An Investigation into the Efficiency of Translation
Dictation
Masaru Yamada, Kansai University, OsakaMichael Carl, Copenhagen Business School and
National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo
Goals of the study
● ENJA15: compare translation dictation (Aug. 2015 – Jan. 2016):
– with other translation modes (from-scratch, post-editing)
– between different experienced users (students, professionals)
● JTD16: investigate translation dictation (Feb. 2016 – March 2016):
– learning effects in 6 successive translation sessions
– different behaviour experienced users
● Compare with translation behaviour in other language pairs:
– 150 hours TP data in the TPR-DB
– EN → DA, DE, ES, HI, JA, ZH
ENJA15: Translation Experiment
● Ambition:Investigate variations of human translation processes across different translator profiles and translation modes: translation, post-editing, dictation
● Method:
➔ Translate six short English source texts (110-160 words) from English into Japanese under controlled conditions
➔ Record translation activities: transcribed speech, keystrokes and gazing
The ENJA15 ExperimentAugust 2015 to January 2016
● Each translator translated total 6 texts English-to-Japanese:1. from-scratch translation (T)2. translation dictation (D)3. MT post-editing (P)
● 39 native Japanese Translators ● 14 translators: 10+ years experience ● 17 translation students < 2 years experience● No experience in translation dictation
● 55 hours of English-to-Japanese user activity
● Data is publicly available free of charge
Number of Insertions per PU (1000ms)
● Longer chunks of coherent insertions in translation dictation (D)
Average Production InEfficiency
● InEff = insertions+deletions/length of final translation
● D involves more deletions per translation than T
P02 P04 P18 P19 P22 P24 P280.000
0.500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
T
D
Average Translation Duration per Texts
● Text 3: most difficult across all translation modes
● Less variance in Post-editing
Multilingual Translation Experiment (MLE)
> 150 hours of translation process data (T,P,E,D,C)774 translation sessions 108053 ST tokens, 122323 TT tokens
Average Translation Duration per Language
● EN-to-{DA,ES,DE} easier than EN-to-{JA,ZH,HI}
● Text 3: more difficult independent from TL
JTD16: Longitudinal Translation Study
● ENJA15: Translators had no experience with ASR and TD
– Some liked it others did not
● Can TD be learned within a few translation sessions and will TD translation speed increase?
● 7 translators (from the ENJA15 experiment) get used to TD over six successive days
● Translate 2 texts each day on 6 successive days within 3 weeks
– Text type: company mission statements
– Amounts to 7 * 12 = 84 translated texts
Post-experimental questionnaire
● With your experience from today's translation session: is TD easier than HT (regular ‘typing’)?
1: Yes, it is a lot easier,2: It is slightly easier3: about the same4: It is a lot more difficult than HT
● Translators did not perceive significant improvement over the 6 sessions.
Day1 Day2 Day3 Day4 Day5 Day60
1
2
3
4
5
P2
P4
P18
P19
P22
P24
P28
Conclusion
● Translation Dictation and ASR:
– novel method of Human-Machine Interaction in Translation
– quicker than from-scratch, approximately as efficient as PE
– no learning effect over 6 days
● Why do translators produce longer chunks in TD:
– concurrent reading ST and typing easier than TT speaking?
– speaking interferes with phonological loop to a larger extent than writing?
● Why is there no learning effect
– better (more professional) training required?
– maybe more fundamental things going on?
● Which texts are suited for dictation, post-editing, translation
– How are processes different/similar?
Top Related