HarperCollins will use AI to translate books

[thescifilady]

Asking an LLM for help with your native language (feigning being a foreign speaker) will quickly demonstrate to you the glaring gaps in the translation capabilities, and understanding of linguistic nuance, across all major LLMs.

I doubt HC is using something much more intelligent (and thus, costly) than Gemini or ChatGPT, given that they're doing this to penny-pinch in the first place. AI has its place, but that place isn't in linguistic or creative work, and this is just another rung on the slopification ladder.

[Gormagon]

Originally Posted by thescifilady

Asking an LLM for help with your native language (feigning being a foreign speaker) will quickly demonstrate to you the glaring gaps in the translation capabilities, and understanding of linguistic nuance, across all major LLMs.

I doubt HC is using something much more intelligent (and thus, costly) than Gemini or ChatGPT, given that they're doing this to penny-pinch in the first place. AI has its place, but that place isn't in linguistic or creative work, and this is just another rung on the slopification ladder.

I used DeepL to translate the quoted text to German, then to Italian, French, and finally British English:

Wenn Sie ein LLM um Hilfe in Ihrer Muttersprache bitten (und dabei vorgeben, ein ausländischer Sprecher zu sein), werden Sie schnell die eklatanten Lücken in den Übersetzungsfähigkeiten und im Verständnis sprachlicher Nuancen aller großen LLMs erkennen.

Ich bezweifle, dass HC etwas viel Intelligenteres (und damit Kostspieligeres) als Gemini oder ChatGPT verwendet, da sie dies in erster Linie tun, um Geld zu sparen. KI hat ihren Platz, aber dieser Platz ist nicht in der sprachlichen oder kreativen Arbeit, und dies ist nur eine weitere Sprosse auf der Leiter der Verflachung.

---------

Se chiedete aiuto a un LLM nella vostra lingua madre (fingendo di essere un parlante straniero), noterete subito le evidenti lacune nelle capacità di traduzione e nella comprensione delle sfumature linguistiche di tutti i principali LLM.

Dubito che HC utilizzi qualcosa di molto più intelligente (e quindi costoso) di Gemini o ChatGPT, poiché lo fa principalmente per risparmiare denaro. L'IA ha il suo posto, ma questo posto non è nel lavoro linguistico o creativo, e questo è solo un altro gradino nella scala dell'appiattimento.

---------

Si vous demandez de l'aide à un LLM dans votre langue maternelle (en prétendant être un locuteur étranger), vous remarquerez immédiatement les lacunes évidentes dans les capacités de traduction et la compréhension des nuances linguistiques de tous les principaux LLM.

Je doute que HC utilise quelque chose de beaucoup plus intelligent (et donc coûteux) que Gemini ou ChatGPT, car il le fait principalement pour économiser de l'argent. L'IA a sa place, mais cette place n'est pas dans le travail linguistique ou créatif, et ce n'est qu'un échelon supplémentaire dans l'échelle de l'appauvrissement.

--------

If you ask an LLM for help in your native language (pretending to be a foreign speaker), you will immediately notice the obvious shortcomings in the translation capabilities and understanding of linguistic nuances of all major LLMs.

I doubt that HC uses anything much smarter (and therefore more expensive) than Gemini or ChatGPT, as it does so primarily to save money. AI has its place, but that place is not in linguistic or creative work, and it is just another rung on the ladder of impoverishment.

----------

While the thescifilady's quote is rather dull and simple and does not feature exceptional linguistic nuance, I really have no complains about the way the last text was translated. Of course it's not a exact replication of the quoted text, but one wouldn't even expect that using human translators.

[Starker]

Machine translation is perfectly adequate when it comes to simple messages and simple purposes, such as, for example, for understanding someone's forum post. In the world of translation, though, it's not always as simple as that. A catchy slogan in one language may be catchy in one language, but may require complete rewriting to be able to work in a similar way in another language, as a marketing text needs to speak to the target audience in a particular way. This is what Nida in bible translation called functional equivalence -- if "lamb" is unknown in the target culture, it may be better to replace it with an animal that's known to them and serves the same functional purpose. And that's not even getting to skopos theory where translation has a particular aim and intent and the translation strategies used depend completely on the particular purpose of the translation

The challenge with fiction is that authors tend to love to play with the language, to twist and stretch it in all kinds of ways, sometimes having characters speak in unorthodox and peculiar ways that root them to a particular time and place and culture, real or imaginary (just think of the nadsat in Clockwork Orange). That's often the unique charm of a novel and a part of what can make translation so difficult -- conveying the style of the author and wrestling with all the clever tricks they are playing with the language and trying to bring along at least something of the culture of the source language can be a herculean task.

Machine translation, AI powered or not, has a lot of shortcomings when it comes to translating creative texts. It has very little consideration for style or register or rhythm or other similar things that determine how the characters in a novel are supposed to come across. Go ahead and try it out -- take a passage of Huckleberry Finn, for example, run it through machine translation, and see how much of the vernacular and eye dialect, the characters' specific way of speaking is preserved in the translation.

[slm]

One thing that seems to have gotten lost in this thread is that HarperCollins is shift to machine-translation only for its Harlequin line. I would guess that they think of this a somewhat formulaic and repetitive, making machine translation--possible initially with tweaks--much less problematic than for "real literature".


Just a guess.

[Wiggo]

What is also often forgotten is that good translators (and good money) get in touch with the author if something is unclear to them

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Wiggo

What is also often forgotten is that good translators (and good money) get in touch with the author if something is unclear to them

Assuming the author is still alive, of course.

[DiapDealer]

Many of things mentioned in this thread are exactly why I've never been comfortable reading any translated work of fiction. The words used are too important to trust to anyone other than the author, in my opinion.

[Wiggo]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Assuming the author is still alive, of course.

*voodoo*

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Wiggo

*voodoo*

You can get anything if you have money, I guess...

[Starker]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Many of things mentioned in this thread are exactly why I've never been comfortable reading any translated work of fiction. The words used are too important to trust to anyone other than the author, in my opinion.

A translation can never be a replacement for the original. It is by its very nature transformative. It is both a bridge to another culture and at the same time has cultural value all of its own. For example, the translation of The Good Soldier Švejk became hugely a hugely important touchstone for an entire generation in my culture, partly because it spoke to people living in the systemic absurdity of authoritarian rule, but also because the translation managed to preserve a great deal of the humour and wit of the author, something that cannot be said of the English translation at the time.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Starker

A translation can never be a replacement for the original. It is by its very nature transformative.

Which is exactly why I'm uninterested in them. I'd rather read something untransformed in the language in which it was written. If I were multilingual, I might feel differently, but I'm not.

[Starker]

This is why I love learning languages. It opens up a whole another world for you. And reading the original works that were previously only available in translation is like rediscovering them all over again.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Which is exactly why I'm uninterested in them. I'd rather read something untransformed in the language in which it was written. If I were multilingual, I might feel differently, but I'm not.

You can afford to feel this way because you were born as a native speaker of one of the most widespread languages in the world. If you had been born in a country with a very small native population, you'd pretty much have no choice but to read translated works until you learned to speak at least one major foreign language.

Not that there weren't any books written by Estonian authors in Estonian when I grew up, of course there were. But not that many for a voracious reader. Even many children's books were translations - from Russian, French, German, English and so on.

It's the same today. Most books in our stores are translations. Estonian works are and always have been a minority, because there are just too few Estonians overall.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

You can afford to feel this way because you were born as a native speaker of one of the most widespread languages in the world. If you had been born in a country with a very small native population, you'd pretty much have no choice but to read translated works until you learned to speak at least one major foreign language.

Yes. Good thing I was only stating my opinion and not making assumptions about other readers.

[thescifilady]

Originally Posted by Gormagon

While the thescifilady's quote is rather dull and simple and does not feature exceptional linguistic nuance, I really have no complains about the way the last text was translated. Of course it's not a exact replication of the quoted text, but one wouldn't even expect that using human translators.

This is disingenuous engagement with my point. A simple forum post doesn't have the emotional or literary nuance as an entire book--Harlequin or not.