.png)
.png)
English-Indonesian Translation in a Selected Chapter of Ferreira’s Critical Theory: Evaluating the Google Translate Output
Abstract
In this digital era, translation has undergone a radical paradigmatic shift from traditional to automated practices in terms of technological, pedagogical, empirical and economic perspectives, such as the emergence of Machine Translation (MT). Unfortunately, scrutiny accentuating the evaluation of GT output in the English-Indonesian translation setting remains under-researched. Hence, this study aimed at poring over how the English-Indonesian translation in a selected chapter of Ferreira’s critical theory was represented from the GT output. The corpus of this study was a selected chapter of a book entitled International Relations Theory edited by Stephen McGlinchey, Rosie Walters and Christian Scheinpflug (McGlinchey, et. al., 2017), namely chapter 6 in part 1 Critical Theory (Marcos Farias Ferreira) (Ferreira, 2017). The corpus was collected through document analysis and analyzed with Baker’s translation equivalence framework (Baker, 2018) and thematic analysis (TA) (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The findings unveiled that GT output represented English-Indonesian translation in five prominent themes, viz. inappropriate word level equivalence, grammatical equivalence and lexical cohesion in the English-Indonesian translated text, decontextualized pragmatic equivalence in Indonesian as the target language, syntactically disordered English-Indonesian translated words, literally translated Indonesian as the target language, and accepted equivalence of English-Indonesian translation. Pedagogically, this study suggests that a combination strategy of GT-based translation and human translation can be a breakthrough to reach the translation quality, namely accuracy, naturalness and readability.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ahdillah, M. Z. I., Hartono, R., & Yuliasri, I. (2020). English-Indonesian translation of idiomatic expressions found in the Adventure of Tom Sawyer: Strategies used and resulted in equivalence. English Education Journal, 10(4), 480-492.
Alhaisoni, E., & Alhaysony, M. (2017). An investigation of Saudi EFL university students’ attitudes towards the use of Google Translate. International Journal of English Language Education, 5(1), 72-82. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v5i1.10696
Alsalem, R. (2019). The effects of the use of Google Translate on translation students’ learning outcomes. Arab World English Journal for Translation and Literary Studies, 3(4), 46- 60. https://doi.org/10.24093/awejtls/vol3no4.5
Al Mahasees, Z. (2020). Diachronic Evaluation of Google Translate, Microsoft Translator and Sakhr in English-Arabic Translation (Unpublished PhD thesis), the University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Almahasees, Z., Meqdadi, S., & Albudairi, Y. (2021). Evaluation of Google Translate in rendering English COVID-19 texts into Arabic. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(4), 2065-2080.
Baker, M. (2018). In other words: A coursebook on translation. Routledge: London.
Barreiro, A. M. (2008). Make it simple with paraphrases: Automated paraphrasing for authoring aids and machine translation [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. New York University.
Bin Dahmash, N. (2020). ‘I can’t live without Google Translate’: A close look at the use of Google Translate App by second language learners in Saudi Arabia. Arab World English Journal, 11 (3) 226 -240.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative research journal, 9(2), 27-40.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.
Carl, M., Gutermuth, S., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2015). Post-editing machine translation. In A. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter (eds.). Psycholinguistic and cognitive intersections in translation and interpreting (pp. 145-174) Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Carston, R. (2004). Relevance theory and the saying/implicating distinction. In L. Horn, & G. Ward (Eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 633–656). Oxford: Blackwell.
Cancino, M., & Panes, J. (2021). The impact of Google Translate on L2 writing quality measures: Evidence from Chilean EFL high school learners. System, 98, 102464.
Chung, E. S. (2020). The effect of L2 proficiency on post-editing machine-translated texts. Journal of Asia TEFL, 17(1), 182.
Clifford, J., Merschel, L., & Munné, J. (2013). Surveying the landscape: What is the role of machine translation in language learning? @tic. Revista dinnovació Educativa, 0(10), 108–121. https://doi.org/10.7203/attic.10.2228
Crossley, S. A. (2018). Technological disruption in foreign language teaching: The rise of simultaneous machine translation. Language Teaching, 51(4), 541–552.
Downe-Wamboldt, B. (1992). Health Care for Women International Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues. Health Care for Women International, 13(3), 313–321.
Ducar, C., & Schocket, D. H. (2018). Machine translation and the L2 classroom: Pedagogical solutions for making peace with Google translate. Foreign Language Annals, 51(4), 779–795. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12366
Feng, W., Yu, H., & Zhou, X. (2021). Understanding particularized and generalized conversational implicatures: Is theory-of-mind necessary? Brain and Language, 212, 104878.
Ferreira, M. F. (2017). Critical Theory. In S. McGlinchey, R. Walters & C. Scheinpflug (Eds). International Relations Theory (pp. 49-55). Bristol: E-International Relations Publishing.
García, I., & Pena, M. I. (2011). Machine translation-assisted language learning: writing for beginners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5), 471-487.
Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Groves, M., & Mundt, K. (2015). Friend or foe? Google Translate in language for academic purposes. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 112-121.
Groves, D., & Schmidtke, D. (2009). Identification and analysis of post-editing patterns for MT
Proceedings of MT Summit, Ottawa, Canada.
Haiyudi, H., Pratama, Y. B., & Art-in, S. (2023, July). Post-editing machine Translation (PEMT) is the preferred method for university students in Indonesia. In ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching (Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 90-97).
Hagestedt, A. (2020). LF Aligner. Retrieved from: https://www.l10nsoftware.com/lf-aligner/
Herbig, N., Pal, S., van Genabith, J., & Krüger, A. (2019, May). Multi-modal approaches for post-editing machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1-11).
Huang, J., & Wang, J. (2022). Post-editing machine translated subtitles: examining the effects of non-verbal input on student translators’ effort. Perspectives, 1-21.
Jia, Y., Carl, M., & Wang, X. (2019). How does the post-editing of neural machine translation compare with from-scratch translation?: A product and process study. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 31, 60–86.
Kassem, H. (2019). The impact of student-centred instruction on EFL learners' affect and achievement. English Language Teaching, 12(1), 134–153. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n1p134
Keshavarz, M.H. (2012). Contrastive Analysis and Error Analysis. Tehran: Rahnama Press.
King, N. (2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 257–270). London, UK: Sage.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. In Journal of the American Statistical Association. https://doi.org/10.2307/228838
Lassiter, C. (2021). Particularized conversational implicatures and miraculous communication. Language Sciences, 86, 101401.
Le, Q. V., & Schuster, M. (2016). A neural network for machine translation, at the production scale. Retrieved October 10, 2023, from the World Wide Web: https://research.googleblog.com/2016/09/a-neural-network-for-machine.html
Lee, I. J. (2018). A quality comparison of English translations of Korean literature between human translation and post-editing. International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology, 6(4), 165–171. https://doi.org/10.17703//IJACT2018.6.4.165
Li, H., Graesser, A. C., & Cai, Z. (2014, May). Comparison of Google translation with human translation. At the twenty-seventh International Flairs Conference.
McGlinchey, S. Walters, R. & Scheinpflug, C. (2017). International relations theory. Bristol: E-International Relations Publishing.
Medvedev, G. (2016). Google translate in teaching English. Journal of teaching English for specific and academic purposes, 4(1), 181-193.
Moorkens, J. (2018). What to expect from neural machine translation: A practical in-class translation evaluation exercise. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 12(4), 375–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2018.1501639
Mostofian, N. (2017). A Study on manual and automatic evaluation procedures and production of automatic post-editing rules for Persian machine translation (Unpublished MA thesis) Uppsala University, Sweden.
Murtisari, E. T., Widiningrum, R., Branata, J., & Susanto, R. D. (2019). Google Translate in language learning: Indonesian EFL students' attitudes. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(3), 978.
O’Brien, Sharon. (2022). How to deal with errors in machine translation: Post-editing. In
Machine Translation for Everyone, 105–20. Berlin: Language Science Press.
Organ, A. (2023). Attitudes to the use of Google Translate for L2 production: Analysis of chatroom discussions among UK secondary school students. The Language Learning Journal, 51(3), 328-343.
Richards. J.C. (1974). Error Analysis: Perspective on Second Language Acquisition. London: Longman.
Shih, C. L. (2021). Re-Looking into Machine Translation Errors and Post-Editing Strategies in a Changing High-Tech Context. Compilation & Translation Review, 14(2).
Shin, D., & Chon, Y. V. (2023). Second language learners’ post-editing strategies for machine translation errors. University of Hawaii National Foreign Language Resource Center, 27 (1), 1-25.
Sutrisno, A. (2020). The Accuracy and Shortcomings of Google Translate Translating English Sentences to Indonesia. Education Quarterly Reviews, 3(4).
Tan, Z., Wang, S., Yang, Z., Chen, G., Huang, X., Sun, M., & Liu, Y. (2020). Neural machine translation: A review of methods, resources, and tools. AI Open, 1, 5-21.
Taşdemir, S., Lopez, E., Satar, M., & Riches, N. G. (2023). Teachers' perceptions of machine translation as a pedagogical tool. Japan Association for Language Teaching Computer Assisted Language Learning Journal (JALT CALL Journal), 19(1).
Tsai, S. C. (2019). Using Google Translate in EFL drafts: a preliminary investigation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(5-6), 510-526.
Tongpoon-Patanasorn, A., & Griffith, K. (2020). Google Translate and Translation Quality: A Case of Translating Academic Abstracts from Thai to English. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 60, 134-163.
Tsai, S. C. (2022). Chinese students’ perceptions of using Google Translate as a translingual CALL tool in EFL writing. Computer-assisted language learning, 35(5-6), 1250-1272.
Turganbayeva, A., Rakhimova, D., Karyukin, V., Karibayeva, A., & Turarbek, A. (2022). Semantic connections in the complex sentences for post-editing machine translation in the Kazakh language. Information, 13(9), 411.
Utami, S. (2017). The source of errors in Indonesian-English translation. Jurnal Kata: Penelitian tentang Ilmu Bahasa dan Sastra, 1(2), 192-202.
van Lieshout, C., & Cardoso, W. (2022). Google Translate as a tool for self-directed language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 26 (1), 1-19
Yang, Y., & Wang, X. (2023). Predicting student translators’ performance in machine translation post-editing: interplay of self-regulation, critical thinking, and motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(1), 340-354.
Zahroh, H., Basid, A., & Jumriyah, J. (2023). Comparison Results of Google Translate and Microsoft Translator on the Novel Mughamarah Zahrah Ma'a Ash-Syajarah by Yacoub Al-Sharouni. Al-Lisan: Jurnal Bahasa, 8(2), 154-170.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30870/jels.v9i1.23941
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of English Language Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Journal of English Language Studies is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright @ 2024 Journal of English Language Studies.