*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: mcn-l@mcn.edu
>
> 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/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
>
--
*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: mcn-l@mcn.edu
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/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
