Gutenberg Goes Neural: Comparing Features of Dutch Human Translations with Raw Neural Machine Translation Outputs in a Corpus of English Literary Classics

Due to the growing success of neural machine translation (NMT), many have started to question its applicability within the field of literary translation. In order to grasp the possibilities of NMT, we studied the output of the neural machine system of Google Translate (GNMT) and DeepL when applied t...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rebecca Webster, Margot Fonteyne, Arda Tezcan, Lieve Macken, Joke Daems
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2020-08-01
Series:Informatics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9709/7/3/32
id doaj-9f358bbce06d43d895d5ad129be23a4c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-9f358bbce06d43d895d5ad129be23a4c2020-11-25T03:55:03ZengMDPI AGInformatics2227-97092020-08-017323210.3390/informatics7030032Gutenberg Goes Neural: Comparing Features of Dutch Human Translations with Raw Neural Machine Translation Outputs in a Corpus of English Literary ClassicsRebecca Webster0Margot Fonteyne1Arda Tezcan2Lieve Macken3Joke Daems4LT3, Language and Translation Technology Team, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, BelgiumLT3, Language and Translation Technology Team, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, BelgiumLT3, Language and Translation Technology Team, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, BelgiumLT3, Language and Translation Technology Team, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, BelgiumLT3, Language and Translation Technology Team, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, BelgiumDue to the growing success of neural machine translation (NMT), many have started to question its applicability within the field of literary translation. In order to grasp the possibilities of NMT, we studied the output of the neural machine system of Google Translate (GNMT) and DeepL when applied to four classic novels translated from English into Dutch. The quality of the NMT systems is discussed by focusing on manual annotations, and we also employed various metrics in order to get an insight into lexical richness, local cohesion, syntactic, and stylistic difference. Firstly, we discovered that a large proportion of the translated sentences contained errors. We also observed a lower level of lexical richness and local cohesion in the NMTs compared to the human translations. In addition, NMTs are more likely to follow the syntactic structure of a source sentence, whereas human translations can differ. Lastly, the human translations deviate from the machine translations in style.https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9709/7/3/32literary machine translationneural machine translationquality assessmentlexical richnesscohesionsyntactic divergence
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Rebecca Webster
Margot Fonteyne
Arda Tezcan
Lieve Macken
Joke Daems
spellingShingle Rebecca Webster
Margot Fonteyne
Arda Tezcan
Lieve Macken
Joke Daems
Gutenberg Goes Neural: Comparing Features of Dutch Human Translations with Raw Neural Machine Translation Outputs in a Corpus of English Literary Classics
Informatics
literary machine translation
neural machine translation
quality assessment
lexical richness
cohesion
syntactic divergence
author_facet Rebecca Webster
Margot Fonteyne
Arda Tezcan
Lieve Macken
Joke Daems
author_sort Rebecca Webster
title Gutenberg Goes Neural: Comparing Features of Dutch Human Translations with Raw Neural Machine Translation Outputs in a Corpus of English Literary Classics
title_short Gutenberg Goes Neural: Comparing Features of Dutch Human Translations with Raw Neural Machine Translation Outputs in a Corpus of English Literary Classics
title_full Gutenberg Goes Neural: Comparing Features of Dutch Human Translations with Raw Neural Machine Translation Outputs in a Corpus of English Literary Classics
title_fullStr Gutenberg Goes Neural: Comparing Features of Dutch Human Translations with Raw Neural Machine Translation Outputs in a Corpus of English Literary Classics
title_full_unstemmed Gutenberg Goes Neural: Comparing Features of Dutch Human Translations with Raw Neural Machine Translation Outputs in a Corpus of English Literary Classics
title_sort gutenberg goes neural: comparing features of dutch human translations with raw neural machine translation outputs in a corpus of english literary classics
publisher MDPI AG
series Informatics
issn 2227-9709
publishDate 2020-08-01
description Due to the growing success of neural machine translation (NMT), many have started to question its applicability within the field of literary translation. In order to grasp the possibilities of NMT, we studied the output of the neural machine system of Google Translate (GNMT) and DeepL when applied to four classic novels translated from English into Dutch. The quality of the NMT systems is discussed by focusing on manual annotations, and we also employed various metrics in order to get an insight into lexical richness, local cohesion, syntactic, and stylistic difference. Firstly, we discovered that a large proportion of the translated sentences contained errors. We also observed a lower level of lexical richness and local cohesion in the NMTs compared to the human translations. In addition, NMTs are more likely to follow the syntactic structure of a source sentence, whereas human translations can differ. Lastly, the human translations deviate from the machine translations in style.
topic literary machine translation
neural machine translation
quality assessment
lexical richness
cohesion
syntactic divergence
url https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9709/7/3/32
work_keys_str_mv AT rebeccawebster gutenberggoesneuralcomparingfeaturesofdutchhumantranslationswithrawneuralmachinetranslationoutputsinacorpusofenglishliteraryclassics
AT margotfonteyne gutenberggoesneuralcomparingfeaturesofdutchhumantranslationswithrawneuralmachinetranslationoutputsinacorpusofenglishliteraryclassics
AT ardatezcan gutenberggoesneuralcomparingfeaturesofdutchhumantranslationswithrawneuralmachinetranslationoutputsinacorpusofenglishliteraryclassics
AT lievemacken gutenberggoesneuralcomparingfeaturesofdutchhumantranslationswithrawneuralmachinetranslationoutputsinacorpusofenglishliteraryclassics
AT jokedaems gutenberggoesneuralcomparingfeaturesofdutchhumantranslationswithrawneuralmachinetranslationoutputsinacorpusofenglishliteraryclassics
_version_ 1724471005777231872