Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:34:16.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Machine Translation and other Translation Technologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2008

Alan Melby
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Computers have become much more widely used in translation since the early 1980s but in unexpected ways. From the beginnings of machine translation research in the 1950s until recently, it was expected that computers would be in direct competition with human translators for the same work. Instead, it has turned out that most translation done by computers fills latent needs that do not reduce the amount of work available to professional translators. Computers have also turned out to be useful as productivity tools for human translators who still perform the central translation task. Today, the relationship between computers and human translators is often seen as synergistic rather than competitive.

Type
Technology and Language Analysis
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 16 , March 1996 , pp. 86 - 98
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

UNANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aijmer, K. and Altenberg, B. (eds.) 1991. English corpus linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Allegranza, V., Krauwer, S. and Steiner, E. (eds.) 1991. Eurotra. [Special issue of Machine Translation. 6. 2–3.]Google Scholar
Allegranza, V., Krauwer, S. and Steiner, E. et al. , 1991. Linguistics for machine translation: The Eurotra linguistic specifications. In Copeland, C. et al. , (eds.) The Eurota linguistic specifications. Luxembourg: CEC. 15–124.Google Scholar
Apresian, J. et al. , 1992. ETAP-2: The linguistics of a machine translation system. META. 37.4.97–112. [ISSN 0026–0452]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennet, P. 1993. The interaction of syntax and morphology in machine translation. In Van Eynde, F. (ed.) Linguistic issues in machine translation. London: Pinter. 72–104.Google Scholar
Bostad, D. 1988. Machine translation: The USAF experience. In Kummer, K. (ed.) American Translators Association Conference 1987: Across the language gap. Medford, NJ: Learned Information. 435–443.Google Scholar
Brown, P. et al. , 1990. A statistical approach to machine translation. Computational Linguistics. 16. 79–85.Google Scholar
Chandioux, J. 1989. 10 ans de Météo (MD). In Abbou, A. (ed.) Traduction assistée par ordinateur: perspectives technologiques, industrielles et économiques envisageables à l'horizon 1990: l'offre, la demande, les marchés et les évolutions en cours. [Computer assisted translation: What is on the horizon in 1990, technologically and commercially? What is available, what is needed, what is the state of the market, and where are things headed?] Paris: Editions Daicadif. 169–172.Google Scholar
Gazdar, G. and Mellish, C.. 1989. Natural language processing in PROLOG: An introduction to computational linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goodman, K. (ed.) 1989. Knowledge-based machine translation, I and II. [Special issue of Machine Translation. 4.1–2.]Google Scholar
Grimaila, A. and Chandioux, J.. 1992. Made to measure solutions. In Newton, J. (ed.) Computers in translation: A practical appraisal. London: Routledge. 33–45.Google Scholar
Hutchins, W. J. 1990. Out of the shadows: A retrospect of machine translation in the eighties. Terminologie et Traduction. [Terminology and Translation.] 1990/1990/3. 275–292.Google Scholar
Kay, M., Gawron, J. M., and Norvig, P.. 1994. Verbmobil: A translation system for face-to-face dialog. Stanford: Stanford University Press. [CSLI lecture notes no. 33.]Google Scholar
Maxwell, D. and Schubert, K. (eds.) 1989. Metataxis in practice: Dependency syntax for multilingual machine translation. Dordrecht: Foris. [Distributed Language Translation 6.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melby, A. 1992. The translator workstation.In Newton, J. (ed.) Computers in translation: A practical appraisal. London: Routledge. 147–165.Google Scholar
Melby, A. with Warner, C. T.. 1995. The possibility of language: A discussion of the nature of language, with implications for human and machine translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishida, F. and Takamastu, S.. 1990. Automated procedures for the improvement of a machine translation system by feedback form postediting. Machine Translation. 5. 223–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pugh, J. 1992. The story so far: An evaluation of machine translation in the world today. In Newton, J. (ed.) Computers in translation: A practical appraisal. London: Routledge. 14–32.Google Scholar
Ritchie, G. D. et al. , 1992. Computational morphology: Practical mechanisms for the English lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sadler, L. 1991. Structural transfer and unification formalisms. Applied Computer Translation. 1. 4.5–21.Google Scholar
Sadler, L. and Arnold, D. J.. 1993. Unification and machine translation. META. 37.4.657–680.Google Scholar
Sadler, V. 1989. Working with analogical semantics: Disambiguation techiques in DLT. Dordrecht: Foris. [Distributed Language Translation 5.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sager, J. C. 1990. A practical course in terminology processing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sager, J. C. 1994. Language engineering and translation: Consequences of automation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stentiford, F. W. M. and Steer, M. G.. 1990. Machine translation of speech. In Wheddon, C. and Linggard, R. (eds.) Speech and language processing. London: Chapman and Hall. 183–196.Google Scholar
Van Eynde, F. 1993. Linguistic issues in machine translation. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Wilks, Y.. 1992. Systran: It obviously works but how much can it be improved? In Newton, J. (ed.) Computers in translation: A practical appraisal. London: Routledge. 166–188.Google Scholar