Commentary

Thomas Claburn
 

Google's Universal Translator

Tech news sites have been buzzing about Google's plan to turn mobile phones into universal translators, based on a report in The Times.

Tech news sites have been buzzing about Google's plan to turn mobile phones into universal translators, based on a report in The Times.It's proof that those who cannot remember history are condemned to report it as news.

It isn't really news, however: Google said it was working on mobile translation technology in December at its Searchology event. The company said it aimed to provide in-conversation voice translation across languages, starting in the first quarter of 2010.


More Internet Insights

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

Webcasts

More >>

But that was two months ago, an eternity for attention spans tuned to Twitter. And The Times' story does include some interest observations from Franz Och, head of Google's translation services.

More interesting still is the comment posted under the name "David Crystal," who says he's the same honorary professor of linguistics at Bangor University quoted -- or misquoted, as he claims -- in the story.

I didn't actually say what [Times writer Chris Gourlay] says I said. I said that there are two problems preventing successful automatic voice recognition, not one: regional accent diversity and speed of speech. I then gave examples of fast speech that would present a problem, and happened to mention Glaswegian in passing. But machines currently have great difficulty processing rapid speech, regardless of accent. So any sniping at Glaswegian misses the point. The issue affects all of us.

Nor did I say that the need to learn foreign languages is removed. I believe the need to learn languages will be stronger than ever, if and when such software becomes available, because there are all kinds of benefits which come from learning a foreign language. The point is being repeatedly affirmed in current research, and it's a pity the opportunity to reaffirm it wasn't taken up here.

Nevertheless, it seems inevitable that automated language translation will pass the point of being an amusing novelty soon, if it hasn't already.

And then what? Will fewer people bother learning foreign languages? Will our lives become even more mediated by machines? While I agree with Crystal's contention that there are real benefits to learning a foreign language, I fear it will be too easy not to do so if Google, or some other company, offers a shortcut that's good enough for the average traveler.

Perhaps even more troubling is the prospect of Google organizing all the world's conversations, in addition to all the world's information. How long until the data trail of translated conversations, not to mention plain old voice queries, draws the interest of law enforcement investigators and attorneys?

Machine translation no doubt will become increasingly capable and valuable in the coming decade. Let's hope it doesn't diminish opportunities for personal interaction or privacy.



InformationWeek has published a report on how telepresence is turning video communications into a near in-person experience. Download the report here (registration required).


Related Reading




Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

InformationWeek encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, InformationWeek moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. InformationWeek further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
T-Shirt Giveaway T-Shirt Giveaway: Each week we're selecting one great comment from our readers. The author of the comment will receive an InformaitonWeek Community t-shirt. So get posting!
Subscribe to RSS

Resource Links