Editors and Machine Translations into English
I posted this on LinkedIn on August 22, 2024, in three parts, and I have made some minor additions.
How best can editors work on text that has been machine translated into English? While some of my clients do use machine translations, some of my clients do not and advise against using machine translations.
When a client uses machine translations into English before hiring me as an editor for the English publication, I find that editing often goes beyond the usual scope for a copyedit (as defined by Editors Canada), and I need to understand the potential benefits and pitfalls of machine translations to do my edit well.
Here are 9 practices I recommend for editors facing the same situation:
1. Check out what machine translation involves, possible applications, and risks. Here are some sources.
· Government of Canada’s “Using new language technologies and machine translation,” subsection “To use or not to use machine translation, that is the question” <https://lnkd.in/eBjCuEtP>
· Slate article “Death by Machine Translation?” https://lnkd.in/ecbcBm6k
· “5 Risks of Machine Translation” < https://lnkd.in/eJqibMqg>
2. Ask what post-machine translation process the text has gone through before it lands on your desk. For example, after the machine translation, was there a post-machine translation edit of the text by a human translator? Or did the multilingual authors and subject experts review the text to identify errors in the translation and address those errors before the text was sent to the English editor?
3. Consider the client’s style guide, other references, and process. Does the client answer questions about many publications, refer to precedents, and refer other questions to the author team?
4. Consider multiple Englishes. Likely the machine translation defaults to US or UK English, but what does the intended audience know and prefer? What does the client require? What national, regional, and local considerations are factors?
5. Use high-value resources and use them well–e.g., a specialist glossary of terms in English for the subject, a wealth of online and hard copy dictionaries (Oxford, Merriam-Webster Collegiate 11th edition, Collins, the online Oxford English Dictionary, and the online Oxford Reference).
6. Consider the process for the edit in English. Will the edit go through at least two rounds of edits: first, an edit with tracked changes and queries or comments to authors; then the authors’ careful review of the text to check the edit and answer all questions; and then at least a second edit round to resolve all text changes and clean up the text?
7. Review for key words and phrases, concepts, and terms of art that are used and expected in the subject area. Are there areas of text that are vague or might lack nuance? Does the text use many different words or phrases for the same thing? Does the text seem to oversimplify a term of art because of a limited vocabulary in machine translation?
8. Keep a style sheet and query the subject expert/author team about specific wordings and patterns of language. Does the text use words and phrases that will be familiar to the audience and explain those that are unfamiliar but necessary in the context? Does it use those words and phrases clearly, consistently, and with precision? Does the text vary language in a way that might be unhelpful for the target audience; does it look like the writers dug into a thesaurus too many times? This might result from machine translation translating each word and phrase separately and without regard for the context and consistency. For example, I have often queried early in a manuscript that three similar phrases are used repeatedly but in a way that is not clear and distinct to me, so what distinctions are being made and are the uses clear and appropriate in each case?
9. Review for tone and style. What tone is wanted for the intended audience? Is the tone and style consistently formal and academic, consistently informal, or a combination? Is the language vague? What style is clear, correct, and precise for the intended audience?
Writers, editors, translators, publishers, and other organizations communicating in multiple languages, please share what you have learned in your work and about machine translations. Thanks!
Do editors fact-check writing? Fact-checking, accuracy, agreements, standards, and artificial intelligence (AI) including ChatGPT
Recently, a colleague on a committee asked me about fact-checking. Do editors actually fact-check the work of writers and subject experts? Shouldn’t the writer or subject editor do this instead of the editor?
Accurate? Fact-checked? Always important but even more so with AI
Is it accurate? Was it fact-checked? These have always been key questions for writers, authors, subject experts, editors, and anyone publishing content. These are particularly important with growing concerns about artificial intelligence (AI) and worries about AI making stuff up or failing to research with rigour. (See “Is it real or is it ChatGPT? (and does it matter?)” and “Using ChatGPT for Book Research? Take Exceeding Care.”)
But back to the question
Do editors fact-check writing? Editors can. I often do in my role as editor, but I do so based on discussions with my clients. When my role is writer, I always fact-check my own writing.
Professional editors are well-placed to fact-check or raise concerns about facts and inconsistencies in text. They can be the extra set of eyes on a document after the writer has read it 100 times and before it is published. Professional editors have long been well-placed to raise concerns about factual correctness, plagiarism, and copyright. And now they are well-placed to fact-check and raise concerns about accuracy or misinformation in the face of artificial intelligence (AI).
In practice
How this works in practice depends on the context and contract.
- When I’m working with subject experts and they are writing about their specialty, I edit according to the contract with the client—so for structure, requirements for plain language, publication style, grammar, usage, mechanics such as spelling and punctuation, some of the preceding, or all—but I also use Track Changes and add comments to ask, for example, “Authors—see suggested changes for required style. Is this edit correct and clear?” or “Authors—see name variation here vs. page 20. Please confirm or change.” Then, at the last point that the writer sees the text, the writer signs off on the content.
- With some clients, the contract spells out that the editor must “Check all facts that fall within the realm of general knowledge—basically anything that can be verified with a quick internet search: dates and details of events, locations, geographic references (directional, distance), historical references, famous quotations, etc.” and change the text or query any inconsistencies.
- With still other writers and clients, I am to fact-check ALL stated facts, including dates and proper nouns, correct any errors based on authoritative sources, and flag those changes, or query the author to resolve concerns.
Industry standards
These varied approaches are backed up by industry standards and can be set out in a clear contract for each editorial project.
Editors Canada’s “Professional Editorial Standards” (2016) includes this standard:
“E14 Query, or correct if authorized to do so, inconsistencies (e.g., in spelling, punctuation, facts, visual elements, navigation elements, metadata, other content that may not appear on a published web page). Use judgment about the degree to which such queries and corrections are called for.”
As well, Editors Canada’s “Definitions of Editorial Skills” includes the following:
“Copy Editing
Editing to ensure correctness, accuracy, consistency, and completeness. It includes:
- editing for grammar, spelling, punctuation, and usage
- checking for consistency and continuity of mechanics and facts, including anachronisms, character names, and relationships ….”
And the same Editors Canada’s “Definitions of Editorial Skills” includes the following additional services that might or might not be included in the contracted editor’s scope of work:
“Fact Checking
Checking the accuracy of facts, citations, and quotes by referring to the writer’s original sources or to other authoritative sources….”
“Rewriting
Creating new material based on content supplied by a writer. It may include:
- research
- writing original material
- fact checking ….”
Conclusion
So, do editors fact-check text? It depends. Many do. For clients or employers who hire editors, editors can be an extra defence against errors in published text. In practice, it helps to settle the details of who will fact-check what and create a sign-off stage at which point the writer or content publisher signs off on the text. With AI (ChatGPT and others) adding to the challenges facing writers and content publishers, pro editors can bring this distinct, value-added skill of fact-checking.