When I was nine years old, my family took a trip down to Florida from New Jersey. My parents loaded up the station wagon, and my two brothers and I squeezed into the back seat and stayed that way for more than a thousand miles. Needless to say, it was not too much fun. At one point, we got lost, and my father spent a half hour in a gas station parking lot looking at a map to determine where we drifted off-course. Eventually, we made it back on the main road and got to Florida in one piece, but we would have been in trouble if we didn't have a map in hand.
This got me to thinking if a map would make much difference nowadays. Most of us have GPS devices or at least Google Maps on our phones to guide us, so we never get lost in the first place. If we do, the machine goes into action and finds the best way to get back to the optimal route to the destination. In regard to convenience and accuracy, a GPS is certainly an improvement, but is it always the best method for planning your route? Your GPS will not have an extensive knowledge about traffic patterns or whether there is construction, for example, so sometimes it might be a good idea to rely your own memory and knowledge of these factors.
This same idea could be used when considering machine translations versus human translations. Last year, the New York Times took a look at whether machine translation software powered by complex math algorithms could do the same work that expert human translators have done for businesses, law firms, educational groups, and other organizations that may need documents translated accurately. While machine translations can certainly be a convenient way to get a quick translation, if it's an important project, it is probably best to go with a human translation.
For example, if you were in need of a patent translation for a new product that you've been working on for years and you now need global IP protection, you certainly wouldn't use Google Translate. The same holds true for a number of different scenarios where a mistranslation could result in disastrous consequences. Translators can apply context, field expertise, and other elements that create a more accurate translation. Although it might be more convenient to use a machine translation, sometimes that convenience is not worth it if it increases risk.
This got me to thinking if a map would make much difference nowadays. Most of us have GPS devices or at least Google Maps on our phones to guide us, so we never get lost in the first place. If we do, the machine goes into action and finds the best way to get back to the optimal route to the destination. In regard to convenience and accuracy, a GPS is certainly an improvement, but is it always the best method for planning your route? Your GPS will not have an extensive knowledge about traffic patterns or whether there is construction, for example, so sometimes it might be a good idea to rely your own memory and knowledge of these factors.
This same idea could be used when considering machine translations versus human translations. Last year, the New York Times took a look at whether machine translation software powered by complex math algorithms could do the same work that expert human translators have done for businesses, law firms, educational groups, and other organizations that may need documents translated accurately. While machine translations can certainly be a convenient way to get a quick translation, if it's an important project, it is probably best to go with a human translation.
For example, if you were in need of a patent translation for a new product that you've been working on for years and you now need global IP protection, you certainly wouldn't use Google Translate. The same holds true for a number of different scenarios where a mistranslation could result in disastrous consequences. Translators can apply context, field expertise, and other elements that create a more accurate translation. Although it might be more convenient to use a machine translation, sometimes that convenience is not worth it if it increases risk.