Abstract
With the advent of the neural paradigm, machine translation has made another leap in quality. As a result, its use by trainee translators has increased considerably, which cannot be disregarded in translation pedagogy. However, since legal texts have features that pose major challenges to machine translation, the question arises as to what extent machine translation is now capable of translating legal texts or at least certain types of legal text into another legal language well enough so that the post-editing effort is limited, and, consequently, whether a targeted use in translation pedagogy can be considered. In order to answer this question, DeepL Translator, a machine translation system, and MateCat, a CAT system that integrates machine translation, were tested. The test, undertaken at different times and without specific translation memories, provided for the translation of several legal texts of different types utilising both systems, and was followed by systematisation of errors and evaluation of translation results. The evaluation was carried out according to the following criteria: 1) comprehensibility and meaningfulness of the target text; and 2) correspondence between source and target text in consideration of the specific translation situation. Overall, the results are considered insufficient to give post-editing of machine-translated legal texts a bigger place in translation pedagogy. As the evaluation of the correspondence between source and target text was fundamentally worse than with regard to the meaningfulness of the target text, translation pedagogy should respond by raising awareness about differences between machine translation output and human translation in this field, and by improving translation approach and strengthening legal expertise.References
Burchardt, Aljoscha, et al. 2014. Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) Definition. http://www.qt21.eu/mqm-definition/definition-2014-08-14.html (accessed May 7, 2019).
Burchardt, Aljoscha, and Jörg Porsiel. 2017. Vorwort: Was kann die maschinelle Übersetzung und was nicht? In Maschinelle Übersetzung. Grundlagen für den professionellen Einsatz, ed. Jörg Porsiel, 11–8. Berlin: BDÜ-Fachverlag.
Castilho, Sheila, et al. 2017. Is Neural Machine Translation the New State of the Art? The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 108: 109–20.
Forcada, Mikel L. 2017. Making sense of neural machine translation. Translation Spaces 6/2: 291–309.
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia, et al. 2017. Post-Editing: Strategien, Qualität, Effizienz. In Maschinelle Übersetzung. Grundlagen für den professionellen Einsatz, ed. Jörg Porsiel, 176–91. Berlin: BDÜ-Fachverlag.
Heiss, Christine, and Marcello Soffritti. 2018. DeepL Traduttore e didattica della traduzione dall’italiano in tedesco. Alcune valutazioni preliminari. InTRAlinea. Special Issue: Translation and Interpreting for Language Learners (TAIL). http://www.intralinea.org/specials/article/2294 (accessed September 13, 2019).
Hutchins, W. John. 1995. Machine Translation: A Brief History In Concise History of the Language Sciences: from the Sumerians to the Cognitivists, eds. Ernst F. K. Koerner and R.E. Asher, 431–45. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Killman, Jeffrey. 2014. Vocabulary Accuracy of Statistical Machine Translation in the Legal Context. In Third Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice, eds. Sharon O’Brian, Michel Simard and Lucia Specia, 85–98.
www.amtaweb.org/AMTA2014Proceedings/AMTA2014Proceedings_PEWorkshop_final.pdf (accessed May 7, 2019).
Koehn, Philipp. 2010. Statistical Machine Translation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kyburz, Kevin. 2018. Schlägt sogar Google. Die Übersetzungsmaschine DeepL.
https://techgarage.blog/schlaegt-sogar-google-die-uebersetzungsmaschine-deepl/ (accessed February 28, 2019).
Matthiesen, Aaron J. 2017. Maschinelle Übersetzung im Wandel. Die Auswirkungen von künstlicher Intelligenz auf maschinelle Übersetzungssysteme. Mit einer vergleichenden Untersuchung von Google Translate und Microsoft Translator. Berlin: epubli.
Prieto Ramos, Fernando. 2015. Quality Assurance in Legal Translation: Evaluating Process, Competence and Product in the Pursuit of Adequacy. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 28/1: 11–30.
Şahin, Mehmet, and Nilgün Dungan. 2014. Translation testing and evaluation: A study on methods and needs. Translation & Interpreting 6/2: 67–90.
Van Brussel, Laura, et al. 2018. A Fine-grained Error Analysis of NMT, PBMT and RBMT Output for English-to-Dutch. In Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 3799–804.
https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8561558 (accessed May 8, 2019)
Wallberg, Ilona. 2017. DIN EN ISO 18587 – eine Norm über den Prozess des Posteditierens. In Maschinelle Übersetzung. Grundlagen für den professionellen Einsatz, ed. Jörg Porsiel, 160–7. Berlin: BDÜ-Fachverlag.
Werthmann, Antonia, and Andrea Witt. 2014. Maschinelle
Übersetung – Gegenwart und Perspektiven. In Translation and Interpretation in Europe. Contributions to the Annual Conference 2013 of EFNIL in Vilnius, ed. Gerhard Stickel, 79–103. Frankfurt et al.: Lang.
Yates, Sarah. 2006. Scaling the Tower of Babel Fish: An Analysis of the Machine Translation of Legal Information. Law Library Journal 98/3: 481–500.
License
When submitting a paper the author agrees to the following publishing agreement and processing personal data.
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT, COPYRIGHT LICENSE, PERSONAL DATA PROCESSING CONSENT
This is a publication agreement and copyright license (“Agreement”) regarding a written manuscript currently submitted via Pressto platform
(“Article”) to be published in Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Journal”).
The parties to this Agreement are:
the Author or Authors of the submitted article (individually, or if more than one author, collectively, “Author”) and Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Publisher”), address al. Niepodległości 4, 61-874 Poznań, represented by its editor in chief Aleksandra Matulewska.
§1. LICENSE OF COPYRIGHT
a) The Author and the Publisher agree that the Author grants a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which is incorporated herein by reference and is further specified at Creative Commons — Attribution 4.0 International — CC BY 4.0 copyright license in the Article to the general public.
b) The Author grants to the Publisher a royalty-free, worldwide nonexclusive license to publish, reproduce, display, distribute, translate and use the Article in any form, either separately or as part of a collective work, including but not limited to a nonexclusive license to publish the Article in an issue of the Journal, copy and distribute individual reprints of the Article, authorize reproduction of the entire Article in another publication, and authorize reproduction and distribution of the Article or an abstract thereof by means of computerized retrieval systems (such as Westlaw, Lexis and SSRN). The Author retains ownership of all rights under copyright in the Article, and all rights not expressly granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author grants to the Publisher the power to assign, sublicense or otherwise transfer any and all licenses expressly granted to the Publisher under this Agreement.
d) Republication. The Author agrees to require that the Publisher be given credit as the original publisher in any republication of the Article authorized by the Author. If the Publisher authorizes any other party to republish the Article under the terms of paragraphs 1c and 1 of this Agreement, the Publisher shall require such party to ensure that the Author is credited as the Author.
§2. EDITING OF THE ARTICLE
a) The Author agrees that the Publisher may edit the Article as suitable for publication in the Journal. To the extent that the Publisher’s edits amount to copyrightable works of authorship, the Publisher hereby assigns all right, title, and interest in such edits to the Author.
§3. WARRANTIES
a) The Author represents and warrants that to the best of the Author’s knowledge the Article does not defame any person, does not invade the privacy of any person, and does not in any other manner infringe upon the rights of any person. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Publisher against all such claims.
b) The Author represents and warrants that the Author has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to grant the licenses granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author represents and warrants that the Article furnished to the Publisher has not been published previously. For purposes of this paragraph, making a copy of the Article accessible over the Internet, including, but not limited to, posting the Article to a database accessible over the Internet, does not constitute prior publication so long as the as such copy indicates that the Article is not in final form, such as by designating such copy to be a “draft,” a “working paper,” or “work-in-progress”. The Author agrees to hold harmless the Publisher, its licensees and distributees, from any claim, action, or proceeding alleging facts that constitute a breach of any warranty enumerated in this paragraph.
§4. TERM
a) The agreement was concluded for an unspecified time.
§5. PAYMENT
a) The Author agrees and acknowledges that the Author will receive no payment from the Publisher for use of the Article or the licenses granted in this Agreement.
b) The Publisher agrees and acknowledges that the Publisher will not receive any payment from the Author for publication by the Publisher.
§6. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
a) This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the Author and the Publisher with respect to the subject of this Agreement. This Agreement contains all of the warranties and agreements between the parties with respect to the Article, and each party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements have been made by or on behalf of any party except those warranties and agreements embodied in this Agreement.
b) In all cases not regulated by this Agreement, legal provisions of Polish Copyright Act and Polish Civil Code shall apply.
c) Any disputes arising from the enforcement of obligations connected with this Agreement shall be resolved by a court competent for the headquarters of the Publisher.
d) Any amendments or additions to the Agreement must be made in writing and signed by authorised representative of both parties, otherwise being ineffective.
e) This Agreement is signed electronically and the submission of the article via the PRESSto platform is considered as the conclusion of the Agreement by the Author and the Publisher.
f) Clause for consent to the processing of personal data - general
g) The Author shall give his or her consent to the processing of their personal data in accordance with the Act of 10 May 2018 on the protection of personal data and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of persons physical in connection with the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (General Data Protection Regulation) for the purpose and in connection with making publications available on the PRESSto scientific journals platform and DeGruyter platform, guaranteeing the security of services rendered, and improving them.
I HAVE READ AND AGREE FULLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT.
The Author The Publisher