Advanced search
1 file | 567.30 KB

Translationese and post-editese : how comparable is comparable quality?

Joke Daems (UGent) , Orphée De Clercq (UGent) and Lieve Macken (UGent)
Author
Organization
Abstract
Whereas post-edited texts have been shown to be either of comparable quality to human translations or better, one study shows that people still seem to prefer human-translated texts. The idea of texts being inherently different despite being of high quality is not new. Translated texts, for example,are also different from original texts, a phenomenon referred to as ‘Translationese’. Research into Translationese has shown that, whereas humans cannot distinguish between translated and original text,computers have been trained to detect Translationesesuccessfully. It remains to be seen whether the same can be done for what we call Post-editese. We first establish whether humans are capable of distinguishing post-edited texts from human translations, and then establish whether it is possible to build a supervised machine-learning model that can distinguish between translated and post-edited text.
Keywords
LT3, MACHINE TRANSLATION, PATTERNS, ENGLISH

Downloads

  • Daems LANS pub.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 567.30 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Daems, Joke, Orphée De Clercq, and Lieve Macken. 2017. “Translationese and Post-editese : How Comparable Is Comparable Quality?” Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series-themes in Translation Studies 16: 89–103.
APA
Daems, Joke, De Clercq, O., & Macken, L. (2017). Translationese and post-editese : how comparable is comparable quality? LINGUISTICA ANTVERPIENSIA NEW SERIES-THEMES IN TRANSLATION STUDIES, 16, 89–103.
Vancouver
1.
Daems J, De Clercq O, Macken L. Translationese and post-editese : how comparable is comparable quality? LINGUISTICA ANTVERPIENSIA NEW SERIES-THEMES IN TRANSLATION STUDIES. 2017;16:89–103.
MLA
Daems, Joke, Orphée De Clercq, and Lieve Macken. “Translationese and Post-editese : How Comparable Is Comparable Quality?” LINGUISTICA ANTVERPIENSIA NEW SERIES-THEMES IN TRANSLATION STUDIES 16 (2017): 89–103. Print.
@article{8516838,
  abstract     = {Whereas post-edited texts have been shown to be either of comparable quality to human translations or better, one study shows that people still seem to prefer human-translated texts. The idea of texts being inherently different despite being of high quality is not new. Translated texts, for example,are also  different  from  original  texts,  a  phenomenon  referred  to  as {\textquoteleft}Translationese{\textquoteright}. Research into Translationese has shown that, whereas humans cannot distinguish between translated and original text,computers  have  been  trained  to  detect  Translationesesuccessfully.  It  remains  to  be  seen whether the same can be done for what we call Post-editese. We first establish whether humans are capable of distinguishing post-edited texts from human translations, and then establish whether it is possible to build a supervised machine-learning model that can distinguish between translated and post-edited text.},
  author       = {Daems, Joke and De Clercq, Orph{\'e}e and Macken, Lieve},
  issn         = {0304-2294},
  journal      = {LINGUISTICA ANTVERPIENSIA NEW SERIES-THEMES IN TRANSLATION STUDIES},
  keyword      = {LT3,MACHINE TRANSLATION,PATTERNS,ENGLISH},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {89--103},
  title        = {Translationese and post-editese : how comparable is comparable quality?},
  url          = {https://lans-tts.uantwerpen.be/index.php/LANS-TTS/article/view/434/409},
  volume       = {16},
  year         = {2017},
}

Web of Science
Times cited: