When artificial intelligence lost in translation is

Posted in ~comp particularly for the linked CS Dojo video on how Google Translate works.

Marked "NSFW.nudity" for the article's included images of sculptures depicting unclothed female anatomy. They're actually a clever series that illustrates cross-cultural interpretation nuance.

From the article:

I first wrote it in Dutch, then ran it through DeepL, a translation tool we’ve recently subscribed to at The Correspondent. Everything I write in Dutch also appears in English, so I’ve become very familiar with the technology lately.

After running the text through the software, I checked the translation and adjusted a few things. For example, a Dutch idiom came out of DeepL as "I do speak a little word about the border". (Even advanced technology still translates idioms literally.)

When I was done, I forwarded it to my colleague Shaun, the copy editor at The Correspondent (although DeepL promoted "copy editor" to “editor-in-chief”). He polished up some sentences, came up with a witty headline and – voilà – the piece was ready.

But aren’t we forgetting someone? Oh yeah, the translator.

And who created a piece of translation technology like this? That’s right – translators. After all, translation tools “learned” the work from them. So, ironically, it’s because of translators that we won’t be hiring a translator for this piece.

This is not only bad for them, but potentially for us as well. A translator filters information and, as such, influences our understanding of the world.

If a translation tool makes a mistake – whether in a manual, a contract, or a piece of literature – then that has consequences.

So is it OK for me to use artificial intelligence (AI) to translate my pieces?