Author:
He Linli,Ghassemiazghandi Mozhgan,Subramaniam Ilangko
Abstract
This study explores the performance of machine translation of literary texts from English to Chinese. The study compares two machine translation systems, Bing Translator and Youdao Machine Translation, using selected texts from the novel “Nineteen eighty-four” by George Orwell. The data collection includes the original source texts, their machine-generated translations by Bing Translator and Youdao Machine Translation, and comparisons with human reference translations to assess the performance of these systems. The research’s focal point is to evaluate the accuracy, fluency, and appropriateness of translations generated by these two machine translation systems, while also analyzing the post-editing effort required to enhance the quality of the final machine-translated product. The study revealed that despite the presence of flaws in both machine translation systems, Youdao Machine Translation demonstrated superior performance, especially in accurately translating technical terms and idiomatic expressions, making it the more effective option overall. Nevertheless, the translations from Youdao Machine Translation required more substantial post-editing efforts to improve fluency and readability. Conversely, Bing Translator yielded more fluent and natural-sounding translations, albeit with a need for improved accuracy in translating technical terms and idiomatic expressions. The study concludes that while machine translation systems are capable of generating reasonable translations for literary texts, human post-editing remains essential to ensure the final output’s accuracy, fluency, and appropriateness. The study underscores the importance of selecting the appropriate machine translation system based on the nature of the text being translated. It also highlights the critical role of post-editing in refining the quality of machine-translated outputs, suggesting that while machine translation can provide a solid foundation, human intervention is indispensable for achieving optimal accuracy, fluency, and overall readability in literary translations.
Publisher
Bilingual Publishing Group
Reference38 articles.
1. Ali, M. A. (2020). Quality and Machine Translation: An Evaluation of Online Machine Translation of English into Arabic Texts. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 10(5), 524–548. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2020.105030
2. Araújo, S., & Aguiar, M. (2023). Comparing ChatGPT’s and Human Evaluation of Scientific Texts’ Translations from English to Portuguese Using Popular Automated Translators Notebook for the SimpleText Lab at CLEF 2023.
3. Bergen, D. (2004). Translation technology and translator training. In: Tommola J (editor). Kieli, teksti ja kääntäminen = Language, Text and Translation. University of Turku. Painosalama Oy. pp. 141–155.
4. Blanchon, H., & Boitet, C. (2007). For the external evaluation of MT systems using task-based methods (French). Trait. Autom. des Langues, 48(1), 33-65.
5. Breyel, C., & Grass, T. (2020). Machine translation and “biotranslation”: an unlikely marriage. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 17(4).