Human Translation vs. Machine Translation: Evaluating the Role of AI in Modern Translation Practice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36586/Keywords:
Machine translation, AI, post-editing, professional translators, Pre-interpretationAbstract
This exploratory mixed-method study examines whether artificial intelligence (AI) and machine translation (MT) are replacing human translators or serving as productivity tools within professional workflows. Drawing on a literature review, a comparative translation task, and a survey of 49 professional translators across Iraq, the Iraqi diaspora in Europe, and the Middle East. The study finds that AI excels in speed and cost, but continues to underperform in context, idiomaticity, and cultural nuance. Most respondents (88%) favor using MT for first drafts followed by human post-editing, indicating a collaborative rather than substitutive role for AI. The comparative component, translating a single 500-word English passage into Kurdish via Google Translate and a professional translator, corroborates these perceptions. While MT produced fluent output, it failed in dialectal sensitivity and culturally bound expressions. Given the modest sample size and narrow comparative corpus, findings should be interpreted cautiously and viewed as hypothesis-generating. Additionally, the study analyzes a translated excerpt from Barack Obama’s inaugural speech to illustrate the limits of AI in handling rhetorical style, idiomatic nuance, and cultural adaptation. Overall, results support positioning AI as an assistive technology that augments, rather than replaces, human expertise in translation.
References
Academia Open. (2023). Ethics in AI-based translation. Indonesia : UMSIDA
Al Sharairi, R. (2025). Review paper on the evolving role of human translators in the age of AI. Pakistan Journal of Life and Social Sciences, 23 (1), 2672–2679. https://doi.org/10.57239/PJLSS-2025-23.1.00210
Bahdanau, D., Cho, K., & Bengio, Y. (2015). Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2015). https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.0473
Bowker, L. (2020). Machine translation and global research: Towards improved machine translation literacy in the scholarly community. Bingley: Emerald.
Burchardt, A., Macketanz, V., Dehdari, J., Heigold, G., Peter, J.-T., & Williams, P. (2017). A linguistic evaluation of rule-based, statistical, and neural machine translation. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, 108 (1), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1515/pralin-2017-0017
Castilho, S., Moorkens, J., Gaspari, F., Calixto, I., Tinsley, J., & Way, A. (2017). Is neural machine translation the new state of the art? The Journal of Specialised Translation, (27), 68–88. https://doi.org/10.1515/pralin-2017-0013
D’Halleweyn, H., & Vanroy, B. (2022). Beyond words: Challenges of translating emotions with AI. AI & Society, 37(4), 859–873. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01188-y
European Language Industry Survey. (2024). Language service industry trends report. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu
Forcada, M. L., & Sánchez-Martínez, F. (2021). State-of-the-art in machine translation. Newyork: Springer.
Gaspari, F., Toral, A., Naskar, S., & Way, A. (2021). Machine translation in professional practice. Language Resources and Evaluation, 55(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-020-09512-z
Kenny, D. (2021). Translation technologies and the translator’s role. England: Routledge.
Koponen, M. (2016). Is machine translation post-editing worth the effort? A survey of research into post-editing and effort. The Journal of Specialised Translation, (25), 131-148. https://doi.org/10.26034/cm.jostrans.2016.303
Kruger, J. L. (2022). Subtitles in the 2020s: The influence of machine translation. Journal of Audiovisual Translation, 5(1), 207–225. https://doi.org/10.47476/jat.v5i1.2022.195
Massey, G., & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2020). Cognitive approaches to translator training. The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Mellinger, C., D., & Hanson, T. A. (2020). Machine translation and audiovisual media: A new voice in subtitling. England: Routledge.
Moorkens, J., Doherty, S., Kenny, D., & O’Brien, S. (2015). Post-editing effort: A measure of cognitive load? Translation Spaces, 4(2), 301–322.
O’Hagan, M. (2019). The socio-technical turn in translation studies. Translation Spaces, 8 (1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.00001.oha
Presas, M., Cid Leal, P., & Torres Hostench, O. (2016). Machine translation implementation among language service providers in Spain: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Research Design and Statistics in Linguistics and Communication Science, 3(1), 126–144. https://doi.org/10.1558/jrds.30331
Pym, A. (2020). On translator ethics: Principles for mediation between cultures. The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Schaeffer, M., & Carl, M. (2021). Eye-tracking studies of translation and interpreting: Methods and applications. Newyork: Springer.
Toral, A., & Sánchez-Cartagena, V. M. (2017). A multifaceted evaluation of neural versus phrase-based machine translation for nine language directions. Machine Translation, 31 (1–2), 39–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-017-9198-5
Wang, Y. (2023). Artificial intelligence technologies in college English translation teaching. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 52, 1525–1544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-023-09960-5
Wu, Y., Schuster, M., Chen, Z., Le, Q., V., Norouzi, M., Macherey, W., & Dean, J. (2016). Google’s neural machine translation system: Bridging the gap between human and machine translation. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.08144
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of the College of Languages (JCL)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
