Register in the Machine Translation and Human Translation: The Case of Steve Toltz's A Fraction of the Whole

الموضوعات : نشریه زبان و ترجمه

Elyar Abadipoor ¹ , Roya Monsefi ² , Bahram Behin ³

1 - English Department, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran
2 - English Department, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran
3 - English Department, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran

تاريخ الإرسال : 05 الجمعة , ذو الحجة, 1444 تاريخ التأكيد : 18 السبت , محرم, 1445 تاريخ الإصدار : 25 الأربعاء , جمادى الأولى, 1446

الکلمات المفتاحية: Register, Literary Translation, Machine Translation, Human Translation, A Fraction of the Whole,

ملخص المقالة :

The present case study aims to compare human translators and machine translation engines to determine the differences in transferring the register of the original text. Khaksar and Sohrabi as human translators are selected to be compared to Google and Targoman as translation machines. Steve Toltz's A Fraction of the Whole is selected to contain the data samples. The method is descriptive qualitative, and quantitative analysis is used to quantify the qualitative data. To deal with the concept of register, Halliday's register theory in systemic functional linguistics is used which mainly considers register as a concept for investigating the contextual factors that consist of three dimensions: field, tenor, and mode. The products of the four translators are analyzed and compared based on the Hallidayan register. The results demonstrate that humans have been able to transfer the register of the selected samples with higher quality than the machines. However, the difference in transferring the three dimensions of the register by each translator implies that there are similarities between the humans and the machines when transferring the dimensions of the register is considered since the distribution of problematic items among the dimensions of the register is extremely similar for all translators.

المصادر:

Alavipour, T., & Noroozi, A. (2020). The quality assessment of the Persian translation of “The Graveyard” based on House's translation quality assessment model. Journal of Language and Translation, 10(1), 27-36.
Anari, S. M., & Varmazyari, H. (2016). House's newly revised translation quality assessment model in practice: A case study. Translation Studies, 13(52), 27-46.
Asp, E. (2017). What is a system? What is a function? In T. Bartlett & G O'Grady (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 27-41). Routledge.
Austermuhl, F. (2014). Electronic tools for translators. Routledge.
Baker, M. (1992). In other words: A course-book on translation. Routledge.
Banks, D. (2002). Systemic functional linguistics as a model for text analysis. Asp, 35-36, 23-34.
Bartlett, B. (2017). Context in systemic functional linguistics: towards scalar supervenience? In T. Bartlett & G O'Grady (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 375-390). Routledge.
Bateman, J. A. (2017). The place of systemic functional linguistics as a linguistic theory in the twenty-first century. In T. Bartlett & G O'Grady (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp 11-26). Routledge.
Bonyadi, A. (2020). Exploring linguistic modifications of machine-translated literary articles: The case of Google Translate. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Translation Studies, 5(3), 93-106.
Bowcher, W. L. (2017). Field, tenor and mode. In T. Bartlett & G O'Grady (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp 391-403). Routledge.
Daems, J., Vandepitte, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Macken, L. (2017). Translation methods and experience: A comparative analysis of human translation and post-editing with students and professional transla-tors. Meta, 62(2), 245–270.
Daems, J., Webster, R., Fonteyne, M., Tezcan, A., & Macken, L. (2020). Gutenberg goes neural: Comparing features of Dutch human translations with raw neural machine translation outputs in a corpus of English literary classics. Informatics, 7(3), 32.
Eggins, S. (2005). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics (2nd ed). Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language and meaning. Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2001). Towards a theory of good translation. In E. Steiner & C. Yallop (Ed.), Exploring Translation and Multilingual Text Production: Beyond Content (pp. 13-18). Mouton de Gruyter.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). Hodder Arnold.
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the translator. Longman.
House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model revisited. Gunter Narr.
House, J. (2015). Translation quality assessment: Past and present. Routledge.
Jones, F. R. (2009). Literary translation. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (2nd ed.) (pp 152-157). Routledge.
Lapshinova-Koltunski, E., & Vela, M. (2015). Measuring ‘registerness’ in human and machine translation: A text classification approach. In B. Webber, M. Carpuat, A. Popescu-Belis, & C. Hardmeier (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Discourse in Machine Translation (pp. 122-131). Association for Computational Linguistics.
LeBlanc, M. (2013). Translators on transla-tion memory (TM): Results of an eth-nographic study in three translation services and agencies. The Interna-tional Journal for Translation and In-terpreting Research. 5(2), 1-13.
Lopez, A., & Post, M. (2013, October 18). Beyond bitext: Five open problems in machine translation [Poster presentation]. Twenty Years of Bitext, Seattle, The United States. https://sites.google.com/site/20yearsofbitext/
Marco, J. (2001). Register analysis in literary translation: A functional approach. Babel, 46(1), 1-19.
Matusov, E. (2019). The challenges of using neural machine translation for literature. In J. Hadley, M. Popovic, H. Afli, & A. Way (Eds.), Proceedings of the Qualities of Literary Machine Translation (pp. 10-19). European Association for Machine Translation.
Moore, A. R. (2017). Register analysis in systemic functional linguistics. In T. Bartlett & G O'Grady (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp 418-437). Routledge.
Neumann, S. (2021). Register and transla-tion. In M. Kim, J. Munday, Z. Wang, & P. Wang (Ed.), Systemic functional linguistic and translation studies (pp 65-82). Bloomsbury Academic.
Saldanha, G., & O'Brien, S. (2014). Research methodologies in translation studies. Routledge.
Somers, H. (2011). Machine translation: History, development, and limitations. In K. Malmkjaer & K. Windle (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of translation studies (pp 284-292). Oxford University Press.
Tolkien, J. R. R. (1955). To the Houghton Mifflin Co. In H. Carpenter & C. Tol-kien (Ed.), The letters of J. R. R. Tolkien (pp 232-234). George Allen & Unwin.
Toltz, S. (2008). A fraction of the whole (1st ed). Spiegel & Grau.Zequan, L. (2003). Register analysis as a tool for translationquality assessment. Translation Journal, 7(3). https://translationjournal.net/journal/25register.htm
تولتز، استیو. (۱۳۹۳). جزء از کل. ترجمه: پیمان خاکسار. انتشارات چشمه.
تولتز، استیو. (۱۴۰۰). جزء از کل. ترجمه: گلناز سهرابی. انتشارات ندای معاصر.