Abstract
This
study, in an attempt to rise above the intricacy
of 'being informed on the verge of globalization,'
is founded on the premise that Machine Translation
(MT) applications searching for an ideal key to
find a universal foundation for all natural languages
have a restricted say over the translation process
at various discourse levels. Our paper favors not
judging against the superiority of human translation
vs. machine translation or automated translation
in non-English speaking settings, but rather referring
to the inadequacies and adequacies of MT at certain
pragmatic levels, lacking the right sense and dynamic
equivalence, but producing syntactically well-formed
or meaning-extractable outputs in restricted settings.
Reasoning in this way, the present study supports
MT before, during, and after translation. It aims
at making translators understand that they could
cooperate with the software to obtain a synergistic
effect. In other words, they could have a say and
have an essential part to play in a semi-automated
translation process (Rodrigo, 2001). In this
respect, semi-automated translation or MT courses
should be included in the curricula of translation
departments worldwide to keep track of the state
of the art as well as make potential translators
aware of future trends.
1.
Introduction
It is
now widely accepted that global communications must
be accessible and transferable, in a timely manner,
in as many languages as feasible. Given that any
field in which human beings are actively involved
requires the knowledge of another field, MT, having
a history almost as old as the modern digital computer,
emerged as an attempt to overcome the intricacy
of 'being informed' in a group of offers
to sustain communication. In doing this, MT, much
advanced since then, is a key means for the human
translator, although not without its problems. MT
applications, for some, have long been challenging
human translators. For others, despite MT researchers'
arguments, it cannot aim at replacing the human
mind. Moreover, MT designers, taking a simplistic
view of language translation, have also long been
searching for an idealistic key to find a universal
foundation for all natural languages. For instance,
Arnold et al. (1995) suggest a comprehensive assessment
of the issues behind MT and popular misconceptions.
For them, the types of knowledge an automated translation
system should have are: a) linguistic knowledge
independent of context (semantics), b) linguistic
knowledge that relates to context (pragmatics),
and c) common sense / real world knowledge (non-linguistic
knowledge).
Although
this attempt to refine the issue had proposed ideas
valid for the translation itself on a hypothetical
basis, it failed to see the phenomenon as a cumulative
process and internalize all other elements that
make a piece of writing representative of a specific
culture and a language, which can evidently be observed
as a neglected dimension in MT pioneer Weaver's
(1949) words: "I have a text in front of me
which is written in Russian but [...] pretend that
it is really written in English [..] All I need
do is strip off the code in order to retrieve the
information contained in the text." In Warren
Weaver Memorandum, solely organized for the purpose
of selling the idea that machine translation works,
He called attention to his four proposals mentioning
that:
a) The problem of multiple meanings
might be tackled by the examination of the immediate
context, (only accomplished in particularly restricted
terminology, e.g. discourse of law, discourse of
medicine etc.,
b) there are logical elements in
language. He drew attention to a theory that "a
robot (or computer) is able to deduce any legitimate
conclusion from a finite set of premises."
Since written language is logical in nature, the
problem of translation is formally solvable,
c) frequencies of letters, letter
combinations, intervals between letters and letter
combinations, letter patterns, etc. which to some
significant degree are independent of the language
used,
d) and lastly, he assertedhis belief
in the existence and applicability of language universals.
However, this task is not as easy
and clear-cut as suggested, and may not even be
attainable in some contexts. It has proved impracticable
in view of the fact that compressing natural languages
into a universal set of symbols denies the very
nature and cultural value of language. Hutchins
(2003), on account of a chronological study of MT
systems, recommended "that different types
of MT systems are required to meet widely reverse
translation needs" in which he implies that
MT does not have the same success with varied genres,
registers and discourse levels, or those involving
a high level of abstraction and culture-bound items.
Most authors of the literature on
MT systems have focused on a particular problem
and stated the limitations of their studies in abstracts
and conclusions. E.g. the study entitled 'The
Automatic Translation of Idioms Translation
Memory Systems vs. Machine Translation' by Volk
(1998) agrees on the impracticability of translating
idioms due to syntactic setbacks, but proposes an
untested and questionable approach, whereas the
truth that language cannot be separated from its
segments either culturally or linguistically remains
disregarded. In this sense, Thriveni (2002) lays
emphasis on the idea: "One language cannot
express the meanings of another; [....] different
languages predispose their speakers to think differently
[...]," which could be taken as the very statement
that inspired this work.
Our scope in this paper is not
to argue for the superiority of human translation
versus machine translation or automated translation
in non-English-speaking settings, but rather to
touch upon the inadequacies and adequacies of MT
in certain contexts because of its failure to understand
true meaning and dynamic equivalence, despite producing
syntactically well-formed or meaning-extractable
outputs in limited settings.
This work insists on the low probability
of any future MT system meeting a wide range of
translation needs unless computers are able to make
judgments, decisions and choices consistent with
non-linguistic knowledge that people frequently
refer to in their daily lives. Yet, it is necessarily
not a dogmatic claimer of MT's not being utilized
in any areas. No doubt, it has certain possibilities,
as Melby (1996) justly states: "On some texts,
predominantly highly technical texts treating a
very narrow topic in a rather dry and monotonous
style, computers sometimes do quite well."
Within this framework, our work
firmly favors two notions:
- The contemporary practical
MT systems are designed mostly to render highly
intricate, scientific and technical texts with
a limited range of terminology in other
words, highly repetitive texts that are
structure-bound in that all the target sentences
are composed only from the syntactic structure
of the source sentences such as web pages and
electronic mails.
- The use of MT before, during,
and after translation can be justified. We aim
at making translators understand that they can
cooperate with the software to obtain
a synergistic effect. In other words, they could
have a say and had an essential part to play
in a semi-automated translation process (Rodrigo,
2001).
2. Synopsis MT
MT is aimed at enabling a computer
to transfer natural language utterances, or to process
a natural language in terms of lexical, syntactic,
and semantic dimensions (See Figure 1., Vauquois,
1968) in either text or speech from one language
into another while preserving both explicit and
implicit meaning. A distinction is originally to
be made between human-aided MT (HAMT) and machine-aided
human translation (MAHT). The latter uses computer-based
translation tools which prop up translators
by providing access to on-line dictionaries, remote
terminology databanks, transmission and reception
of texts, stores of previously translated texts
('translation memories'), and integrated resources,
commonly referred to as translator workstations
or translator workbenches. The term computer-aided
translation (CAT) is sometimes used to cover all
these computer-based translation systems.
The Machine Translation Pyramid
(MTP) suggested by Vauquois (1968) specifies a way
of processing comparable to that used by the human
translator. The system begins on the left bottom
by analyzing the source language; the analysis becomes
more and more complicated as we ascend the pyramid
to the semantic and syntactic levels. The term 'transfer'
means a format suitable for the interpretation and
generation of the target-language text.

Nida (1964:246-247) proposes the
following nine steps to be employed by a competent
translator with some steps being optional:
- Reading over the entire document
- Obtaining background information
(culture-inclusive)
- Comparing existing translations
of the text [if they exist]
- Making a first draft of sufficiently
comprehensible units
- Revising the first draft after
a short lapse of time
- Reading aloud for style and rhythm
- Studying the reactions of receptors
by the reading of the text by another person [
- omissible]
- Submitting a translation to the
scrutiny of other competent translators [omissible]
- Revising the text for publication
Consider the word bill; it
can have anumber of widely different meanings. (See
Appendix II.). Subsequently, translating this particular
word into other natural languages is not clear-cut.
Due to this many-to-many mapping of words, word-for-word
correspondence is deficient; hence, a lexical transfer
system fails to achieve accurate translation even
at this very morphological level.
The following representational stage
is to do with Syntax. E.g. identifying whether bill
is a noun or a verb provides a translator with a
first element for translation. The categorization
of words, cognitively, requires a rule-based process
depending on the syntactic arrangement of the word
used. The problem is still not vanished as multiple
meanings for the noun bill and the verb
bill are still available.
Up the pyramid, the semantic level
probably makes the greatest contribution to the
translation process when two other levels are taken
for granted. Semantic disambiguation is indispensable
for the proper translation of words represented
with the same symbols but divergent meanings in
various languages. To cite a more concrete example:
Within the context of drug trafficking, "a
mule" is a person who carries drugs across
frontiers. In French, the term "le passeur"
is used with the same meaning. However, in another
contextual setting or via the help of surrounding
words, it might be a term used by either the police
or a drug dealer. What if human translators and
computers are swapped? Could computers tell apart
a drug dealer speaking and police interrogating?
The rationale behind this depending fully on pragmatics here
it is the scene of the occurrence drives a
translator to strictly adhere to the decision-making
process: the real world knowledge in which the most
crucial step is "the capacities, which computers
lack, to make real choices by exercising our innate
faculty, choices for which we are responsible"
(Melby, 1996)
3. Evidential theory towards praxis
Benjamin Whorf's field study in
the Hopi speaking community so as to do an extensive
research in this Native American Language came up
with the findings that the Hopi creates or interprets
the world in a way quite dissimilar from that of
the ordinary speaker of any European language. He
asserted that the way in which people see the 'real
world' was based on the language habits of that
specific community a phenomenon known as linguistic
relativity.
For instance, as cited in Bahar
(2001), Bloor and Bloor (1995:246) emphasize "that
the speakers of one language may describe two objects
as, say red and orange (English) where
those who speak another will describe them with
the same term, say kai (Amharic)..."
Likewise, the Hopi have only one word for most flying
objects (Hayes et al., 1996). A dragonfly, an
airplane, and a pilot are all defined via the
same word founded on a specific-shared feature
theory or otherwise called 'overgeneralization'.
Whorf also proposed that in the Hopi language; a
system of tenses is not available, but as a substitute,
they talk about concepts on the subject of durations
and the speaker's perceptions. Hence, in Hopi, the
form of verbs changes to express whether the speaker
and listener can currently witness the occurrence
or whether they are predicting or remembering it a
phenomenon known as aspectual categorization.
As it is the case with mono-cultural
words. An unhygienic round dessert sold widely in
front of brothels in Turkey called 'halka tatlısı'
which literally translates as 'round dessert,'
also called 'brothel dessert,' (Açıkgцz,
2005) is believed to be an aphrodisiac to a Turkis
male, but means no more than an ordinary dessert
to a foreigner. Correspondingly, in some local dialects
of western Turkey, people originally make use of
distinctive adverbs 'цsen', 'yalım' meaning
'maybe, perhaps', whether it be in a literary piece
written by a nationally known author or in local
speech; it means nothing to an outsider of that
district in Turkey unless an explanatory footnote
is given at the bottom of the page.
Given that thought and languages
have borrowed from one another so much and have
developed interactively over time, societies now
and then let the language be influential over thoughts,
and at times thoughts over the language itself.
The above-mentioned examples represent the former
aspect, but there have been times ideologies and
thoughts of societies shape the language in certain
contexts. A good example of this was witnessed in
1950-60's and could be here given as a case of 'ideo-euphemism'.
The language surrounding weapons were knowingly
developed in harmony with the ideology of certain
groups (cited in Carroll, 1956; Knight, 2003). Terms
used at that juncture seem to be scientific or specialized
and often had positive connotations or hid another
meaning as in Enhanced radiation weapon that
literally means a bomb that kills people leaving
property intact, or Demographic targeting
that means killing the civilian population. It is
unquestionably the translator's job to make a distinction
between varied meanings of a word which may further
break itself into numerous connotations, whereas
such a distinction is beyond the capabilities a
machine deprived of functional-contextual aspects
and cultural values. Furstenberg
et al. (2001), in their cultural project, talks
about how an identical word can carry totally opposite
connotations in unlike cultures. The word the
fetus of a goat locally named kutti pi as
a food, for instance, is a prime example
where highly positive connotations of words such
as "delicacy," "rare; but tasty," in the Anglo-Indian
culture, while in the Turkish culture it has negative
undertones such as "nausea," "disgusting."
(National Geographic-Online)
Gross (1992) notably speaks of two
main setbacks of MT: They lack the contextual and
pragmatic competence of humans. On the other hand,
Canale lists four competencies of human translators:
(a) grammatical, (b) sociolinguistic, (c) discourse,
and (d) strategic competencies both in the source
and target languages. Additionally, as cultural
diversity doubles the richness of a language, machines
are at a disadvantage since they lack culture-specific
notions.
The latter of the two setbacks mentioned
by Gross is to do with the functional aspect of
languages. Machines' sole purpose is to convey meaning,
whereas natural languages perform numerous functions
depending on the context or situation such as humor,
sharing emotions or feelings without needing to
convey any actual information, establishing solidarity,
etc. (Rodrigo, 2001). E.g. the single word 'yes'
generally known as conveying confirmation, agreement
and so forth may gain numerous divergent meanings
depending on its function. Likewise; its function
is uneven and situation-sensitive in accordance
with context, stress, and intonation (See Appendix
I). A further aspect deals with ambiguity, idioms,
collocations, and structural and lexical differences
between the source language and target language,
which are highly valid concerns for Gross (1992,
p.111). As seen, so many variables are dynamically
engaged in this decision-making process, and it
also requires a capacity of functional-contextual
entry so as to account for multiple meanings
of even a single word.
Pericliev (1984) in his article
on structural ambiguity reached a conclusion that
supports his hypothesis: Structural ambiguity in
MT can be partially overcome by preserving the syntactical
ambiguity of the source language into target language;
in his case Bulgarian into English. However, a competent
translator is able to make judgments, inferences,
as well as deductions in the course of his/her decision-making
process and of manipulating the ambiguous source
sentence at ease following the nine steps of Nida.
The solution to this problem is, as suggested by
Pericliev (1984), that MT should not intend to explicate
SL texts by means of TL texts, but should only translate
them untouched, no matter how ambiguous they might
happen to be, and leave the stage for human translators
to make use of MT when necessary.
There exists a whole body of research
literature for approaches to recognize and translate
idioms (Volk, 1998). Consequently, the full treatment
of idioms is considered a difficult problem, since
it involves a flexible distinction between literal
and non-literal interpretation. Moreover, Topçu
(2004) rightly states that idioms representing even
a culture's tiny segment can get modified by time
and experience changes in meaning consistent with
context or setting. She further explains the intricacy
of negative or positive connotative meanings of
each idiom in a specific culture. Consider the following
example extracted from Turkish newspapers. "Perhiz
ve Lahana Turşusu" (cited in Topçu,
2004, Cum., 28-09-1999): This ordinary use of idiom
can frequently be encountered in daily lives of
Turks, thus can be interpreted without much effort.-"Diet
and pickled cabbage" when literally translated.
Yet its meaning is independent of the literal meaning
of the individual words. So, in this respect, "Perhiz
ve Lahana Turşusu" corresponds to "irrelevance
of the topic under discussion with the current situation."
4. Impediments to example-based
MT evaluation
Example-based translation (EBMT)
is, to all intents and purposes, translation by
analogy. An EBMT system stores a set of sentences
in the source language and their corresponding
translations in the target language, and
uses those examples to translate other identical
or similar sentences. The crucial argument is that,
if a previously translated sentence re-occurs, the
same translation is likely to be accurate again.
Reasoning in this way, using separate examples from
three different translation engines Google
and Alta Vista, Proceviri in French, German,
English, and Turkish in our efforts to support the
notions offered in this study (See introduction),
the principle is demonstrated with reference to
different cultures, contexts, genres, and discourses.
The core motive of offering sample
uses from actual, rather than invented, texts as
did some scholars, is that natural language should
be the only and absolute source for analyzing any
sort of language produced by its users. Therefore,
the data evaluated in this article is adequate for
the purpose.
It should not be neglected that
there exist some setbacks. Initially, the texts
are not complete texts because of technical limitations.
Drawing upon this, it may, at times, not be so easy
to deduce the intended meaning because of the lack
of context and co-text of the extracts. Additionally,
the data is randomly selected, and therefore the
examples (See Appendix III.) may not be well-systemized.
However, it is worth mentioning that random selection
leads to objective evaluation, as systematic elimination
of any sample might give the impression of subjective
bias in selecting the entries.
These impediments mentioned are
certainly subject to change depending on the nature
of the study given that existing samples in Appendix
III fulfill the necessary requirements the two principles
require. In this sense, it may possibly be claimed
that the samples under examination adequately explicate
and support what is intended throughout this study.
Within this framework, the words or phrases in italics
revealing the inequivalences stemming from lexical,
semantic, syntactic, cultural, and discourse-based
incorrespondences among languages reflect the ideas
behind all the above-mentioned theories of previous
scholarly works as well as our own approach to MT.
5. Conclusion
Put it simply, this paper does not
claim the superiority of human translation versus
machine translation in a comparative manner, but
rather points out the impediments of MT in certain
contexts although it, at times, may produce syntactically
well-formed or meaning-extractable outputs. To replace
this gap, it puts forward and suggests machine-aided
human translation in that it is more efficient,
effective, economic, and less time-consuming in
comparison to solely machine translation. The post-editing
process should follow a route, not through direct
implementation but sensible integration of MT into
pre-translation and actual translation process.
Experience recommends a semi-automated translation
process to obtrain the desired synergistic effect.
Appendix
I.

Çelik,
M. (2003) Learning stress and intonation in English.
Gazi Publishing.
Appendix
II.
|
bill 1
n.
1. An itemized list or
statement of fees or charges.
2. A statement or list of particulars,
such as a theater program or menu.
3. The entertainment offered by a theater.
4. A public notice, such as an advertising
poster.
5. a. A piece of legal paper money: a
ten-dollar bill.
b. Slang One hundred dollars.
6. a. A bill of exchange.
b. Obsolete A promissory note.
7. a. A draft of a proposed law presented
for approval to a legislative body.
b. The law enacted from such a draft:
a bottle bill in effect in three states; the
GI Bill.
8. Law A document presented to
a court and containing a formal statement
of a case, complaint, or petition.
tr.v. billed, bill·ing, bills
1. To present a statement of costs or
charges to.
2. To enter on a statement of costs or
on a particularized list.
3.
a. To advertise or schedule by public
notice or as part of a program.
b. To declare or describe officially;
proclaim: a policy that was billed as an
important departure for the administration.
|
|
bill 2
n.
1. The horny part of the
jaws of a bird; a beak.
2. A beaklike mouth part, such as that
of a turtle.
3. The visor of a cap.
4. Nautical The tip of the fluke
of an anchor.
intr.v. billed, bill·ing,
bills
To touch beaks together.
Idiom:
bill
and coo
To
kiss or caress and murmur endearments.
[Middle
English, from Old English bile.]
|
| bill 3
n.
1. A billhook.
2. A halberd or similar weapon with a
hooked blade and a long handle.
|
(www.thefreedictionary.com)
Appendix
III.
Entry
1#
|
Source input: To be completely honest,
I'm not a big fan of mystery endings. |
|
Target output: Um vollständig ehrlich
zu sein, bin ich nicht ein großer Ventilator
der Geheimnisenden. ( Google translation engine-GTE
) |
|
Target output: Um vollständig ehrlich
zu sein, bin ich nicht ein großer Ventilator
der Geheimnisenden. (Altavista translation
engine-ATE ) |
|
deprived
of a functional-contextual filter at the lexical
level. |
Entry
2#
|
Source input: After the
divorce, my wife said she didn't know who
or what she wanted to be. When I heard that
she had become a toaster, I felt vindicated.
A toaster! Was that all she could be
without me? And she wasn't even good at it.
She could only do two slices at a time, and
they came out charred on one side and white
on the other. Obviously, she was the one with
inadequacies. -http://www.shortshortshort.com/ |
|
Target output: Nach der
Scheidung sagte meine Frau, daß sie
nicht wußte, wem oder, was sie sein
wünschte. Als ich hörte, daß
sie ein Toaster geworden war, glaubte
ich vindicated. Ein Toaster! War das
alles, das sie ohne mich sein könnte?
Und sie war nicht an ihm sogar gut. Sie könnte
zwei Scheiben nur hintereinander tun, und
sie kamen heraus verkohlt auf einer Seite
und Weiß auf dem anderen. Offensichtlich
war sie die mit Unzulänglichkeit.
( GTE ) |
|
Target output: Nach der
Scheidung sagte meine Frau, daß sie
nicht wußte, wem oder, was sie sein
wünschte. Als ich hörte, daß
sie ein Toaster geworden war, glaubte
ich vindicated. Ein Toaster! War das
alles, das sie ohne mich sein könnte?
Und sie war nicht an ihm sogar gut. Sie könnte
zwei Scheiben nur hintereinander tun, und
sie kamen heraus verkohlt auf einer Seite
und Weiß auf dem anderen. Offensichtlich
war sie die mit Unzulänglichkeit.
( ATE ) |
|
deprived
of possible connotations at the lexical level. |
Entry
3#
|
Source input: There
is nothing more precious than being loved. |
|
Target Output: Hiçbir
şey yoktur, sevgili daha çok,
sevilen ol. (Proçeviri)
Possible well-formed output: Sevilmekden
daha degerli hicbir sey yoktur. |
|
Simply
making the distinction between a clause and
sentence is impracticable for MT due to syntactic
differences between Turkish and English. |
Entry
4#
|
Source input: Nikolai
Goryunov has been named coach of FC Gomel
after Aleksandr Kuznetsov resigned following
a run of poor results for the 2003
Belarussian champions. The club lie eighth
after four defeats in six matches and 51-year-old
Goryunov, who returns for his second spell
at the helm having led the side from 1994-96,
has ten games to turn things around. -www.uefa.com |
|
Target output: Nikolai
Goryunov ist Reisebus von FC Gomel nach Aleksandr
Kuznetsov genannt worden, das nach einem Durchlauf
der schlechten Resultate für die
Meister 2003 Belarussian abgefunden wird.
Die Vereinlüge achte nach vier Niederlagen
in sechs Gleichen und in 51-year-old Goryunov,
das für seinen zweiten Bann am Helm zurückgeht,
der die Seite von 1994-96 geführt wird,
hat 10 Spiele zum herum Drehen von Sachen.
( GTE ) |
|
Target output: Nikolai
Goryunov ist Reisebus von FC Gomel nach Aleksandr
Kuznetsov genannt worden, das nach einem Durchlauf
der schlechten Resultate für die
Belarussian Meister 2003 abgefunden wird.
Die Vereinlüge achte nach vier Niederlagen
in sechs Gleichen und in 51-year-old Goryunov,
das für seinen zweiten Bann am Helm zurückgeht,
der die Seite von 1994-96 geführt wird,
hat 10 Spiele, zum von von Sachen herum zu
drehen. ( ATE ) |
|
The
same word has different connotations in German
and English. |
Entry
5#
|
Source input: He is a
gay and he is happy with that. |
|
Target output: O, bir
mutludur, ve o, onla mutludur. (Proçeviri)
Possible well-formed output: O bir eşcinsel(dir)
ve bununla mutlu(dur). |
|
MT
is deprived of different functions of the
same word at various discourse levels in Turkish
and English. |
Entry 6#
|
Source input: If I
were in your shoes, I would beat him without
saying a word. |
|
Target output: Wenn
ich in Ihren Schuhen war, würde ich
ihn schlagen, ohne ein Wort zu sagen. ( ATE
) |
|
Target output: Wenn
ich in Ihren Schuhen war, würde ich
ihn schlagen, ohne ein Wort zu sagen.( GTE
) |
|
Idiomatic
usage varies between languages. |
Entry
7#
|
Source input: He only
choked the chicken for years, because
there was no female for sexual intercourse.
This is not his fault! |
|
Target output: Er erdrosselte
nur das Huhn für Jahre, weil
es keine Frau für sexuellen Verkehr gab.
Dieses ist nicht seine Störung! ( GTE
) |
|
Target output: Er erdrosselte
nur das Huhn für Jahre, weil es
keine Frau für sexuellen Verkehr gab.
Dieses ist nicht seine Störung! ( ATE
) |
|
Idiomatic
and colloquial usage varies between languages. |
Entry
8#
|
Source input: He passed
away in peace. |
|
Target output: Er überschritt
weg in Frieden. ( GTE ) |
|
Target output: Er überschritt
weg in Frieden. ( ATE )
Idiomatic usages vary between languages. |
Entry
9#
|
Source input: How do you
feel? |
|
Target output: Comment
vous sentez-vous? ( GTE ) |
|
A
class discussion on the topic brought to the
surface the fact that there is no exact French
equivalent to the American "How do you feel?"
since the phrase "Comment tu te sens?" relates
solely to the physical well-being of someone,
and "How do you feel?" is usually expressed
as "Qu'est-ce que tu penses?"
|
Works
cited:
- Açıkgöz,
F. (2005) Metaphors and non-native tertiary learners:
Ametaphorical study of 'Archetypes'-An absurd
short story by Natazsa Goerke.Unpublished Paper
presented at Çukurova University: 3rd International
Postgraduate Conference
- Bahar,
I.B. (2001) Linguistic relativity and the translation
dilemma: Reading between the lines in Malay literatures
in English. Nottingham Linguistic Circular, 16,
19-29.
- Bloor,
T. and Bloor, M. (1995) The Functional Analysis
of English: A Hallidayan
Approach.
London: Arnold.
- Canale,
M. (1983) From communicative competence to communicative
language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R.
W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication
(pp. 1-27). London: Longman.
- Carroll,
J. (ed.) (1956) Language, Thought and Reality,
Massachusetts: MIT Press
- Celik,M.
(2003). Learning Stress and Intonation in English.
Ankara: Gazi
- Furstenberg,
G. et al.(2001) Giving a virtual voice to the
silent language of culture: The Cultura Project
Language Learning & Technology Vol. 5, No.
1, January 2001, pp. 55-102
- Gross,
A. (1992) 'Limitations of computers as translation
tools', in Newton, John (ed), Computers in translation
- a practical appraisal, London, Routledge, pp.
96-130
- Melby,
A.K. (1996) 'The Possibility of Language'. Warner
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Nida,
E. A.(1964) Toward a Science of Translating, Leiden,
Netherlands: E. J. Brill.
- Pericliev,
V. (1984) "Handling Syntactical Ambiguity in Machine
Translation," COLING'84, July, pp. 521-524
- Rodrigo,
E.Y. (2001) "Making MT commonplace in translation
training curricula: too many misconceptions, so
much potential!." In: Maegaard, B. (ed.): MT Summit
VIII. CD-ROM Proceedings of the 8th International
Machine Translation Summit - 'Machine Translation
in the Information Age.' Santiago de Compostela
(Spain), 18th-22nd September 2001. Geneva: 45-49.
- Thriveni,
C. (2002) Cultural elements in translation: The
Indian perspective. Translation Journal. 6/1
- Topçu.
N. (2004) 'Les locutions idiomatiques imagées
dans la presse turque et leur utilisation dan
une classe de langue étrangère.'
In Yılmaz et al. (ed.) (2004): Linguistique
Vers une Grammaire Linguistique Du Turc. Multilingual
Yabancı Dil Yayınları. TÑŒrkiye,
pp.167-181
- Vauquois,
B. (1968) A survey of formal grammars and algorithms
for recognition and
transformation
in machine translation, IFIP Congress-68 (Edinburgh),
pp. 254-260.
- Volk,
M. (1998) The Automatic Translation of Idioms.
Machine Translation vs. Translation Memory Systems.
In: Nico Weber (ed.): Machine Translation:
Theory, Applications, and Evaluation. An assessment
of the state of the art. St. Augustin: gardez-Verlag.
http://www.ling.su.se/DaLi/volk/publications.html
- Weaver,
W. (1949): 'Translation'. Repr. in: Locke, W.N.
and Booth, A.D. (eds.) Machine translation of
languages: fourteen essays (Cambridge, Mass.:
Technology Press of the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, 1955), pp. 15-23.
Authors'
Bio-data:
Fırat
Açıkgöz is currently an instructor
working for TOBB University of Economics and Technology.
He also graduated from Interpretation and Translation
Department of the same affiliation in 2003. He has
worked at several private founding language schools
as an English teacher, and is studying on his M.A
entitled 'Teaching English to the Young Blind, at
the department of ELT at Hacettepe University. He
is interested in, ELT research, translation, special
education, material development and discourse. erciyesfirat@yahoo.com
Olcay
Sert, R.A is a linguist and ELT instructor at
Hacettepe University, English Language Teaching
Department. His research interests include sociolinguistics,
discourse analysis and critical discourse analysis,
Neuro-linguistic Programming, educational linguistics
and their relations to foreign language teaching
and learning.
Read
more articles - Free!
E-mail
this article to your colleague!
Need
more translation jobs? Click here!
Translation
agencies are welcome to register here - Free!
Freelance
translators are welcome to register here - Free!
Subscribe
to TranslationDirectory.com newsletter - Free!
Take
part in TranslationDirectory.com poll - your voice
counts!