THE RELIABILITY AND LIMITATIONS OF GOOGLE TRANSLATE: A BILINGUAL, BIDIRECTIONAL AND GENRE-BASED EVALUATION

Authors

  • Blanca Roig Allué Universidad de Zaragoza Spain

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24310/Entreculturasertci.vi9.11240

Keywords:

Machine translation, Google Translate, Reliability, Corpus, Linguistic limitations

Abstract

The popularity of machine translation systems (or CAT, computer-assisted translation), which enable their users to obtain automatically generated translations of any text, has been increasing ever since they were created. One of the most widely used machine translation is Google Translate, a statistical system whose performance is the object of study of this paper. In order to evaluate its reliability, a small-scale study has been carried out in which translations of tourist texts and football match reports published online generated by the tool have been analysed, and the most representative mistakes found in terms of frequency have been classified at a lexicogrammatical, syntactic, pragmatic and punctuation level. Based on these findings, the main linguistic limitations of Google Translate have been established. It is worth highlighting the fact that three crucial variables have intervened in the corpus compilation, namely language (English/Spanish), direction of the translation (English into Spanish and vice versa) and genre of the texts (tourist and sports).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Bhatia, Vijay Kumar (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London, Longman.

Herrera, J. [online] (n.d.). “Documentación aplicada a la traducción: Hay vida más allá de Google”. La linterna del traductor, 9. http://www.lalinternadeltraductor.org/n9/documentacion-traduccion.html [retrieved April 20, 2016].

López Guix, J. G. y J. M. Wilkinson (1997). Manual de traducción inglés-castellano: Teoría y práctica. Barcelona, Gedisa.

Martínez Moreno, R. [online] (2013). “Breve análisis del lenguaje periodístico deportivo en España”, Papel de periódico. http://papeldeperiodico.com/2013/09/breve-analisis-del-lenguaje-periodistico-deportivo-en-espana/ [retrieved May 7, 2016].

McLuhan, Marshall (1962). The Gutenberg galaxy: The making of typographic man. Toronto, University of Toronto Press.

Safaba Translation Solutions [online] (n.d.). “What are the main types of machine translation?”, A quick guide to machine translation. http://www.machinetranslation.net/quick-guide-to-machine-translation/machine-translation-technologies [retrieved May 5, 2016].

Sanning, H. (2010). “Lost and found in translating tourist texts: Domesticating, foreignising or neutralising approach”, JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation, 13, 124-137.

Skibitska, O. [online] (2013). “The challenges of translation of tourist e-text”, Translation Journal, 17 (4). http://translationjournal.net/journal/66tourism.htm [retrieved March 5, 2016].

Swales, John Malcolm (1990): Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Turovsky, B. [online] (2016). “Ten years of Google Translate”, Google Translate blog. http://googletranslate.blogspot.com.es/ [retrieved April 20, 2016].

Valero Garcés, C. [online] (2012). “Inglés y español mano a mano: Dos lenguas y dos formas de ver el mundo”, Cuadernos Cervantes. http://www.cuadernoscervantes.com/lc_ingles.html [retrieved May 20, 2016].

Zaro, J. J. y M. Truman (1999). Manual de traducción: Textos españoles e ingleses traducidos y comentados. Madrid, Sgel.

Published

2017-02-01

How to Cite

Roig Allué, B. (2017). THE RELIABILITY AND LIMITATIONS OF GOOGLE TRANSLATE: A BILINGUAL, BIDIRECTIONAL AND GENRE-BASED EVALUATION. Entreculturas. Revista De traducción Y comunicación Intercultural, (9), 67–80. https://doi.org/10.24310/Entreculturasertci.vi9.11240

Issue

Section

Artículos