An empirical investigation of temporal and technical post-editing effort

Sharon O'Brien

This article reports on a study designed to quantify temporal and technical post-editing effort in machine translated texts. The study involved two groups of English>German translators, one instructed to post-edit a machine-translated text and the other to translate the same text from English into German. In addition, text segments containing negative translatability indicators (NTIs) were isolated in order to compare the effort involved in post-editing and translating segments with such indicators and without. Results indicate that the post-editing effort for all segments was lower than the translation effort for those segments. Additional results suggest, among other things, that the removal of NTIs may reduce relative post-editing effort overall.

Published online: 20 February 2009
https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.2.1.03ob

Cited by

Cited by 16 other publications

Alves, Fabio, Arlene Koglin, Bartolomé Mesa-Lao, Mercedes García Martínez, Norma B. de Lima Fonseca, Arthur de Melo Sá, José Luiz Gonçalves, Karina Sarto Szpak, Kyoko Sekino & Marceli Aquino

2016. In New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 77 ff.

Jia, Yanfang, Michael Carl & Xiangling Wang

2019. Post-editing neural machine translation versus phrase-based machine translation for English–Chinese. Machine Translation 33:1-2 ► pp. 9 ff.

Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A. & Joseph V. Casillas

2021. Literal is not always easier. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 4:1 ► pp. 98 ff.

Karamanis, Nikiforos, Saturnino Luz & Gavin Doherty

2011. Translation practice in the workplace: contextual analysis and implications for machine translation. Machine Translation 25:1 ► pp. 35 ff.

Koby, Geoffrey S.

2012. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics,

Mellinger, Christopher D.

2017. Translators and machine translation: knowledge and skills gaps in translator pedagogy. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 11:4 ► pp. 280 ff.

Mellinger, Christopher D.

2018. Re-thinking translation quality. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 30:2 ► pp. 310 ff.

Munková, Daša, Oľga Wrede & Jakub Absolon

2019. Vergleich der menschlichen, maschinellen und Post-Editing-Übersetzung aus dem Slowakischen ins Deutsche mittels automatischer Evaluation. Zeitschrift für Slawistik 64:2 ► pp. 231 ff.

O’Brien, Sharon

2011. Towards predicting post-editing productivity. Machine Translation 25:3 ► pp. 197 ff.

Pym, Anthony

2014. Translation Skill-Sets in a Machine-Translation Age. Meta 58:3 ► pp. 487 ff.

Screen, Benjamin

2017. Productivity and quality when editing machine translation and translation memory outputs: an empirical analysis of English to Welsh translation. Studia Celtica Posnaniensia 2:1 ► pp. 1 ff.

Sun, Sanjun

2019. In Researching Cognitive Processes of Translation [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 139 ff.

Walker, Callum

2021. In An Eye-Tracking Study of Equivalent Effect in Translation, ► pp. 215 ff.

Yamada, Masaru

2015. Can college students be post-editors? An investigation into employing language learners in machine translation plus post-editing settings. Machine Translation 29:1 ► pp. 49 ff.

Yang, Yanxia, Xiangling Wang & Qingqing Yuan

2021. Measuring the usability of machine translation in the classroom context. Translation and Interpreting Studies 16:1 ► pp. 101 ff.

마승혜

2018. Expanding the Scope of Machine Translation-Machine Translation Post Editing Strategies for Specific Metaphors in Newspapers. The Journal of Translation Studies 19:2 ► pp. 117 ff.

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 november 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.