This work was supported by the Shaanxi Provincial Philosophy and Social Sciences Research Project (2025HZ0988) under the title “Research on Innovation and Practice of Translation Technology Pedagogy Driven by AIGC.”
Abstract
As translation technologies continue to evolve, particularly with the maturation of computer-assisted translation tools and the rapid progress of neural machine translation, post-editing of translation memory and machine translation outputs has substantially increased translation productivity, thereby exerting a profound influence on the translation industry and translation education. This study investigates undergraduate students’ perception after performing translation assignments via post-editing translation results offered by translation memories and machine translation. Adopting a qualitative research design, the study collected data via an online questionnaire, and eight students were purposively selected for a follow-up questionnaire session. Based on content analysis, the qualitative data revealed that students’ perceptions of translation memories and machine translation were mostly positive, with relatively few negative views. Overall, they regarded both technologies as effective, and they perceived translation memory to offer more consistent suggestions than machine translation, largely due to its reliance on previously validated bilingual segments, which students felt enhanced terminological stability and minimized fluctuation in style and phrasing.
References
Bowker, L. (2000). A corpus-based approach to evaluating student translations. The Translator, 183-210.
Dillon, S., & Fraser, J. (2006). Translators and TM: An investigation of translators’ perceptions of translation memory adoption. Machine Translation, 67-79.
Halim, S. W. (2019). Translation technology for student translators: A study on perceptions. Journal of English Teaching as a Foreign Language, 5(1), 1-13.
Kenny, D. (2020). Machine translation. In Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (pp. 305-310). Routledge.
Mahfouz, I. (2018). Attitudes to CAT tools: Application on Egyptian students and professionals. Arab World English Journal, 4, 69-83.
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 192-222.
Sánchez-Gijón, P., Moorkens, J., & Way, A. (2019). Post-editing neural machine translation versus translation memory segments. Machine Translation, 33, 31-59.
Teixeira, C. (2014). Perceived vs. measured performance in the post-editing of suggestions from machine translation and translation memories [Paper presentation]. Third Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice (WPTP-3), Vancouver, Canada.
Vandeghinste, V. (2019). Improving the translation environment for professional translators. Informatics, 6(2), 24.
Vázquez, L. M., Vázquez, S. R., & Bouillon, P. (2013). Comparing forum data post-editing performance using translation memory and machine translation output: A pilot study. In Proceedings of Machine Translation Summit XIV: Posters.
Yang, Z., & Mustafa, H. R. (2022). On postediting of machine translation and workflow for undergraduate translation program in China. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2022, 1-11.
How to cite this paper
Investigating Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Post-editing Efforts in Translation Memory and Neural Machine Translation
How to cite this paper: Zhengang Yang. (2025) Investigating Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Post-editing Efforts in Translation Memory and Neural Machine Translation. Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Science, 9(11), 2200-2206.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/jhass.2025.11.022