Machine translations are often brought up as a gotcha whenever I criticize LLMs.
Uncategorized
72
Posts
59
Posters
12
Views
-
I have the impression that primarily anglophone people don't read as much translated literature, because so much good literature already exists in their language, so this issue may not be as familiar within that demographic. As someone who did not grow up anglophone, I can tell you there is a world of difference between a good and a bad translation even when done by humans. Machine translations are not even on the scale.
@Gargron plus doesn't everyone do the test of translate then translate back? They are garbage in a way that even a machine could recognize as garbage.
-
@Gargron I'm willing to guess that machine translation of prose may serve two uses: firstly, as an assist for human translators (by preparing a very rough first cut, which they then have to refine), and secondly, as an assist for human editors in figuring out which foreign-language-works to pay a human translator (with or without AI assistance) to work on (translation costs money: knowing where to spend it is important). But those are assistive roles, not human-replacing ones.
@cstross @Gargron I have a friend who worked for years as a translator (English to French) but in recent years he found that he was no longer being asked to translate but to "post-edit" machine translations. It was taking him just as long, paying him less, and destroying his soul.
He now works as a tour guide.
-
I have the impression that primarily anglophone people don't read as much translated literature, because so much good literature already exists in their language, so this issue may not be as familiar within that demographic. As someone who did not grow up anglophone, I can tell you there is a world of difference between a good and a bad translation even when done by humans. Machine translations are not even on the scale.
@Gargron I've just bought an English translation of Mikhail Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita. I wondered which was the best translation, and found a website with multiple translations of the opening page. It was really interesting how different they were. The one by Diana Burgin's and Katherine Tiernan O'Connor was the clear winner for me.
-
@Gargron thank you. When writing the German subtitles for No Other Land I had to basically do it all by hand because the context window was so narrow it got everything wrong that could be lost in translation.
@ErikUden @Gargron I work for Swiss Broadcast Company. Our devs did a wonderfull job in this regard. I get autotranslated subtitles that are amazingly good. It ain't literature but very good. It's a two tier system that joins the captions, then translation and then reconstructing the captions. Translation is done by Claude. Langs are not that big of a challange (DE FR IT EN). Only Rumantsch is a challange. Claude 3.5(!) Is pretty darn good though. Claude 4+ not so much
-
@Gargron I'm willing to guess that machine translation of prose may serve two uses: firstly, as an assist for human translators (by preparing a very rough first cut, which they then have to refine), and secondly, as an assist for human editors in figuring out which foreign-language-works to pay a human translator (with or without AI assistance) to work on (translation costs money: knowing where to spend it is important). But those are assistive roles, not human-replacing ones.
@cstross @Gargron
Machine translations are more of a hindrance than a help, for translators. If you don't know both languages well, having an automated dictionary lookup could possibly be useful - but if you're a translator, and especially a translator of fiction, having a nuanceless draft will only take more time to figure out. And it will be irritating time, because reading mistranslations is a pain. Editing one's own drafts is hard enough!As to B: Editors rely on readers, reviews /...
-
Machine translations are often brought up as a gotcha whenever I criticize LLMs. It's worth pointing out two things: Machine translations existed decades before LLMs, and yes, machine translations are useful. However: I would never in my life read a machine translated book. Understanding what a social media post is talking about in rough terms? Sure. Literature? Absolutely not. Hell, have you ever seen machine translated subtitles? It's absolute garbage.
@Gargron Yeah you most definitively have to thoroughly proof read that stuff which kinda defeats the point.
-
Machine translations are often brought up as a gotcha whenever I criticize LLMs. It's worth pointing out two things: Machine translations existed decades before LLMs, and yes, machine translations are useful. However: I would never in my life read a machine translated book. Understanding what a social media post is talking about in rough terms? Sure. Literature? Absolutely not. Hell, have you ever seen machine translated subtitles? It's absolute garbage.
Kille Bill -> 'Kill rekening' (Kill the invoice)
-
@inanedirk @Gargron Microsoft uses machine translations on their pages extensively, and the results are a mess. They even OCR and translate the screenshots, so you end up with screenshots that have wrong text crammed over the English original, making them doubly useless.
@inanedirk @Gargron Oh, and not just pages, it seems that at least parts of Windows are machine-translated nowadays, because some texts make absolutely no sense and use extremely weird word combinations.
-
@cstross @Gargron
Machine translations are more of a hindrance than a help, for translators. If you don't know both languages well, having an automated dictionary lookup could possibly be useful - but if you're a translator, and especially a translator of fiction, having a nuanceless draft will only take more time to figure out. And it will be irritating time, because reading mistranslations is a pain. Editing one's own drafts is hard enough!As to B: Editors rely on readers, reviews /...
-
@Gargron I'm willing to guess that machine translation of prose may serve two uses: firstly, as an assist for human translators (by preparing a very rough first cut, which they then have to refine), and secondly, as an assist for human editors in figuring out which foreign-language-works to pay a human translator (with or without AI assistance) to work on (translation costs money: knowing where to spend it is important). But those are assistive roles, not human-replacing ones.
-
@Gargron I'm willing to guess that machine translation of prose may serve two uses: firstly, as an assist for human translators (by preparing a very rough first cut, which they then have to refine), and secondly, as an assist for human editors in figuring out which foreign-language-works to pay a human translator (with or without AI assistance) to work on (translation costs money: knowing where to spend it is important). But those are assistive roles, not human-replacing ones.
@cstross @Gargron My (very not translator) impression is that human translators who have worked from rough machine translations, say that it’s harder than just translating the text.
Also, today I was in a work info session, where the talks were translated by some MS PoS thing, from Finnish to English. The results were horrendous, if hilarious. It might get better but I don’t really know why. Good simultaneous interpretation is kind of a human-level problem, really. Context matters!
-
I have the impression that primarily anglophone people don't read as much translated literature, because so much good literature already exists in their language, so this issue may not be as familiar within that demographic. As someone who did not grow up anglophone, I can tell you there is a world of difference between a good and a bad translation even when done by humans. Machine translations are not even on the scale.
@Gargron Many times when I land on an auto-translated site I have to change the language to english because I don't even understand what's supposed to mean.
-
Machine translations are often brought up as a gotcha whenever I criticize LLMs. It's worth pointing out two things: Machine translations existed decades before LLMs, and yes, machine translations are useful. However: I would never in my life read a machine translated book. Understanding what a social media post is talking about in rough terms? Sure. Literature? Absolutely not. Hell, have you ever seen machine translated subtitles? It's absolute garbage.
@Gargron Yeah, people who don't know anything about language or translation seem to think of translation as a perfect example of a "mechanical" process that should be automate-able.
*Maybe* for some kinds of technical writing (which still has its difficulties), but good translation of literature is probably one of the hardest things to replace humans for, right alongside writing good literature in the first place.
-
Machine translations are often brought up as a gotcha whenever I criticize LLMs. It's worth pointing out two things: Machine translations existed decades before LLMs, and yes, machine translations are useful. However: I would never in my life read a machine translated book. Understanding what a social media post is talking about in rough terms? Sure. Literature? Absolutely not. Hell, have you ever seen machine translated subtitles? It's absolute garbage.
@Gargron much of my work is as a legal translator (evidence, wiretaps, court filings, etc.)
The party that relies on machine translations or worse, AI translations, is the party that will lose the case. Any translator can pick holes in an AI translation big enough to cross through with a herd of elephants. Those "translations" lack nuance.
-
I have the impression that primarily anglophone people don't read as much translated literature, because so much good literature already exists in their language, so this issue may not be as familiar within that demographic. As someone who did not grow up anglophone, I can tell you there is a world of difference between a good and a bad translation even when done by humans. Machine translations are not even on the scale.
@Gargron Native speaker: I think you’re right. Though I have seen warnings recently about “new translation” editions on Amazon that are just LLM trash.
-
I have the impression that primarily anglophone people don't read as much translated literature, because so much good literature already exists in their language, so this issue may not be as familiar within that demographic. As someone who did not grow up anglophone, I can tell you there is a world of difference between a good and a bad translation even when done by humans. Machine translations are not even on the scale.
@Gargron @mastodon.social I absolutely agree.
On the other hand, although I'm a native spanish speaker, I've read a couple of books in english.
I think that US pleople don't even consider reading in any language but english. -
@Gargron or Google's auto translated crab, Voice or text is atrocious
@hashraydamon @Gargron I was thinking about asr too! Youtube has been using that since 2009 and it still sucks somehow!
-
Machine translations are often brought up as a gotcha whenever I criticize LLMs. It's worth pointing out two things: Machine translations existed decades before LLMs, and yes, machine translations are useful. However: I would never in my life read a machine translated book. Understanding what a social media post is talking about in rough terms? Sure. Literature? Absolutely not. Hell, have you ever seen machine translated subtitles? It's absolute garbage.
I don't get the machine translation argument. LLMs do even that poorly, certainly noticeably worse than a purpose-trained translation model, which is I believe what at least Google Translate uses.
My pet peeve about machine translation is how someone at Google and Microsoft thought that it's a good idea to "helpfully" translate developer documentation into your system language by default. As in, you have to look for a button to read it in English. Who in their right mind could possibly want that?..
-
@cstross @Gargron I have a friend who worked for years as a translator (English to French) but in recent years he found that he was no longer being asked to translate but to "post-edit" machine translations. It was taking him just as long, paying him less, and destroying his soul.
He now works as a tour guide.
-
Machine translations are often brought up as a gotcha whenever I criticize LLMs. It's worth pointing out two things: Machine translations existed decades before LLMs, and yes, machine translations are useful. However: I would never in my life read a machine translated book. Understanding what a social media post is talking about in rough terms? Sure. Literature? Absolutely not. Hell, have you ever seen machine translated subtitles? It's absolute garbage.
@Gargron My host admin added a "translate this" for foreign language posts on this instance, and it is wonderful. Not 100% accurate, but I normally get the picture and enough people speak English that quite often I can engage in my own language and its ok. So translating on the fly, and I only mean on the fly, is good. I can't think of a single other thing that should be used for LLM or any other type of computerized program.
As a reader I do appreciate when there is more than one English translation of a foreign language text that I study. That is great and super helpful and also eliminates "standards" which can't exist from just one translator.
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@chris holding you and her in the light.
-
-
-
-
-
send healing hugs for my wife @Tree
she had a bad seizure.
We're at the H.
First really bad one for a few weeks :(
Still haven't been able to see a neurologist to really figure then out :(
#health
-
@stefano In the Chateau maybe ??
-
@monsieuricon I hate this.
