Translators are very difficult to spot. You have to get up at about 4.30 a.m. or just as it's getting light. So anyway, you have to get up early and creep outside - be careful not to make any noise - if you take your cellphone, make sure the torchlight is off. So then - whatever the weather, you have to sit (or stand) without moving and you might just be rewarded with a tiny tweet or cheep - quite birdlike - but not quite. Anyway, if you're lucky, you could just get the complete call, which is quite difficult to decipher (for some). But you have to really know the sounds the false translator (a bit like how the cuckoo operates) sounds something like this: Cheepcheapterchatgptcheapterchattergptcheeptgpt etc. It's quite sweet if you like that sort of music, but anyway real translators are almost extinct so yeah - early rise or not - they really are difficult to spot
As if a machine could love writing, understand subtle language nuances, or have the sensitivity to choose the right words and tone of voice.
I know you will answer that we have to adapt, upskill, blah blah, and eventually get ready to lose our jobs, so please do not feel obliged to.
AI translations may be on the rise, but they still cannot compare with human translations.
Unfortunately in many cases I would say they can, not if you are translating a novel, the nuances of language would get lost, but on a one pager? Yes, generative AI can do the job.
Translating a website which is just individual paragraphs of text, absolutely AI can do the job. It may not always be perfect, but good enough for the amount of time spend? Certainly.
I think for translators, the skill shift may be for translation of actual systems (UI/UX) where we are talking about words only for buttons and actions, that is where nuances are very important as is context. And even there, companies may be OK with an OK translations.
Legal documents and the likes are obviously different.
All in all I feel that you would be remiss to think that AI isn't already taking away jobs when it comes to translation.
Iwan S wrote:
I feel that you would be remiss to think that AI isn't already taking away jobs when it comes to translation.
When did I say that AI isn't already replacing translators? I know it is, and it is yet another blow to our profession after the introduction of machine translation.
But being also a copywriter by vocation, I do appreciate the difference between a "great" and a "good enough" translation. Unfortunately you are right - clients often prefer to settle for cheaper solutions, and most readers cannot tell the difference.
What you say about UI/UX is absolutely true, and also legal documents. But thankfully some clients still value our work also in other fields and prefer quality over saving money.
It isn't artificial intelligence. That may be the title, but it's more like virtual intelligence. As long as the programs outright steal from others work, it is not AI. Real AI would be able to generate content after given the rules and language.
Every time someone uses it, if they don't opt out, they are "training" the chatbot. AI wouldn't need to steal, it would create. ChatGPT is about an 18 years old program that is resurrected as the best thing since sliced bread. Without being given human works, it would just sit there.
Let me know when the program can create anything on its own, and I will be appropriately impressed. Also, it's important to separate an old chat program from the far-reaching potential of true "AI."