Machine Translation (MT) is slower and less accurate than human translation and there is no immediate or predictable likelihood of machines taking over this role from humans. Do you agree or disagree?
In our times, machines are widely deemed to be more precise and faster than humans. Nonetheless, there are those who contend that machines would never supersede humans in the field of translation. In this sense, whether machines are consistently beneficial to succeed humans’ works is yet to be ascertained.
First and foremost, excessive time is employed in putting the source to be translated to the machine. Recordings, paper documents and word files are the most common items to be translated. Consequently, people are required to convert those files into soft copies before translating them with the aid of a machine.
Furthermore, it is a common occurrence that translation machines generate the results irrespective of grammar. As a result, the translation generated would be hardly to fathom. Time and again, individuals have to check and correct the work by themselves. Consequently, the original purpose of employing a machine in order to bring convenience to users is by all means lost.
Conversely, a staggering number of individuals claim that translation machines solved their problems perfectly in the means of providing exact wording of the translated language. In addition, translation machines help translators to recall the meaning of a particular word since there is unlimited capacities in comparison with human brain.
Viewed as a whole, it is axiomatic that machine-based translation has its own positive and negative implications. Basis on my observation, translators would never be superseded by translation machines. In truth, translation machines will continue to be second to none assistants to translators.