REVIEW 1 cited by
Post-editese: an Exacerbated Translationese
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
read the original abstract
Post-editing (PE) machine translation (MT) is widely used for dissemination because it leads to higher productivity than human translation from scratch (HT). In addition, PE translations are found to be of equal or better quality than HTs. However, most such studies measure quality solely as the number of errors. We conduct a set of computational analyses in which we compare PE against HT on three different datasets that cover five translation directions with measures that address different translation universals and laws of translation: simplification, normalisation and interference. We find out that PEs are simpler and more normalised and have a higher degree of interference from the source language than HTs.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Can Peter Pan Survive MT? A Stylometric Study of LLMs, NMTs, and HTs in Children's Literature Translation
LLM translations of Peter Pan sit stylistically closer to human translations than NMT outputs do on several child-literature features, but the prompting strategy and possible training-data overlap partly explain the c...
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.