Pith. sign in

REVIEW

What about em? How Commercial Machine Translation Fails to Handle (Neo-)Pronouns

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2305.16051 v1 pith:WRGN3VPV submitted 2023-05-25 cs.CL cs.AIcs.CY

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.CY
keywords pronounpronounstranslationcommercialdanishenglishgender-neutrallanguages
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

As 3rd-person pronoun usage shifts to include novel forms, e.g., neopronouns, we need more research on identity-inclusive NLP. Exclusion is particularly harmful in one of the most popular NLP applications, machine translation (MT). Wrong pronoun translations can discriminate against marginalized groups, e.g., non-binary individuals (Dev et al., 2021). In this ``reality check'', we study how three commercial MT systems translate 3rd-person pronouns. Concretely, we compare the translations of gendered vs. gender-neutral pronouns from English to five other languages (Danish, Farsi, French, German, Italian), and vice versa, from Danish to English. Our error analysis shows that the presence of a gender-neutral pronoun often leads to grammatical and semantic translation errors. Similarly, gender neutrality is often not preserved. By surveying the opinions of affected native speakers from diverse languages, we provide recommendations to address the issue in future MT research.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools