对统计机器翻译的批判

IF 1.7 3区 文学 N/A LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series-Themes in Translation Studies Pub Date : 2021-10-25 DOI:10.52034/LANSTTS.V8I.243
Andy Way
{"title":"对统计机器翻译的批判","authors":"Andy Way","doi":"10.52034/LANSTTS.V8I.243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Phrase-Based Statistical Machine Translation (PB-SMT) is clearly the leading paradigm in the field today. Nevertheless—and this may come as some surprise to the PB-SMT community—most translators and, somewhat more surprisingly perhaps, many experienced MT protagonists find the basic model extremely difficult to understand. The main aim of this paper, therefore, is to discuss why this might be the case. Our basic thesis is that proponents of PB-SMT do not seek to address any community other than their own, for they do not feel any need to do so. We demonstrate that this was not always the case; on the contrary, when statistical models of trans-lation were first presented, the language used to describe how such a model might work was very conciliatory, and inclusive. Over the next five years, things changed considerably; once SMT achieved dominance particularly over the rule-based paradigm, it had established a position where it did not need to bring along the rest of the MT community with it, and in our view, this has largely pertained to this day. Having discussed these issues, we discuss three additional issues: the role of automatic MT evaluation metrics when describing PB-SMT systems; the recent syntactic embellishments of PB-SMT, noting especially that most of these contributions have come from researchers who have prior experience in fields other than statistical models of translation; and the relationship between PB-SMT and other models of translation, suggesting that there are many gains to be had if the SMT community were to open up more to the other MT paradigms.","PeriodicalId":43906,"journal":{"name":"Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series-Themes in Translation Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Critique of Statistical Machine Translation\",\"authors\":\"Andy Way\",\"doi\":\"10.52034/LANSTTS.V8I.243\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Phrase-Based Statistical Machine Translation (PB-SMT) is clearly the leading paradigm in the field today. Nevertheless—and this may come as some surprise to the PB-SMT community—most translators and, somewhat more surprisingly perhaps, many experienced MT protagonists find the basic model extremely difficult to understand. The main aim of this paper, therefore, is to discuss why this might be the case. Our basic thesis is that proponents of PB-SMT do not seek to address any community other than their own, for they do not feel any need to do so. We demonstrate that this was not always the case; on the contrary, when statistical models of trans-lation were first presented, the language used to describe how such a model might work was very conciliatory, and inclusive. Over the next five years, things changed considerably; once SMT achieved dominance particularly over the rule-based paradigm, it had established a position where it did not need to bring along the rest of the MT community with it, and in our view, this has largely pertained to this day. Having discussed these issues, we discuss three additional issues: the role of automatic MT evaluation metrics when describing PB-SMT systems; the recent syntactic embellishments of PB-SMT, noting especially that most of these contributions have come from researchers who have prior experience in fields other than statistical models of translation; and the relationship between PB-SMT and other models of translation, suggesting that there are many gains to be had if the SMT community were to open up more to the other MT paradigms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43906,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series-Themes in Translation Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series-Themes in Translation Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52034/LANSTTS.V8I.243\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series-Themes in Translation Studies","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52034/LANSTTS.V8I.243","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

基于短语的统计机器翻译(PB-SMT)显然是当今该领域的领先范例。然而,这可能会让PB-SMT社区感到惊讶,大多数翻译人员,更令人惊讶的是,许多经验丰富的MT参与者发现基本模型非常难以理解。因此,本文的主要目的是讨论为什么会出现这种情况。我们的基本论点是,PB-SMT的支持者不寻求解决他们自己以外的任何社区,因为他们觉得没有必要这样做。我们证明,情况并非总是如此;相反,当第一次提出翻译的统计模型时,用来描述这种模型如何工作的语言是非常调和和包容的。在接下来的五年里,情况发生了很大的变化;一旦SMT取得了主导地位,特别是在基于规则的范式中,它就建立了一个不需要将MT社区的其他成员带进来的位置,在我们看来,这在很大程度上与今天有关。在讨论了这些问题之后,我们讨论了另外三个问题:自动MT评估指标在描述PB-SMT系统时的作用;最近对PB-SMT的语法修饰,特别注意到这些贡献大多来自那些在翻译统计模型以外的领域有经验的研究人员;以及PB-SMT与其他翻译模式之间的关系,表明如果SMT社区向其他翻译范式开放更多,将会有很多收获。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Critique of Statistical Machine Translation
Phrase-Based Statistical Machine Translation (PB-SMT) is clearly the leading paradigm in the field today. Nevertheless—and this may come as some surprise to the PB-SMT community—most translators and, somewhat more surprisingly perhaps, many experienced MT protagonists find the basic model extremely difficult to understand. The main aim of this paper, therefore, is to discuss why this might be the case. Our basic thesis is that proponents of PB-SMT do not seek to address any community other than their own, for they do not feel any need to do so. We demonstrate that this was not always the case; on the contrary, when statistical models of trans-lation were first presented, the language used to describe how such a model might work was very conciliatory, and inclusive. Over the next five years, things changed considerably; once SMT achieved dominance particularly over the rule-based paradigm, it had established a position where it did not need to bring along the rest of the MT community with it, and in our view, this has largely pertained to this day. Having discussed these issues, we discuss three additional issues: the role of automatic MT evaluation metrics when describing PB-SMT systems; the recent syntactic embellishments of PB-SMT, noting especially that most of these contributions have come from researchers who have prior experience in fields other than statistical models of translation; and the relationship between PB-SMT and other models of translation, suggesting that there are many gains to be had if the SMT community were to open up more to the other MT paradigms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Translation, politics, and development Concordancing DEVELOP* at the Interpreter-mediated Press Conferences Federici, F. M., Declercq, C. (Eds.). (2021). Intercultural Crisis Communication: Translation, Interpreting and Languages in Local Crises. Bloomsbury Academic. (pp. 280) http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781350097087 Lombez, C. (Ed.). (2021). Circulations littéraires. Transferts et traductions dans l’Europe en guerre (1939-1945). Presses Universitaires François-Rabelais. (pp. 245) Oxfam Novib et la diffusion de la littérature du Sud en néerlandais
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1