USING MACHINE TRANSLATION ENGINES IN THE CLASSROOM: A SURVEY OF TRANSLATION STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.197812

Keywords:

machine translation, machine translation engine, post-editing, students majoring in translation, translation pedagogy, machine translation evaluation

Abstract

This paper outlines the results of the experimental study aiming to explore the impact of using machine translation engines on the performance of translation students. Machine translation engines refer to the software developed to translate source texts into target languages in a fully automatic mode which can be classified according to the algorithm (example-based, rule-based, statistical, pragmatics-based, neural, hybrid) and the level of customisation (generic, customised, adaptive). The study was carried out in the form of a translation test held during the first semester of 2019/2020 academic year (September). The subjects included 48 undergraduate students of the School of Foreign Languages of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University (42 women and 6 men aged from 19 to 22) majoring in translation. They were subdivided into two sample groups: sample group 1 performed translation from English into Ukrainian with the help of the MT engine while sample group 2 translated the same text from English into Ukrainian by hand. The MT engine chosen for conducting the research was Microsoft Translator for personal use. The research was arranged into the following stages: preliminary (designing the experiment), main (implementing the experiment into life), conclusive (processing the results and interpreting them). The comparison of the students’ average results allowed us to come to the conclusion that the hypothesis preconceived in the beginning of the study was confirmed: the quality of the text translated by the students who received no previous training in post-editing with the use of a modern machine translation engine was of a poorer quality compared to the translation of the same text made by the students without the use of a machine translation engine. The students using the machine translation engine showed the tendency not to treat critically the output of the machine translation engine, thus scoring more penal points than the students translating on their own. The evidence from this study implies the necessity of teaching students to use machine translation in their work and to post-edit texts by means of developing the appropriate cross-curricular methodology of teaching.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Alla Olkhovska, V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

Doctor of Pedagogy, Associate Professor at Mykola Lukash Translation Studies Department

 

Iryna Frolova, V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor at Mykola Lukash Translation Studies Department

References

  1. Bespalko, V. P. (1989). Slagaemye pedagogicheskoj tehnologii [Components of pedagogical technology]. Moscow: Pedagogika.
  2. Chernovatyy, L. M. (2009). Problema otsinyuvannya pys'movykh robit maybutnikh perekladachiv [Assessment of written papers submitted by students majoring in Translation]. Visnyk Kharkivs'koho natsional'noho universytetu imeni V. N. Karazina, 848, 257–262. Retrieved 17 January 2020 from http://ekhnuir.univer.kharkov.ua/bitstream/123456789/6418/2/09cheass.pdf.
  3. Chernovatyy, L. M. (2010). Kontrol' kompetentsiyi usnoho perekladu z arkusha maybutnikh perekladachiv [Ways of testing sight interpreters’ proficiency]. Naukovi zapysky Kirovohrads'koho derzhavnoho pedahohichnoho universytetu im. V. Vynnychenka, 89(1), 35–40. Retrieved 17 January 2020 from http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Nzs_2010_89(1)__10.
  4. Chernovatyy, L. M. (2013). Metodyka vykladannya perekladu [Methodology of teaching translation as profession]. Vinnytsya, Ukraine: Nova Knyha.
  5. Daems, J., Vandepitte, S., Hartsuiker, R. & Macken, L. (2015). The impact of machine translation error types on post-editing effort indicators. In S. O'Brien & M. Simard (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice (pp. 31–45). Miami, FL, USA: Association for Machine Translation in the Americas.
  6. Doherty, S. & Kenny, D. (2014). The design and evaluation of a Statistical Machine Translation syllabus for translation students. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8(2), 295–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.937571.
    |
  7. European Master’s in Translation: Competence Framework 2017. (2017). Retrieved 25 January 2020 from https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/emt_competence_fwk_2017_en_web.pdf.
  8. Fiederer, R. & O’Brien, S. (2009). Quality and machine translation: A realistic objective? The Journal of Specialised Translation, 11, 52–74. Retrieved 05 February 2020 from https://www.jostrans.org/issue11/art_fiederer_obrien.pdf.
  9. García, I. (2010). Is machine translation ready yet? Target, 22(1), 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.22.1.02gar.
    |
  10. Garcia, I. (2011). Translating by post-editing: is it the way forward? Machine Translation, 25(3), 217–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-011-9115-8.
    |
  11. Goodmanian, A. G., Sitko, A. V. & Struk, I. V. (2019). Functional and pragmatic adequacy of journalistic style texts translation applying machine translation systems. Scientific journal of the Lviv State University of Life Safety “Philological Periodical of Lviv”, 5, 48–54. https://doi.org/10.32447/2663-340X-2019-5-8.
  12. Guerberof, A. (2009). Productivity and quality in the postediting of outputs from translation memories and machine translation. Localisation Focus, 7(1), 11–21. Retrieved 20 January 2020 from https://www.localisation.ie/
  13. Hutchins, J. & Somers, H. (1992). An Introduction to Machine Translation. London, England, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  14. Jia, Y., Carl, M., & Wang, X. (2019). How does the post-editing of neural machine translation compare with from-scratch translation? A product and process study. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 31, 60–86. Retrieved 02 February 2020 from https://www.jostrans.org/issue31/art_jia.php.
  15. Koehn, P. & Germann, U. (2014). The Impact of Machine Translation Quality on Human Post-Editing. In U. Germann, M.Carl, P. Koehn, G.Sanchis-Trilles, F. Casacuberta, R. Hill, S. O’Brien (Eds.), Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Humans and Computer-assisted Translation (pp. 38–46). Gothenburg, Sweden: Association for Computational Linguistics.
  16. Koponen, M. & Salmi, L. (2017). Post-editing quality: Analysing the correctness and necessity of post-editor corrections. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 16, 137–148. Retrieved 15 February 2020 from https://lans-tts.uantwerpen.be/index.php/LANS-TTS/article/view/439
  17. Kostikova, I., Shevchenko, A., Holubnycha, L., Popova, N. & Budianska, V. (2019). Use of machine translation technology for understanding scientific and technical texts. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 97 (4), 1355–1366. Retrieved 16 February 2020 from http://www.jatit.org/volumes/Vol97No4/24Vol97No4.pdf.
  18. Mellinger, C. D. (2017). Translators and machine translation: knowledge and skills gaps in translator pedagogy. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 11(4), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2017.1359760.
  19. O’Brien, S. (2002). Teaching Post-editing: A Proposal for Course Content. In Proceedings of 6th EAMT Workshop Teaching Machine Translation (pp. 99–106). Manchester, UK.
  20. Pym, A. (2019). How automation through neural machine translation might change the skill sets of translators. Draft written as part of the project Language Competence and Work (Recer Caixa2016 ACUP00020), 2017-2019.
  21. Qun, L. & Xiaojun Z. (2015). Machine Translation: General. In S.-W. Chan (Ed.), The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology (pp. 105–119). London, England & New York, NY: Routledge.
  22. Raído, V. E. (2013). Teaching Translation Technologies “Everyware”: Towards a Self-Discovery and Lifelong Learning Approach. Revista Tradumàtica: tecnologies de la traducció, 11, 275–285. Retrieved 15 February 2020 from https://revistes.uab.cat/
  23. Samson, R. (2005). Computer-assisted translation. In M. Tennent (Ed.), Training for the New Millenium (pp. 101–126). Amsterdam, The Netherlands & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  24. Scansani, R. & Bernardini, S. (2019). Do translator trainees trust machine translation? An experiment on post-editing and revision. In Proceedings of MT Summit XVII, Volume 2: Translator, Project and User Tracks (pp. 73–79). Dublin, Ireland: e International Association for Machine Translation.
  25. Seredenko, P. V. & Dolzhikova, A. V. (2009). Metody matematicheskoj statistiki v psihologo-pedagogicheskih issledovaniyah [Methods of mathematical statistics in psychological and pedagogical research]. Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russian Federation: SakhGU.
  26. TAUS (2016). MT Post-editing Guidelines. Retrieved 20 January 2020 from https://www.taus.net/academy/best-practices/postedit-best-practices/machine-translation-post-editing-guidelines.
  27. Temizöz, Ö. (2016). Postediting machine translation output: subject-matter experts versus professional translators. Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 24(4), 646–665. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2015.1119862.
  28. What is Machine Translation? (n.d.). Retrieved 18 January 2020 from https://www.gala-global.org/what-machine-translation.
  29. Yamada, M. (2019). The impact of Google Neural Machine Translation on Post-editing by student translators. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 31, 87–106. Retrieved 02 February 2020 from https://www.jostrans.org/issue31/art_yamada.php.
  30. Zinukova, N. V. (2018). Metodychna systema navchannya studentiv magistratury usnogo perekladu u zovnishnoekonomichnij sferi (na materiali anglijskoyi ta ukrayinskoyi mov) [Methodological System of Training Interpreting in Foreign Economic Field to Masters]. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Kyiv National Linguistic University, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Downloads

Published

2020-07-19

How to Cite

Olkhovska, A., & Frolova, I. (2020). USING MACHINE TRANSLATION ENGINES IN THE CLASSROOM: A SURVEY OF TRANSLATION STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE. Advanced Education, 7(15), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.197812

Issue

2020: Issue 15

Section

ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2020 Alla Olkhovska, Iryna Frolova

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).