Google Translate e Microsoft Translator - Valutazione di due applicazioni per la traduzione automatica del parlato e analisi di una tecnologia in evoluzione.

This work focuses on Machine Translation (MT) and Speech-to-Speech Translation, two emerging technologies that allow users to automatically translate written and spoken texts. The first part of this work provides a theoretical framework for the evaluation of Google Translate and Microsoft Translator, which is at the core of this study. Chapter one focuses on Machine Translation, providing a definition of this technology and glimpses of its history. In this chapter we will also learn how MT works, who uses it, for what purpose, what its pros and cons are, and how machine translation quality can be defined and assessed. Chapter two deals with Speech-to-Speech Translation by focusing on its history, characteristics and operation, potential uses and limits deriving from the intrinsic difficulty of translating spoken language. After describing the future prospects for SST, the final part of this chapter focuses on the quality assessment of Speech-to-Speech Translation applications. The last part of this dissertation describes the evaluation test carried out on Google Translate and Microsoft Translator, two mobile translation apps also providing a Speech-to-Speech Translation service. Chapter three illustrates the objectives, the research questions, the participants, the methodology and the elaboration of the questionnaires used to collect data. The collected data and the results of the evaluation of the automatic speech recognition subsystem and the language translation subsystem are presented in chapter four and finally analysed and compared in chapter five, which provides a general description of the performance of the evaluated apps and possible explanations for each set of results. In the final part of this work suggestions are made for future research and reflections on the usability and usefulness of the evaluated translation apps are provided.

Neural Machine Translation in the Field of Law. Analysis and Evaluation against Human Reference of NMT Raw Outputs of an Atto Costitutivo of S.r.l. from Italian into German.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is gaining ever more ground in every sphere of human life, to the point that it is now even used to pass sentences in courts. The use of AI in the field of Law is however deemed quite controversial, as it could provide more objectivity yet entail an abuse of power as well, given that bias in algorithms behind AI may cause lack of accuracy. As a product of AI, machine translation is being increasingly used in the field of Law too in order to translate laws, judgements, contracts, etc. between different languages and different legal systems. In the legal setting of Company Law, accuracy of the content and suitability of terminology play a crucial role within a translation task, as any addition or omission of content or mistranslation of terms could entail legal consequences for companies. The purpose of the present study is to first assess which neural machine translation system between DeepL and ModernMT produces a more suitable translation from Italian into German of the atto costitutivo of an Italian s.r.l. in terms of accuracy of the content and correctness of terminology, and then to assess which translation proves to be closer to a human reference translation. In order to achieve the above-mentioned aims, two human and automatic evaluations are carried out based on the MQM taxonomy and the BLEU metric. Results of both evaluations show an overall better performance delivered by ModernMT in terms of content accuracy, suitability of terminology, and closeness to a human translation. As emerged from the MQM-based evaluation, its accuracy and terminology errors account for just 8.43% (as opposed to DeepL’s 9.22%), while it obtains an overall BLEU score of 29.14 (against DeepL’s 27.02). The overall performances however show that machines still face barriers in overcoming semantic complexity, tackling polysemy, and choosing domain-specific terminology, which suggests that the discrepancy with human translation may still be remarkable.