Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop1 Shared resources, shared values? Ethical implications of sharing translation resources Jo Drugan and Bogdan Babych University.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop1 Shared resources, shared values? Ethical implications of sharing translation resources Jo Drugan and Bogdan Babych University."— Presentation transcript:

1 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop1 Shared resources, shared values? Ethical implications of sharing translation resources Jo Drugan and Bogdan Babych University of Leeds, UK

2 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop2 Overview Practical challenges to sharing translation resources, but also ethical and legal problems Recent collaboration and greater openness, but focus generally on practical issues Good reasons for failure to broach ethics Yet essential to do so – huge and growing demand for translation can’t be met without sharing Questions users and developers should be asking and suggested ways forward

3 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop3 Talk map 1.Practical problems in sharing translation resources 2.Ethical problems in sharing translation resources 3.Case studies Google Translation Toolkit TAUS Language Search Engine (LSE) 4.Conclusion

4 Sharing translation resources: Practical problems Exploitation of large parallel corpora to create/populate translation resources hampered by: –“Locked-in” data: range of tools –Ineffective exchange formats Vashee 2010: ‘Translation tools often trap your data in a silo because the vendors WANT to lock you in and make it painful for you to leave’ –Client reservations 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop4

5 Recent progress on practical problems Large minable multilingual corpora released online since 1990s –Canadian Hansard, UN texts, Europarl corpus –Large-scale SMT platforms rely on such parallel corpora European Union TM archive, 2007 Translation Automation User Society (TAUS), 2007 Shared online Translation Environment Tools (TenTs), crowdsourced/collaborative translation 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop5

6 Sharing translation resources and MT Koehn 2010: SMT is domain-dependent to much greater degree than RBMT –Lower quality of out-of-domain translation Sharing translation resources essential for building high-quality SMT systems –Range of text types/subject domains –Requires consideration of ethical and legal issues 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop6

7 And ethics?... Conspicuous by its absence: limited to issues of (informed) consent and ‘threats’ to translators –Improved MT quality –Collaborative translation Yet familiar issues –Trailblazers (Wikipedia) –Legal grey areas (translation as international activity par excellence) 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop7

8 Consequences? Two standard reactions: 1.‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ Risks of burying your head in the sand Legal implications, traceability 2.Excessive caution Passing up potentially valuable data 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop8

9 Consequences - MT? ‘What has ethics got to do with MT?’ Sharing translation resources requires consideration of ethical and legal issues –Confidentiality of data –Trade, industrial, state secrets –Intellectual property rights (moral rights?) of translators, authors, data owners 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop9

10 Engaging with ethics Share data confidently, arguing from clearly stated values Draw on precedents in related fields/debates Essential because sharing is increasingly the norm –TAUS: Information Age = ‘insatiable demand for translation services that cannot be met with existing proprietary business models and the capacity of around 300 000 professional translators worldwide’ One way in: case studies –Ethical questions raised by what’s actually happening 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop10

11 1. Google Translation Toolkit SMT –Since 2005, –58 language pairs in 2010 –For assimilation, typically not integrated in translation workflow MT post-editing concerns Google move to embed MT in online collaborative translation environment: Google Translation Toolkit 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop11

12 Google Translation Toolkit MT integrated with TM and user dictionary functionality TM matches/user dictionary entries have priority but post-edit MT output if not available Translators collaborate, as for Google Docs Stored on ‘cloud’ servers but can be downloaded User options, no MT if preferred But limiting factors… 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop12

13 Limiting factors Ethical rather than technological No.1: Confidentiality of project and resources –Not practical for most real-world professional projects –Technically possible to address translators’/clients’ concerns –Default settings 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop13

14 Other ethical issues not addressed Recognition, compensation of translators’ work –Potential legal consequences –Other tools support such approaches: Ownership, attribution Familiar issues Potentially useful innovative technology falls down because it fails to take into account practical user-based scenarios, in part due to inadequate ethical framework 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop14

15 2. TAUS Language Search Engine (LSE) Online tool for searching uploaded TMX data –Parallel concordances, word alignment techniques –Intelligent dictionary –User (mis)expectations Ethical framework is explicit – even a ‘model’ –User consent –Quid pro quo –Data owner responsibility 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop15

16 But key questions remain unaddressed Ethical, not technical Ownership and consent – broader issues –‘Community of users and providers of translation technologies and services’ – but all large-scale, not end users or freelance translators –Informed consent? NB not legal/contractual - broader –Industry codes of ethics, ‘taking credit for others’ work’ –UNESCO 1976, ‘supplementary payment’? 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop16

17 Key questions unaddressed Translator choice? Should ultimate responsibility afford claims to ultimate ownership? Avoiding harm? Effects on future translation quality judgments? 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop17

18 Positively ethical The aims and ambitions of these two initiatives can be seen as profoundly ethical Relevant principles in codes: –Professional review, informed critiques, raise standards, improve public understanding, contribute to society and human well-being, respect human diversity, support fellow professionals, contribute to profession’s standing, enhance quality of life Not just defensive, but allows case to be made for action rather than inaction 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop18

19 4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop19 Questions/Discussion

Download ppt "4 November 2010EM+/CNGL workshop1 Shared resources, shared values? Ethical implications of sharing translation resources Jo Drugan and Bogdan Babych University."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google