International journal of advanced smart convergence

  • 제10권2호
  • /
  • Pages.86-96
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 2288-2847(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-2855(eISSN)
한국인터넷방송통신학회 (The Institute of Internet, Broadcasting and Communication)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Satisfaction Survey on the Human Translation Outcomes and Machine Translation Post-Editing Outcomes

  • Hong, Junghee (Dept. of English Language and Literature, Kwangwoon Univ.) ;
  • Lee, Il Jae (Dept. of English and Industry, Kwangwoon Univ.)
  • 투고 : 2021.04.27
  • 심사 : 2021.05.04
  • 발행 : 2021.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

This cross-sectional survey research carried out with the inquisitive agenda on satisfaction of the translation outcomes as performed by human translation and (machine translation) post-editing. The survey group consisted of 166 Korean translators primarily working with the English, Chinese, and Japanese languages. They were asked to rate the satisfactory level with accuracy, fluency, idiomatic expression, and terminology in the Richter's scale of four. The result reveals that human translation is more satisfactory than post-editing with respect to accuracy, but it is uneasy to assert that accuracy is unsatisfactory in post-editing. On the other hand, the Korean translators are less satisfied with fluency, idiomatic expression, and terminology than accuracy. It can be assumed that although human translation is more satisfactory than post-editing, the accuracy of post-editing seems to be more acknowledged than fluency, idiomatic expression, and terminology, which lead the translators to take the accuracy of raw machine-translation products and to go on to improve the fluency, idiomatic expression, and terminology. Nevertheless, Korean translators believe Korean idiomatic expressions cannot be satisfactorily produced in post-editing, while fluency and terminology can be improved in post-editing.

키워드

과제정보

This present research has been conducted by the Research Grant of Kwangwoon University in 2019.

참고문헌

  1. S. Doherty, "The Impact of Translation Technologies on the Process and Product of Translation," International Journal of Communication, Vol. 10, pp. 647-969, February 2016.
  2. J. Daems, S. Vandepitte, R.J. Hartsuiker, and L. Macken, "Identifying the Machine Translation Error Types with the Greatest Impact on Post-Editing Effort," Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 8, pp. 1-15, August 2017. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01282
  3. Y. Gambier, "Changing Landscape in Translation," International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 1-12, Summer and Autumn 2014.
  4. Y. Gambier, "Translations Rapid and Radical Changes in Translation and Translation Studies," International Journal of Communication, Vol 10, pp. 887-906, February 2016.
  5. I. Garcia, "Is Machine Translation Ready Yet?" Target, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 7-21, June 2010. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.22.1.02gar
  6. I. Garcia, "Translating by Post-Editing: Is It the Way Forward?" Machine translation, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 217-237, September 2011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-011-9115-8
  7. J.-Y. Park, "Language Technologies & the T&I Industry's Future," Interpreting and Translation Studies, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 137-168, January 2017. DOI: 10.22844/its.2017.21.1.137
  8. S.M. Kim, "Coexistence of humans and machines in the era of artificial intelligence," Interpretation and Translation, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 1-32, August 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.20305/it201802001032
  9. Turner, Phil (2016) HCI Redux: The Promise of Post-Cognitive Interaction, Springer, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42235-0_9
  10. TAUS, MT Post-Editing Guideline. https://www.taus.net/think-tank/articles/postedit-articles/taus-post-editing-guidelines, 2016.
  11. J.-S. Shin, "Revisiting Translation Competence in a Technological Paradigm," Interpreting and Translation Studies, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 51-71. October 2017. DOI: 10.22844/its.2017.21.4.51
  12. J.-S. Chun, "Study on Translators' Acceptance of Machine Translation," Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, Vol. 11, No. 6, pp. 281-288, June 2020. DOI: 10.15207/JKCS.2020.11.6.281
  13. I.J. Lee, "A Quality Comparison of English Translations of Korean Literature between Human Translation and Post-Editing," International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology (IJACT), Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2018. DOI: 10.17703//IJACT2018.6.4.165
  14. J.-C. Kwak and S.-H. Han, "Revisiting Machine Translation Error Typology through Human Post-editing," Interpreting and Translation Studies, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 1-25, January 2018. DOI: 10.22844/its.2018.22.1.1
  15. S.-H. Mah, "An Empirical Investigation of Kor-Eng Machine Translation Post-Editing - Focused on the Analysis of MT-PE of Undergraduates," Interpreting and Translation Studies, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 53-87, January 2018. DOI: 10.22844/its.2018.22.1.53
  16. S.-B, Lee, "A Phenomenological Study of Undergraduate Students' Experiences of Machine Translation Post-editing," Interpreting and Translation Studies, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 117-143, January 2018. DOI: 10.22844/its.2018.22.1.117
  17. M. Plitt and F. Masselot, "A Productivity Test of Statistical Machine Translation Post-Editing in a Typical Localisation Context," The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, Vol. 93, No. 1, pp. 7-16. January 2010. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10108-010-0010-x
  18. J. Daems, S. Vandepitte, R.J. Hartsuiker, and L. Macken, "Translation Methods and Experience: A Comparative Analysis of Human Translation and Post-Editing with Students and Professional Translators," Meta: Translators' Journal, Vol. 62, No. 2, pp. 245-270, September 2017. https://doi.org/10.7202/1041023ar
  19. S. O'Brien, "An Empirical Investigation of Temporal and Technical Post-Editing Effort Translation and Interpreting Studies," The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 83-136, January 2007. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.2.1.03ob
  20. H. Fulford, "Freelance Translators and Machine Translation: An Investigation of Perceptions, Uptake, Experience and Training Needs," The 6th European Association of Machine Translation Workshop: Teaching Machine Translation, pp. 117-122, November 2002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-011-9115-8
  21. A. Guerberof, (2013) 'What do Professional Translators Think about Post-Editing', The Journal of Specialised Translation, Vol. 19, pp. 75-95, January 2013.
  22. F. Gaspari, A. Toral, S.K. Naskar, D. Groves, and A. Way, "Perception vs Reality: Measuring Machine Translation Post-Editing Productivity," in S. O'Brien, M. Simard, and L. Specia (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas: Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice, pp. 60-72, Vancouver, BC. Canada: AMTA, Oct. 22-26, 2014.
  23. J.R. Fraenkel, N.E, Wallen, and H.H. Hyun, How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, tenth edition, New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2018.
  24. D.J. Sheskin, "Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures," fifth edition, CRC Press, August 2003.