Book Reviews
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology
THE ROUTLEDGE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF TRANSLATION TECHNOLOGY The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology provides a state-of-the art survey of the field of computer-assisted translation. It is the first definitive reference to provide a comprehensive overview of the general, regional and topical aspects of this increasingly significant area of study. The Encyclopedia is divided into three parts: • Part One presents general issues in translation technology, such as its history and development, translator training and various aspects of machine translation, including a valuable case study of its teaching at a major university. • Part Two discusses national and regional developments in translation technology, offering contributions covering the crucial territories of China, Canada, France, Hong Kong, Japan, South Africa, Taiwan, the Netherlands and Belgium, the United Kingdom and the United States. • Part Three evaluates specific matters in translation technology, with entries focused on subjects such as alignment, bitext, computational lexicography, corpus, editing, online translation, subtitling and technology and translation management systems. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology draws on the expertise of over 50 contributors from around the world and an international panel of consultant editors to provide a selection of articles on the most pertinent topics in the discipline. All the articles are self-contained, extensively cross-referenced, and include useful and up-to-date references and information for further reading. It will be an invaluable reference work for anyone with a professional or academic interest in the subject. Chan Sin-wai is Professor in the Department of Translation at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. His research interests include computer translation, translation studies and lexicography. -
A Telescope for the Mind? Willard Mccarty (
Debates in the Digital Humanities, ed. Matthew K. Gold. Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2012. A telescope for the mind? Willard McCarty (www.mccarty.org.uk As to those for whom to work hard, to begin and begin again, to attempt and be mistaken, to go back and rework everything from top to bottom, and still find reason to hesitate from one step to the next-- as to those, in short, for whom to work in the midst of uncertainty and apprehension is tantamount to failure, all I can say is that clearly we are not from the same planet. --Michel Foucault, History of Sexuality 2 The phrase in my title is Margaret Masterman's; the question-mark is mine. Writing in 1962 for Freeing the Mind, a series in the Times Literary Supplement,1 she used the phrase to suggest computing’s potential to transform our conception of the human world just as in the 17th Century the optical telescope set in motion a fundamental rethink of our relation to the physical one. The question-mark denotes my own and others’ anxious interrogation of research in the digital humanities for signs that her vision, or something like it, is being realised, or that demonstrable progress has been made. This interrogation for “evidence of value”--a trendy phrase we seem recently to have picked up--is actually nothing new; it began in the professional literature during the 1960s and then became a sporadic feature of our discourse that persists to this day.2 I will return to present worries shortly. -
Front Matter
Cambridge University Press 0521454891 - Language, Cohesion and Form Margaret Masterman and Yorick Wilks Frontmatter More information Language, Cohesion and Form Margaret Masterman was a pioneer in the field of computational linguis- tics. Working in the earliest days of language processing by computer, she believed that meaning, not grammar, was the key to understanding languages, and that machines could determine the meaning of sentences. She was able, even on simple machines, to undertake sophisticated experiments in machine translation, and carried out important work on the use of semantic codings and thesauri to determine the meaning structure of text. This volume brings together Masterman’s groundbreak- ing papers for the first time. Through his insightful commentaries, Yorick Wilks argues that Masterman came close to developing a computational theory of language meaning based on the ideas of Wittgenstein, and shows the importance of her work in the philosophy of science and the nature of iconic languages. Of key interest in computational linguistics and artificial intelligence, this book will remind scholars of Masterman’s significant contribution to the field. Permission to publish Margaret Masterman’s work was granted to Yorick Wilks by the Cambridge Language Research Unit. YORICK WILKS is Professor in the Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield, and Director of ILASH, the Institute of Language, Speech and Hearing. A leading scholar in the field of compu- tational linguistics, he has published numerous articles and sixbooks in the area of artificial intelligence, the most recent being Electric Words: Dictionaries, Computers and Meanings (with Brian Slator and Louise Guthrie, 1996). He designed CONVERSE, the dialogue system that won the Loebner prize in New York in 1998. -
Wittgenstein in the Machine
Wittgenstein in the Machine Lydia H. Liu Computing is too important to be left to men. —Karen Spärck Jones Can a machine have toothache? There are some questions we should never put to Siri and other talking chatbots, or we will come away feeling underwhelmed by the machine’s much-touted intelligence. This could be one of them. The machine will — — not understand the question at least, not in the foreseeable future al- though humans would not fare much better trying to make sense of it ei- ther. The question bears the hallmarks of philosophical surrealism that 1 identify the author as Ludwig Wittgenstein. It is as if the philosopher had ’ “ ” anticipated Alan Turing s classic provocation Can machines think? and 2 decided to parody him. Unlike the Turing question, Wittgenstein’s parody avant la lettre re- quires no reply, has elicited none, and leads only to further questions: What is the point of his parody? Is it to convey his misgivings about the claims of machine cognition? If that were true, why single out “tooth- ”— — ache something machines can do happily without when he could have evoked nobler human aptitudes as do most anthropocentric critics when My residency at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton in 2018–2019 helped shape the original idea for this essay. I thank the School of Historical Studies, in particular, for their generous support and facilitation of many cross-disciplinary conversations at IAS that led to my new research. 1. See Ludwig Wittgenstein, Preliminary Studies for the “Philosophical Investigations”: Gener- ally Known as The Blue and Brown Books (New York, 1969), p.