The Linguist is a languages magazine for professional linguists, translators, interpreters, language professionals, language teachers, trainers, students and academics with articles on translation, interpreting, business, government, technology
Issue link: https://thelinguist.uberflip.com/i/1189092
24 The Linguist Vol/58 No/6 2019 ciol.org.uk/tl REVIEWS resection arthroplasty' (a procedure to repair the joint between the scapula and the collarbone) is translated as 'in your case one option is surgery to rebuild the shoulder' it gets a BLEU score of 0.46, but when it is incorrectly translated as 'in your case one option is surgery vasectomy' it gets a much higher score of 0.60. Despite its limitations, the BLEU assessment method can be quite informative when the original text contains explicit textual information. For example, the Japanese 先生は嘘を ついてますね。外国人にお金を使いたくないんですよ ('The doctor is lying. She doesn't want to spend money on foreigners') was mistranslated by Google and MS Translator as 'The teacher is lying. I don't want to spend money on foreigners'. In this case, you need contextual information (a medical consultation) to translate the word sensei correctly as 'doctor' and to determine that it is she who does not want to spend money on the speaker. In contrast, the Spanish la doctora está mintiendo. Ella no quiere gastar dinero en los extranjeros explicitly states the profession of the subject of the first sentence (doctora), and the subject of the second sentence (ella). AI systems translated this Spanish segment correctly. In such circumstances, MT achieved very high BLEU scores and also a pass mark by the assessors. With this in mind, BLEU scores could be used as a quick and cheap way to discriminate between good and bad translations. It can also be used to teach students about the difference between formal and functional equivalence. However, as effective interpreting relies on interpreters being able to presume, complement and supply contextual information, the BLEU score is not the best metric to report news from the battlefront between human and machine. Notes 1 Awadalla, HH et al (2018) 'Achieving Human Parity on Automatic Chinese to English News Translation'. Cornell University. bit.ly/humanparity 2 Bird, S, Loper, E and Klein, E (2009) Natural Language Processing with Python, O'Reilly Media Inc: California The concept of paratext – the 'thresholds' through which readers and viewers access a text – is a growing area of interest for translation scholars. In her new book, Kathryn Batchelor argues that thinking about paratext should be refined and expanded. She traces connections between paratext as an object of study and daily translation practice, and suggests how the concept is also relevant to interpreting. The three sections of Translation and Paratexts move from the genesis of the concept through case studies to prompts for further thinking about the relationship between paratext and translation. Batchelor begins with Gérard Genette's seminal 1987 book Seuils (literally 'thresholds', translated as 'paratexts'). Genette defines paratext as "a certain number of verbal or other productions" that surround a text. He lists 'productions' including prefaces, reviews and author interviews. He also regards translations as paratexts to the original text. This is problematic because he insists that paratext is "always the conveyor of a commentary that is authorial or Translation and Paratexts Kathryn Batchelor Routledge 2018, 202 pp; ISBN 9781138488 977 Paperback £29.99 more or less legitimated by the author". As Batchelor points out, this clashes with today's view of translation as a creative process in its own right. She proposes that paratext be considered a "consciously crafted threshold for a text which has the potential to influence the way(s) in which the text is received". In this way, a translation can be considered a text in its own right with its own paratext. Three case studies illustrate Batchelor's argument. She uses English translations of Nietzsche to explore whether 'authorised' translations have particular paratextual relevance; she asks how the peritexts (paratext physically attached to a publication) of Chinese editions of Western translation studies texts shape how Western translation theory is presented; and – in a particularly interesting angle on paratext – she considers how the paratextual strategies adopted for a subtitled television series reflect changing attitudes towards subtitling in the UK. With regard to interpreting, Batchelor argues that interpreters themselves are paratext, consciously crafting their listeners' understanding. This raises ethical considerations since it clashes with the view of the interpreter as impartial. In her final section, the author speaks mainly to translation scholars in proposing a framework for studying paratext in relation to translation. Translation and Paratexts explores an area of translation scholarship and practice characterised by contradictions and fuzziness. Kathryn Batchelor has grappled with these to craft a book that is approachable and raises significant questions that demand further consideration. Mary Frank MCIL © SHUTTERSTOCK