooner as we would like | Nov 6, 2009 |
Williamson is right, it is just a question of time.
After four decades in interpretation and translation, I dare say that we will probably see a "usable" interpretation machine much before a usable text translation machine sees the light.
The law of exponential growth in computer power means that a machine already is, or will be very soon, capable of accomplishing any mental task currently carried out by humans. It just has to be fed with the right stuff. Satisfactory ... See more Williamson is right, it is just a question of time.
After four decades in interpretation and translation, I dare say that we will probably see a "usable" interpretation machine much before a usable text translation machine sees the light.
The law of exponential growth in computer power means that a machine already is, or will be very soon, capable of accomplishing any mental task currently carried out by humans. It just has to be fed with the right stuff. Satisfactory text-to-speech and speech-to-text programmes already exist and are rapidly improving. Only the internal core engine between them is lacking, and the infantile "grammar-and-dictionary" based text-MT systems to make gadgets (like this new japanese thing) are not good enough even for a start.
But, alas, almost nobody, including most interpreters, really know how human interpretation functions. Thus, until now nobody has thought of modelling into a computer engine and replicate the mental processes applied and the information used by human interpreters (which, by the way, are only half-explored). This a huge task, but POSSIBLE.
Once a big company realizes which is the way to go, the development can be very fast.
Sorry for the bad news.
[Edited at 2009-11-06 21:39 GMT]
[Edited at 2009-11-06 21:39 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Claudio Porcellana (X)
Italy
| blind trust in technology ... | Nov 6, 2009 |
... seems unbelievable to me!
mankind is wasting from centuries a lot of energy/money to redo (badly) what nature does very well effortlessly
for example, I recently read the story of sericulture (natural, technologic, hyper-technologic and then natural again) and I found it very illuminating ...
;-D
I think that science/technology should try to fulfil its old and vain promise, i.e to free men from physical struggle, rather than trying to substitute our clev... See more ... seems unbelievable to me!
mankind is wasting from centuries a lot of energy/money to redo (badly) what nature does very well effortlessly
for example, I recently read the story of sericulture (natural, technologic, hyper-technologic and then natural again) and I found it very illuminating ...
;-D
I think that science/technology should try to fulfil its old and vain promise, i.e to free men from physical struggle, rather than trying to substitute our cleverness, that is insane
Claudio ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Vlatko
Local time: 15:04
English to Macedonian
+ ...
| Short and simple? | Nov 7, 2009 |
Short and simple. Not machine, not software, nothing on this world will never work untile human eyes and hands don't manualy push it and push it to do the work as it should be done.
Machines that cost 600 000 eur. are not able to reach the purpose.
Every developing leeds to easy way for job to be done, but it will never exclude the human sense.
Where did PC development get? From 1980 to today, nothing is new, it just plastic/sand machines have become smaler in size and cheaper,... See more Short and simple. Not machine, not software, nothing on this world will never work untile human eyes and hands don't manualy push it and push it to do the work as it should be done.
Machines that cost 600 000 eur. are not able to reach the purpose.
Every developing leeds to easy way for job to be done, but it will never exclude the human sense.
Where did PC development get? From 1980 to today, nothing is new, it just plastic/sand machines have become smaler in size and cheaper, available to any home = competition gets high = better results for less money.
No one will never be able to create such translation base for automated translation with quality, it will take 1 000 000 translators from whole the world and 10 years to fill it in any sentence combinations. = Even Google + Microsoft together are not able to invest such money. = If some one do it, the service will cost more expensive than human brain+hand.
Google, yes, continue to translate web pages for simple people, it's no need for quality for them??? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Williamson
United Kingdom
Local time: 14:04
Flemish to English
+ ...
Technology evolves at a rapid pace.
Nippon Electronics Company happens to be one of those companies engaged in robotics. If I am not mistaken, it created female robot, looking like a human. The robot has a speech module and reacts to sentences from humans. Next step, program that robot so that it (s)he repeats/answers in another language. In other words, interpret.
Not for now perhaps. NEC is a multinational, Google and Microsoft are not small comapnies either. Look at it from an R.O... See more Technology evolves at a rapid pace.
Nippon Electronics Company happens to be one of those companies engaged in robotics. If I am not mistaken, it created female robot, looking like a human. The robot has a speech module and reacts to sentences from humans. Next step, program that robot so that it (s)he repeats/answers in another language. In other words, interpret.
Not for now perhaps. NEC is a multinational, Google and Microsoft are not small comapnies either. Look at it from an R.O.I. point of view. How much would it cost and how much would it save if interpreting/translation by humans could be minimized (or even eliminated).
Machines costing 600.000 euro. How much is the budget of the E.U. is a question which occurred at a preselection test of an EU-competition: 126 billion euros was the correct answer.
Besides in 1982, I wanted to buy an Apple Lisa II comptuer with 32 Kb and AppleWriter (elementary word processor) for the equivalent sum of €2000. What do you have for that kind of money now? In 1994, I bought the first cell phone (Moterola) for €450, the price of an Iphone today. Ever heard of the BCG-Matrix: star, cash-cow, ?, dog or the life cycle of a product: early adopters pay a lot, mass consumption takes place and prices go down.
[Edited at 2009-11-07 08:34 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Claudio Porcellana (X)
Italy
BTW, the technology that took men on the moon was very simple (something as 2 or 3 Commodore 64 and many piece of foil over the LEM)
After 30 years, PCs became a lot more sophisticated and in spite of all, there are no human colonies on the moon and EU HCL was blocked (again) by some bread crumbs ...
Technology doesn't ever advances
Often it fails and it will fail in this case because the the game's not worth the candle
It is an existential issue, no... See more BTW, the technology that took men on the moon was very simple (something as 2 or 3 Commodore 64 and many piece of foil over the LEM)
After 30 years, PCs became a lot more sophisticated and in spite of all, there are no human colonies on the moon and EU HCL was blocked (again) by some bread crumbs ...
Technology doesn't ever advances
Often it fails and it will fail in this case because the the game's not worth the candle
It is an existential issue, not different from the agricultural revolution
Even there, scientists guaranteed that introducing machines, the peasant's life should have been made easier
Now, we see that it was a lie: current peasants work a lot more and harder than their grandfathers (even if the manual work is apparently reduced), as they have to pay much more to maintain more and more bigger, expensive and sophisticated machines, plus to buy fuels, pesticides, etc
In the meanwhile, machines created a massive unemployment and the shift of young people from countryside towards the cities, i.e. the mother of ambiental degradation and countryside/mountain abandonment
Is was really an advance?
I don't think so
Claudio
[Modificato alle 2009-11-07 09:08 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Pablo Grosschmid wrote:
After four decades in interpretation and translation, I dare say that we will probably see a "usable" interpretation machine much before a usable text translation machine sees the light.
Why do you think so?
I find this a laughable statement, to be honest.
For interpretation, the sw has to do voice recognition first, and then feed the text to the same algorithm that the written MT uses... the extra errors introduced by the voice recognition will always be there and make machine interpreting worse than MT. Add to that the issues with voice synthetizing and the time pressure and you see why interpreting will always lag behind.
Depending on your definition, usable text translators do exist. The top current MT software is easily good enough for you to make some sense of a newspaper article written in a foreign tongue, and some of our colleagues are using such sw in their day-to-day work.
| | |
|
|
|
Parrot
Spain
Local time: 15:04
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Not to be taken lightly | Nov 7, 2009 |
Pablo Grosschmid wrote:
But, alas, almost nobody, including most interpreters, really know how human interpretation functions. Thus, until now nobody has thought of modelling into a computer engine and replicate the mental processes applied and the information used by human interpreters (which, by the way, are only half-explored). This a huge task, but POSSIBLE.
I've read some of the models proposed. EXTREMELY complex. To begin with, interpretation doesn't function literally.
| | | | | Modelling human processes | Nov 7, 2009 |
Pablo Grosschmid wrote:
But, alas, almost nobody, including most interpreters, really know how human interpretation functions. Thus, until now nobody has thought of modelling into a computer engine and replicate the mental processes applied and the information used by human interpreters (which, by the way, are only half-explored).
Probably true, definitely beside the point.
Computers work differently from human brains so programmers make them approach problems differently from what a human would do. It would make no sense to make them imitate humans because they are bad at it, and some of their amazing capabilities (recalling data instantly with perfect precision from huge databases) would remain unused.
For example, computer chess programs don't play chess quite like humans: in endgames with 6 or less pieces on the board, they don't make plans, they don't calculate how vulnerable the opponent's king is or what the most useful position for the dark-square bishop is. They have a massive pre-made database that tells them what the best move is in the given position and they play it instantly. Humans can't possibly remember that much data of course, so they are stuck analysing.
MT itself is a great example of how massive the difference can be: humans make sense of the source language text and then formulate it in the target language. Computers can't really do that and I'm not sure they will ever be able to. They attempt to come somewhat close with one of two the main MT algorithms, rule-based MT: they identify grammatical structures and recreate them in the target language, while slotting in the translations of words. They don't "understand" the text even with this process, but the MT method that's currently most successful is entirely different: statistical machine translation basically uses fuzzy matches from a gigantic TM and adapts the match to the source segment.
This has hardly anything to do with how humans translate/interpret but it's the best way for machines to do it.
| | | | Williamson
United Kingdom
Local time: 14:04
Flemish to English
+ ...
| Worries for the young ones. | Nov 7, 2009 |
Some who are 25-30 years old should better start worrying.
If a career, freelance or otherwise as an interpreter spans 4 decades, where will they be in say 2050 at the current rate of technological evolution. I know where I will be in 2050 : dead and gone. No worries for me.
Make no mistake, if the current Mekka of interpreting (E.U.-institutions)can save costs by gradually replacing interpreters by machines (robots) which are (almost) as perfomant as humans, it will be done.
... See more Some who are 25-30 years old should better start worrying.
If a career, freelance or otherwise as an interpreter spans 4 decades, where will they be in say 2050 at the current rate of technological evolution. I know where I will be in 2050 : dead and gone. No worries for me.
Make no mistake, if the current Mekka of interpreting (E.U.-institutions)can save costs by gradually replacing interpreters by machines (robots) which are (almost) as perfomant as humans, it will be done.
Not by sacking people, but by not replacing them by youngsters. That's the way social minded state owned companies do it. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: [1 2] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » After machine translation, here comes machine interpreting! | 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 » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
