The Interaction Between Morphosyntactic Features and the Performance of Machine Translation Tools: The Case of Google Translate, Systran, and Microsoft Bing in English-Arabic Translation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1402.35Keywords:
machine translation tools, Google Translate, Systran Translate, Microsoft Bing Translator, English-Arabic translationAbstract
The present study compares the performance of three machine translation tools in English-Arabic translation to answer the questions of (a) whether the three machine translation tools, Google Translate, Systran and Microsoft Bing can be ordered in a hierarchy of performance, and (b) whether they can handle lexically and structurally ambiguous sentences and garden path sentences. Using a number of constructed and selected English sentences, the morphosyntactic features of number, gender, case, definiteness, and humanness, agreement between cardinal numerals and their head nouns, lexically and structurally ambiguous sentences and garden path sentences are used to test the three machine translation tools for performance. The results show that (a) as far as handling the morphosyntactic features of subject-verb agreement in Standard Arabic, all three machine translation tools perform equally well, and no machine translation tool seems to perform significantly better than the other two (b) some marked features (e.g. dual number and humanness) of SA seem to pose some problems for machine translation tools, and (c) lexically and structurally ambiguous sentences and garden path sentences seem to be the most challenging sentences for the three machine translation tools.
References
Abdelaal, N. & Alazzawie, A. (2020). Machine Translation: The Case of Arabic English Translation of News Texts. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 10(4), 408-418. http://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1004.09
Alhaisoni, E. and Alhaysony, M. (2017). An Investigation of Saudi EFL University Students’ Attitudes towards the Use of Google Translate. International Journal of English Language Education, 5(1), 72-82. http://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.1 0696
Aljerf, R. (2021). An Investigation of Google’s English-Arabic Translation of Technical Terms. Eurasian Arabic Studies, 14, 16-37.
Al-Kabi, M., Hailat, T., Al-Shawakfa, E. & Alsmadi, I. (2013). Evaluating English to Arabic Machine Translation Using BLEU. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 4(1), 66-73.
Alkhawaja, L., Ibrahim, H., Ghnaim, F. & Awwad, S. (2020). Neural Machine Translation: Fine-Grained Evaluation of Google Translate Output for English-to-Arabic Translation. International Journal of English Linguistics, 10(4), 43-60. http://doi.org/ 10.5539/ijel.v10n4p43
Almahasees, Z. (2018). Assessment of Google and Microsoft Bing Translation of Journalistic Texts. International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics, 4(3), 231-235. http://doi.org/10.18178/ijlll.2017.3.1.100
Alqarni, M. (2021). No gender polarity in Arabic numeral phrases. Linguistic Inquiry, 52(3), 441-472. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00385
Al-Samawi, A. (2014). Language Errors in Machine Translation of Encyclopedic Texts from English into Arabic. Arab World English Journal, 3, 182-211.
Beaver, W. (1955). Translation. In W. N. Locke and A. D. Booth, (Eds.), Machine Translation of Languages. MIT Press.
de olivera R. & Anastasiou, D. (2011). Comparison of SYSTRAN and Google Translate for English→ Portuguese. revista. tradumatica technologie de la traduccio, 118-136.
Deng, L. & Yang, L. (2018). Deep Learning in Natural Language Processing. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5209-5
Gorrell, P. (1999). Sentence processing. In Wilson, Robert A. and Keil, Frank C., (Eds.), The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences, (pp. 748-751). MIT.
Greene, L. (2016). Everything you ever wanted to know about Google Translate, and finally got the chance to ask. Retrieved October 10, 2023 from https://www.taus.net/insights/reports/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-google-translate-and-finally-got-the-chance-to-ask.
Hillert, D. (1997). Language in Time: Lexical and Structural Ambiguity Resolution, in M. Stamenov (Ed.), Approaches to Language and Consciousness. John Benjamins.
Hovy, E. (1999). Machine translation. In Wilson, Robert A. and Keil, Frank C., (Eds.), The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences, (pp. 498-499). MIT.
Huchins, W. (1995). Machine translation: A brief history. In E.F.K. Koemer and R. E. Asher (Eds.) Concise history of the language sciences: from the Sumerians to the cognitivists, (pp. 431-445). Pergamon Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-1-28311-0
Hutchins, W. & Somers, H. (1992). An introduction to machine translation. Academic Press.
IBM Education. (2020). Neural networks. Retrieved September 15, 2023 from https://www.ibm.com/cloud/learn/neural-networks.
Jabak, O. (2019). Assessment of Arabic-English translation produced by Google Translate. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation (IJLLT), 238-247. http://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2019.2.4.24
Osterhout, L. Holcomb, P. & Swinney, D. (1994). Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20: 786–803. http://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.20.4.786
Ryding, K. (2005). A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic. CUP.
Sabtan, Y, Hussein, M., Ethelb, H. & Omar, A. (2021). An Evaluation of the Accuracy of the Machine Translation Systems of Social Media Language: Google’s Arabic-English Translation as an Example. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(7), 406-415.
Seljan, S., Vičić, T & Brkić, M. (2012). BLEU Evaluation of Machine-Translated English-Croatian Legislation. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation – LREC (pp. 2143-2148). http://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4374.3204
Wilks, Y. (2009). Machine translation: its cope and limits. Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72774-5
Zughoul, M. & Abu-Alshaar, A. (2005). English/Arabic/English machine translation: A historical perspective. Meta, 50(3), 1022-1041. http://doi.org/10.7202/011612ar
