Interpreting and Technology
One of the most intriguing questions about simultaneous interpreting is whether we human interpreters are going to be replaced by machines anytime soon. While the short answer is "no," the landscape of interconnections between the world is a bit more complex than that.
To find out more, let's check out the eponymous publication compiled by Claudio Fantinuoli (December 2018).
In this post, let's just look through the terminology and briefly answer the question whether those technologies are already in use and whether they can have considerable impact on human interpreters.
Computer-Assisted Interpreting (CAI) -- tools aimed at improving the working experience of interpreters, both during preparation and during the very act of interpreting. Just like CAT tools, CAI tools would help with terminology, proper names, numbers, and other nitty-gritty details of subject matter.
A particular case of CAI is Computer-Assisted Interpreter Training (CAIT).
Is CAI there yet? Meh, not really.
Should interpreters be afraid of it? Nope.
Remote Interpreting (RI) -- technically, any setting different from the traditional one, in which all the interpreters, all the speakers and all the audience are located in one room.
In other words, if the conference is in the hall and the interpreter is seated in some dusty closet, or if at least one speaker is joining through a conference call, that's already RI.
The most extereme case, though, is a situation when the interpreters are not present at the venue altogether -- they are somewhere in their home cities, whether in their home offices or some kind of interpreting hubs (you know, something like call centers).
Is RI there yet? To some extent, yes.
Should interpreters be afraid of it? Yes.
Machine Interpreting (MI), also known as automatic speech translation, automatic interpreting, or speech-to-speech translation, is the technology that aims at replacing human interpreters with software.
Is MI there yet? Meh, not really.
I'll quote the author:
"The success of these systems has been quite modest so far, as they fail to achieve the goal of quality and usability even for the most basic real scenarios in which interpreting is needed."
Should interpreters be afraid of it?
To some extent, yes.
This is the kind of technology that can cause some real pain in the back despite it doesn't really work yet.
OK, that's it for today; I hope we'll explore the topic further in the forthcoming posts.
One of the most intriguing questions about simultaneous interpreting is whether we human interpreters are going to be replaced by machines anytime soon. While the short answer is "no," the landscape of interconnections between the world is a bit more complex than that.
To find out more, let's check out the eponymous publication compiled by Claudio Fantinuoli (December 2018).
In this post, let's just look through the terminology and briefly answer the question whether those technologies are already in use and whether they can have considerable impact on human interpreters.
Computer-Assisted Interpreting (CAI) -- tools aimed at improving the working experience of interpreters, both during preparation and during the very act of interpreting. Just like CAT tools, CAI tools would help with terminology, proper names, numbers, and other nitty-gritty details of subject matter.
A particular case of CAI is Computer-Assisted Interpreter Training (CAIT).
Is CAI there yet? Meh, not really.
Should interpreters be afraid of it? Nope.
Remote Interpreting (RI) -- technically, any setting different from the traditional one, in which all the interpreters, all the speakers and all the audience are located in one room.
In other words, if the conference is in the hall and the interpreter is seated in some dusty closet, or if at least one speaker is joining through a conference call, that's already RI.
The most extereme case, though, is a situation when the interpreters are not present at the venue altogether -- they are somewhere in their home cities, whether in their home offices or some kind of interpreting hubs (you know, something like call centers).
Is RI there yet? To some extent, yes.
Should interpreters be afraid of it? Yes.
Machine Interpreting (MI), also known as automatic speech translation, automatic interpreting, or speech-to-speech translation, is the technology that aims at replacing human interpreters with software.
Is MI there yet? Meh, not really.
I'll quote the author:
"The success of these systems has been quite modest so far, as they fail to achieve the goal of quality and usability even for the most basic real scenarios in which interpreting is needed."
Should interpreters be afraid of it?
To some extent, yes.
This is the kind of technology that can cause some real pain in the back despite it doesn't really work yet.
OK, that's it for today; I hope we'll explore the topic further in the forthcoming posts.