← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Ritter
Thread ID: 10312 | Posts: 17 | Started: 2003-10-07
2003-10-07 05:25 | User Profile
[Bulgaria]
Scientists claim to have invented an instant translator which will allow people talking on phones in different languages to understand each other.
A research team from Rousse in Bulgaria claim to have patented the technology which converts words spoken in one language into digital code which can then be immediately interpreted into another language.
The translator chip can be inserted into any phone, the scientists claim.
Project leader Koycho Mitev told BTV national television: "A person can talk freely on the phone in their mother tongue and at the other end of the world people will hear the translation of what they say."
The Bulgarian team says it has also worked out a computer program that translates texts.
Mitev said that if investors show an interest in the technology, practical application can begin within a year.
Story filed: 11:27 Monday 6th October 2003 [url]http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_826296.html[/url]
2003-10-07 06:02 | User Profile
Rban will probably claim that it was actually created by Indians. High class Brahmins with a swagger, no doubt. :twisted:
2003-10-07 13:58 | User Profile
I guess I'm too old fashion in believeing in just learning the language.
2003-10-07 17:32 | User Profile
Perun, the good thing about this new technologies coming out that can automatically translate conversations is that it will significantly limit foreign language influx onto a native culture.
In France or Germany for example, the influx of English words.
But just imagine there being no language barrier between you and another person in a different country. You can understand them completely. How many languages can you possibly learn? Speaking 3 languages in hard enough for myself. Though if my future children, in the fatherland, can speak to my sister's children in America, so both can speak their native tounges to each other. This will also take off the need for european countries to require english learning in alot of jobs and educations.
2003-10-07 18:00 | User Profile
Ritter there are so many flaws in this type of system. What about slang? I've noticed such programs can't do a damn thing about that.
In Russian, the term "what the hell" is literally translated as "on whose dog". Now a computer program would translate that as "on whose dog" instead of "what the hell".
My grandfather always complained about how Russian translators would mistranslate Khruschev's speeches. Khruschev often used Russian slang in his speeches, and the translator didn't know Russian slang. So they translated his speeches literally.
I can understand the attraction of such a program especially for those having trouble trying to learn a foreign language(like myself in trying to learn Russian). But this concept is flawed.
2003-10-07 19:25 | User Profile
That is the beauty of computers perun! They can program it anyway they will. You can put slang in the chip! There is no limit to the technology.
2003-10-07 19:45 | User Profile
I am extremely skeptical of this claim. This type of technology, is, quite frankly, impossible to create at our current level of technological sophistication. We do not even have computer voice recognition systems that are adequate for daily use yet.
2003-10-08 06:52 | User Profile
Leading computer speech recognition is good enough for this. If you speak clearly, computer recognition, for conversational purposes, will have nearly an insignificant number of errors.
Accuracy of translation is still a problem for clear speakers. You can go to babble fish or google and see how rough computer translations are. Still, it might be good enough for crude conversation.
But, the thing to remember is that technology always gets better. Lousy translation today will be better than human translators in 10 years.
2003-10-09 01:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Happy Hacker] But, the thing to remember is that technology always gets better. Lousy translation today will be better than human translators in 10 years.[/QUOTE]
Yes and thats the only real claim technophiles can ever rely on to prove any of their theories(which have been proven false quite often).
2003-10-09 02:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=perun1201]Yes and thats the only real claim technophiles can ever rely on to prove any of their theories(which have been proven false quite often).[/QUOTE]
Look at the Internet. Even 10 years ago few people had any idea that it would become so universal. Ditto for cell phones and digital cameras.
Computers already have some advantages over human translators. Whether the translation is right or wrong, computers speak more clearly than most human translators. Computers can follow a voice with high background noise better than a person can.
2003-10-09 03:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=perun1201] In Russian, the term "what the hell" is literally translated as "on whose dog". Now a computer program would translate that as "on whose dog" instead of "what the hell". [/QUOTE] Actually it would be "what the devil" -- "kakogo cherta". Almost a literal translation.
2003-10-09 04:24 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]Actually it would be "what the devil" -- "kakogo cherta". Almost a literal translation.[/QUOTE]
Isvintye! My mistake.
2003-10-30 04:50 | User Profile
Could such a device be adapted to work like a hearing aid, that you could wear? That would be something! :)
2003-10-30 07:32 | User Profile
Predicting future technology is actually very easy. Just take anything today and consider how that would be if it were much more efficient. What's rare and hard to predict are new kinds of technologies. For example, it was a no brainer that TVs would eventually become flat, but to predict that the first TV would be created would take some real smarts.
It's a no brainer that computers will soon be able to translate human speech on the fly. Better than human translators do.
"what the hell" is literally translated as "on whose dog"
I don't speak Russian, but that looks like pure nonsense. The only thing a computer would have trouble with is vague word sounds that depend on contetxt for meaning. Hell is not so vauge that a computer could think the speaker means "dog."
Hell = ад, not dog. Going the other direction, ад could be "hell" or "inferno." Close enough.
2003-10-30 18:41 | User Profile
Invention is the mother of neccessity. One example is the airplane-we need planes even though we didn't have flight for all of recorded history and people could really have used flight many, many times during that vast stretch of time. Or washing machines for that matter. Just because we need anti-gravity today doesn't mean someone will invent it. An invention usually arrives unexpectedly, like the telescope, derived by observing a little kid playing with a couple of of eyeglass lenses. Afterwards inventions become indispensable because of the people who make a career using them, like astronomers, or automobile commuters.
2003-10-31 10:50 | User Profile
I'd like to see that thing translate Swabian or Kölsch.. or Plattdeutsch. Start smoking and spitting sparks. Heh.
Ausonius
2003-10-31 16:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ausonius]I'd like to see that thing translate Swabian or Kölsch.. or Plattdeutsch. Start smoking and spitting sparks. Heh.
Ausonius[/QUOTE]
Hochdeutsch ist ein Dialekt, den kein anständiger Schwabe in den Mund nimmt. :smoke: