Cover not available
Article published In:
Fair MT: Towards ethical, sustainable Machine Translation
Edited by Joss Moorkens, Dorothy Kenny and Félix do Carmo
[Translation Spaces 9:1] 2020
► pp. 78–97

Social groups in machine translation post-editing

A SCOT analysis

ORCID logo | University of Portsmouth
ORCID logo | Kansai University

We analysed focus group interview data collected from 22 project managers (PMs) working in Japan, covering their experiences of machine translation post-editing (MTPE). A Social Construction of Technology analysis of how PMs describe different social groups in translation enabled us to examine the meanings those groups attach to MTPE, the intricate and complex power structures which exist between them, and the negotiations that take place in their day-to-day operations. The examination discovered that MTPE is still in a fluid and controversial state due to the difficulty of meeting all groups’ interests, which may lead to MTPE’s disappearance as a business model and the eventual dominance of conventional human translation and raw MT. We conclude that establishing ethical and sustainable translation workflows for all social groups will be vital for MTPE’s survival, which will require careful consideration of the complexity of these social groups and negotiations between them.

Keywords: SCOT (Social Construction of Technology), machine translation (MT), machine translation post-editing (MTPE), translation project managers, translation industry, sociology of translation
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The study
    • Methodology
    • Data collection
    • Data analysis
  • 3.Findings
    • Project managers
    • Clients
    • The management of LSPs
    • Translators
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 17 August 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.00022.sak
References
Abdallah, Kristiina, and Kaisa Koskinen
2007 “Managing Trust: Translating and the Network Economy.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 52 (4): 673–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Ross, Meg Guerreiro, and Jo Smith
2016 “Are All Biases Bad? Collaborative Grounded Theory in Developmental Evaluation of Education Policy.” Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation 12 (27): 44–57.Google Scholar
Association of Translation Companies
2017 “ISO 18587 on MT Post-Editing Gaining Traction.” Blog. Accessed August 1, 2017. [URL]
Bowker, Lynne
2006 “Translation Memory and ‘Text.’” In Lexicography, Terminology, and Translation: Text-Based Studies in Honour of Ingrid Meyer, edited by Lynne Bowker, 175–87. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cadwell, Patrick, Sharon O’Brien, and Carlos S. C. Teixeira
2018 “Resistance and Accommodation: Factors for the (Non-) Adoption of Machine Translation among Professional Translators.” Perspectives 26 (3): 301–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daems, Joke, Sonia Vandepitte, Robert J. Hartsuiker, and Lieve Macken
2017 “Identifying the Machine Translation Error Types with the Greatest Impact on Post-Editing Effort.” Frontiers in Psychology 81 (August): 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, Denis
2019 “7 Ways AI Will Power Intelligent Content and Customer Engagement in 2020.” SDL Blog. Accessed December 20, 2019. [URL]
Dragsted, Barbara
2006 “Computer-Aided Translation as a Distributed Cognitive Task.” Pragmatics & Cognition 14 (2): 443–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dranch, Konstantin
2016 “UK Language Services Market 2016.” London: The Association of Translation Companies (ATC).Google Scholar
Eakins, Sophia
2019 “Top Lionbridge AI Blog Posts of 2019.” Lionbridge Insights. Accessed December 17, 2019. [URL]
Garcia, Ignacio
2007 “Power Shifts in Web-Based Translation Memory.” Machine Translation 21 (1): 55–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Translating by Post-Editing: Is It the Way Forward?” Machine Translation 25 (3): 217–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giotta, Gina
2018 “Teaching Technological Determinism and Social Construction of Technology Using Everyday Objects.” Communication Teacher 32 (3): 136–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glaser, Barney G., and Alselm L. Strauss
1967 The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Göpferich, Susanne, and Riitta Jääskeläinen
2009 “Process Research into the Development of Translation Competence: Where Are We, and Where Do We Need to Go?” Across Languages and Cultures 10 (2): 169–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guerberof Arenas, Ana
2013 “What Do Professional Translators Think about Post-Editing?” The Journal of Specialised Translation, no. 19: 75–95.Google Scholar
Hassan, Hany, Anthony Aue, Chang Chen, Vishal Chowdhary, Jonathan Clark, Christian Federmann, Xuedong Huang, et al.
2018 “Achieving Human Parity on Automatic Chinese to English News Translation.” DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holz-Mänttäri, Justa
1984 Translatorisches Handeln. Theorie Und Methode. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica.Google Scholar
Hubscher-Davidson, Séverine
2018 Emotion and the Translation Process. Translation and Emotion: A Psychological Perspective. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Isahara, Hitoshi
2015 “Translation Technology in Japan.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology, edited by Sin-Wai Chan, 315–26. Oxfordshire, England & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Japan Translation Federation
2018 “2017 Dai 5 Kai Honyaku Tuyaku Gyokaichosa Hokokusho (2017, the 5th Translation and Interpreting Industry Survey – Report).” Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
Kenny, Dorothy
2011 “The Ethics of Machine Translation.” In New Zealand Society of Translators and Interpreters Annual Conference 2011. Auckland, New Zealand. Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
Klein, Hans K., and Daniel Lee Kleinman
2002 “The Social Construction of Technology: Structural Considerations.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 27 (1): 28–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kline, Ronald, and Trevor Pinch
1996 “Users as Agents of Technological Change: The Social Construction of the Automobile in the Rural United States.” Technology and Culture 37 (4): 763–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Läubli, Samuel, Rico Sennrich, and Martin Volk
2018 “Has Machine Translation Achieved Human Parity? A Case for Document-Level Evaluation.” In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 4791–96. Brussels, Belgium: Association for Computational Linguistics. [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Massardo, Isabella, Jaap van der Meer, Sharon O’Brien, Fred Hollowood, Nora Aranberri, and Katrin Drescher
2016 “MT Post-Editing Guidelines.” Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
Moorkens, Joss
2017 “Under Pressure: Translation in Times of Austerity.” Perspectives 25 (3): 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moorkens, Joss, David Lewis, Wessel Reijers, Eva Vanmassenhove, and Andy Way
2016 “Translation Resources and Translator Disempowerment.” In Proceedings of ETHI-CA2 2016: ETHics In Corpus Collection, Annotation & Application, edited by Laurence Devillers, Björn Schuller, Emily Mower Provost, Peter Robinson, Joseph Mariani, and Agnes Delaborde, 49–53. Portorož. Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
Moorkens, Joss, Antonio Toral, Sheila Castilho, and Andy Way
2018 “Translators’ Perceptions of Literary Post-Editing Using Statistical and Neural Machine Translation.” Translation Spaces 7 (2): 240–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon
2011 “Towards Predicting Post-Editing Productivity.” Machine Translation 25 (3): 197–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olohan, Maeve
2011 “Translators and Translation Technology: The Dance of Agency.” Translation Studies 4 (3): 342–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 “Technology, Translation and Society.” Target 29 (2): 264–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pielmeier, Hélène
2019 “Is AI Everywhere in the Language Services Industry?” Multilingual 2019 Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
Pinch, Trevor J., and Wiebe E. Bijker
1984 “The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other.” Social Studies of Science 14 (3): 399–441. Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
Presas, Marisa, Pilar Cid-Leal, and Olga Torres-Hostench
2016 “Machine Translation Implementation among Language Service Providers in Spain: A Mixed Methods Study.” Journal of Research Design and Statistics in Linguistics and Communication Science 3 (1): 126–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reiss, Katharina
2000 Translation Criticism, the Potentials and Limitations: Categories and Criteria for Translation Quality Assessment. Oxfordshire, England: Routledge. Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
Reiss, Katharina, and Hans J. Vermeer
2013 Towards a General Theory of Translational Action: Skopos Theory Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Richards, Lyn, and Janice M. Morse
2007 README FIRST for a User’s Guide to Qualitative Methods, 2nd Edition. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Sakamoto, Akiko
2019 “Why Do Many Translators Resist Post-Editing? A Sociological Analysis Using Bourdieu’ s Concepts.” The Journal of Specialised Translation, no. 31: 201–16.Google Scholar
forthcoming. “The Value of Translation in the Era of Automation: An Examination of Threats.” In When Translation Goes Digital edited by Renée Desjardins, Claire Larsonneur, and Philippe Lacour London Palgrave Macmillan
Sakamoto, Akiko, Begona Rodríguez de Céspedes, Sarah Berthaud, and Jonathan Evans
2017 “When Translation Meets Technologies: Language Service Providers (LSPs) in the Digital Age – Focus Group Report [Commissioned Report by the ITI].” Portsmouth. Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
Sakamoto, Akiko, and Masaru Yamada
2019 “The Current State of Technology Use in the Translation Industry in Japan: Project Managers’ Views – Focus Group Report 翻訳業界におけるテクノロジー使用の現状：現場の声から フォーカスグループ報告書.” Translated by Alison Burnicle. Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
TAUS
n.d. “TAUS Partner Foundation Board.” Accessed March 14, 2020. [URL]
The British Standards Institution
2018 “BS EN 17100:2015+A1:2017 BSI Standards Publication Translation Services – Requirements for Translation Services.” London.Google Scholar
Toral, Antonio, Sheila Castilho, Ke Hu, and Andy Way
2018 “Attaining the Unattainable? Reassessing Claims of Human Parity in Neural Machine Translation.” In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Machine Translation: Research Papers, 11:113–23. Brussels, Belgium: Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vieira, Lucas Nunes, and Elisa Alonso
2019 “Translating Perceptions and Managing Expectations: An Analysis of Management and Production Perspectives on Machine Translation.” Perspectives 28 (2): 163–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winner, Langdon
1999 “Do Artifacts Have Politics?” In The Social Shaping of Technology, 2nd Ed., edited by Judy Wajcman and Donald MacKenzie, 28–40. Backingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Yamada, Masaru
2019 “The Impact of Google Neural Machine Translation on Post-Editing by Student Translators.” The Journal of Specialised Translation, no. 31: 87–106.Google Scholar