*Any* translation is subjective. If the institution did not write the text in the second language, it cannot be held liable for what a machine translation algorithm comes up with, if the use of machine translation is transparent. "Nuanced interpretation" could, on the other hand, definitely be considered biased by those -- in the same language group -- with differing points of view. Interpretation is, after all, interpretation -- not translation.
That said, I repeat my skepticism about automatic translation for serious deep content. Amalyah > Less so for exhibition texts, articles, and deep content, but its > > certainly better than nothing. > > > Just a word of caution here for interpretative text. > > IMHO nothing is better than machine translation if dealing with culturally > significant text. Do you really want to trust a machine to translate > nuanced interpretation about ethnic cleansing or colonisation? This may > land your organisation in some sticky situations if the translations > somehow trivialised certain historical events. > > Cheers > Glen > _______________________________________________ > You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer > Network (http://www.mcn.edu) > > To post to this list, send messages to: [email protected] > > To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: > http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l > > The MCN-L archives can be found at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > -- *Amalyah Keshet* _______________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: [email protected] To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
