Slashdot Mirror


Computer Translator Ready for Testing in Iraq

cgibby98 wrote to mention a Wired News story about a battle-zone translation technology that may allow near real-time conversations between English and Arabic speakers. From the article: "Funded by Darpa, the system would allow troops to communicate in Arabic through a laptop computer equipped with voice recognition and translation software. Troops could speak in English and have their words instantly translated into Iraqi Arabic, 'spoken' by a computerized man's voice. The program also translates Arabic into English. Will it replace the need for an interpreter when you're having some sort of high-level conversation? Absolutely not. But it is absolutely to the point where it could be useful in some carefully chosen situations."

16 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. In Sunni-controlled Iraq... by geekpuppySEA · · Score: 5, Funny

    Language butchers YOU!

    --
    Intelligent Design: because MATH is HARD.
  2. A bit obvious by haluness · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But it is absolutely to the point where it could be useful in some carefully chosen situations.

    Seems like you could say that for any new, generally unproven, technique

    1. Re:A bit obvious by halltk1983 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think I'd use it as a check device to see if the "local" translator was lying to me. If the difference is blatant, then maybe I'd find another translator.

      --
      Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
  3. Oh teh noes by paranode · · Score: 4, Funny

    This have disaster writed all over it!

    1. Re:Oh teh noes by identity0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ah, but will it be able to replicate the great cross-cultural interactions from Hollywood movies?

      Soldier: Ma'am, have you seen any suspicious men in the area?
      Translator: Woman, have you been consorting with men not of your family?

      Iraqi: Fuck you!
      Translator: Me love you long time.

      Soldier: What the fuck?
      Translator: Which way shall we fornicate?

      Iraqi: Agh, you Americans make me so aggravated!
      Translator: Me so horny.

      hilarity ensues. Face it, you know these are going to be programmed by lonely geeks with dirty thoughts on their minds.

  4. Bad idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Trusting a computer to do real-time translation in a volatile, war-torn region...

    English: "We applaud the creation of your new constitution and are preparing to pull our troops out of the country so that the rebuilding process can begin."
    Arabic: "All your base are belong to us."

    1. Re:Bad idea. by vux984 · · Score: 4, Funny

      English: "We applaud the creation of your new constitution and are preparing to pull our troops out of the country so that the rebuilding process can begin."

      Arabic: "All your base are belong to us."

      Wow, this is the most advanced translater built. Unlike most which simply try direct literal translations, this one can actually parse the intent of what Bush actually meant when he said that!

      Bravo!

  5. Ah, but... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Will it be able to instantly start translating from an alien language that it has never heard before as soon as the other person appears on the main viewer?

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  6. I've tried out the online demo and it's sweet! by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Funny

    I tried out the online demo that works through the web browser. I wondered what "I hope the weather is clement when you arive" would translate into. You get:

    "durka durka mohammed jihad durka durka"

    Super!

  7. This was already possible by matt+me · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I managed something similar a year or so back, in an attempt to create a 'babelfish'. Of course the input/output had to be specified, and it had a very limited range of languages - certainly no universal translator but it did use all free software (as that's all I have).
    0) Input recording of English languagge
    1) Voice recognition software (Sphinx) pipes output to
    2) Script using online translator to convert between language
    3) Festival stumbles out an imhuman gramatically-wrong rendition of the input.

    It wasn't exactly in realtime, I just fed it recordings, for which it would then output an audio file in the other language. The worst step was the voice recognition, which didn't work great even when given the output of the voice syntethisier.

    Sphinx http://cmusphinx.sourceforge.net/html/cmusphinx.ph p

  8. Danger! by Dog135 · · Score: 4, Funny

    English: We are here to save you!
    Translation: We are here to collect you!

    Seems to work fine to me!

    --
    "That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
  9. Human translators not very reliable either by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But it is absolutely to the point where it could be useful in some carefully chosen situations."

    I think it is far more useful than many people realize given that many people have too much faith in human translators. I was watching a discovery channel episode of "Off to War" and a US officer had his men hold their fire when they saw armed insurgents because they were not sure where the Iraqi police attached to the unit were. Afterwards the US officer tells the translator to tell the police that he had to hold his fire because he did not know where they were and that they must let him know when they leave the group. Subtitles show that the translator really says something like: You idiots! You completely screwed up the mission ... So much for the diplomacy and professionalism the US officer was trying to convey.

  10. Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _humans_ by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "No one in the military would make life or death decisions based on a machine translation." That's pure CYA for the first time this device gets someone killed. If a life or death decision needs to be made and the only thing you have at hand is a machine translation, what are you going to use?

    I don't know how representative of the state of the art they are, but I've been massively underwhelmed at Babelfish's ability to understand foreign-language text and by ViaVoice's ability to understand speech. I can't imagine the effect of layering machine translation errors on top of machine voice interpretation errors.

    According to href="http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200512/iraq-a rmy">James T. Fallows, "The U.S. military does everything in Iraq worse and slower than it could if it solved its language problems. It is unbelievable that American fighting ranks have so little help. Soon after Pearl Harbor the U.S. military launched major Japanese-language training institutes at universities and was screening draftees to find the most promising students. America has made no comparable effort to teach Arabic. Nearly three years after the invasion of Iraq the typical company of 150 or so U.S. soldiers gets by with one or two Arabic-speakers. T. X. Hammes says that U.S. forces and trainers in Iraq should have about 22,000 interpreters, but they have nowhere near that many. "

    Instead of doing the obvious thing--give soldiers training in Arabic and offer big bonuses for Arabic-speaking recruits--the U.S. does nothing for a couple of years and then tries to throw a cheap technical fix at the problem.

    If we must throw gadgets at the problem, why not a satellite phone linked to a big building full of human Arabic/English simultaneous translators?

  11. let's clear up some confusion by geekpuppySEA · · Score: 4, Informative
    Trade languages don't erode the use of local languages (what's "cultural language"?) - trade languages get used because there isn't a language in common. ("No language was harmed in the making of this commercial transaction")

    On many occasions, it's been shown that if the pidgin language is used consistently around kids, they'll start using it, but just add in all this extra grammatical stuff that they expect to hear but don't - and then the language is said to become "creolized".

    Also: we don't predominantly think in language. We think in something that's more base than, and was prior to, language. Everyone always hears that decades-old, long-ago-disproven Whorfian line, that people (in the same species, with the same neurological makeup) actually think differently according to what language they speak - but no one's buying it anymore except those Psych 101 students who are going to major in elementary education instead of cognitive development.

    I'm a language dork so I feel like I HAVE to comment every time I see language stuff on /. Except for all those "it's"es where it should be "its". Those, I can let you guys have.

    --
    Intelligent Design: because MATH is HARD.
  12. Speaking as someone who has had some experience by DG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...I totally agree - once it works.

    I went to school in a military college in Quebec. One of its aims was to make us fluently bilingual (French and English) and a lot of effort was spent on that. All communications outside the classroom switched language every two weeks, we got 5 classes of instruction per week, and we spent two months one summer on a full-bore language training programme.

    And after 4 years of this, I was indeed fluently bilingual. (Je suis billingue)

    BUT - it took 4 years of constant immersion to get there, French and English are reasonably similar (same alphabet, mostly the same sounds, a lot of shared words, reasonably similar grammar) and I still can't do a very good job of translating. In fact, I didn't really start to be able to function in French until I was comfortable enough with it to THINK in French (pense en francias). If I think in French, I'm fine. If I have to think in english and then speak in French (or vice versa) there's a kind of mental clashing of gears; it's like the speech centre and the comprehension centre are in one place, and the translation centre is in another.

    So I can watch a French movie, no problem. But ask me to provide a running translation of the dialogue in English, and I can't do it - not without falling way behind. Translation is HARD.

    Plus, from personal experiance, trying to communicate with somebody when you share very little language is very, very frustrating - for both of you - even in the most benign circmstances. It's a stressor. Now try it when one or both participants in the conversation are in fear for their lives... it's an easy way for tempers and emotions to get stoked way high.

    And that's with French, which was relatively easy. Arabic reads right-to-left, has no shared alphabet with romantic languages, shares few sounds, and has a completely different grammar. I can't imagine how long it would take to be able to speak fluent Farsi or Pashtun - but yet, some day, my life might depend on it.

    If we can develop a working real-time translator, it's going to make a lot of people's lives a lot easier. It will be a de-escalator when it comes to conflict resolution - and by far the best way to resolve conflicts is peacefully. Ask any soldier.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
  13. Re:But... by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

    Only if you hang your robe on the hook, put the towel over the grate, drop your satchel in front of the panel and then put the pile of junk mail on top of the satchel before pressing the dispenser button.