A comparison of Google translate and Youdao translation : a case study of sentences Selected from Financial Times
With the rising demand for cross-cultural communication arising from globalisation, emerging technologies in the IT industry have made machine translation tools the most accessible in meeting one’s daily translation needs. In light of this, this paper aims to conduct a comparison of two mainstrea...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Theses and Dissertations |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/78898 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | With the rising demand for cross-cultural communication arising from globalisation,
emerging technologies in the IT industry have made machine translation tools the most
accessible in meeting one’s daily translation needs. In light of this, this paper aims to conduct
a comparison of two mainstream online MT tools, namely Google Translate and Youdao
Translation, through determining which tool provides higher English-Chinese translation
quality in terms of translating informative content. To achieve this, 90 sample sentences
originally in English with official Chinese translation of each sentence were selected from
Financial Times, global business newspaper. Translation results from Google and Youdao
were first evaluated by an automatic evaluation metric, BLEU, to determine which tool was
likely to have translation outputs that are more consistent with the human translated version.
For a further comparison, sample sets were reviewed qualitatively and quantitatively based
on a linguistic classification framework with regards to the emergence of translation errors.
This error analysis part was also designed to provide MT developers cues about the common
mistakes committed by MTs from a linguistic perspective. Results obtained from both
approaches revealed a higher probability of Youdao in providing quality translations as
compared that of Google. In particular, Youdao outperformed Google by an average of 22.9%
BLEU score while the total number of linguistic errors produced by Youdao was 48 fewer
than that produced by Google. Meanwhile, there was no statistical evidence indicating a
negative correlation between sentence length of input content and the output quality of the
MT. It was also found that lexical error was the most common type of translation error
generated by both MT tools. |
|---|