The Printing Press

It is a little-known fact among the Western world that Johannes Gutenberg was not in fact the first to create a printing press. Borrowing from wood-block printing in many Asian cultures, Korean Choe Yun-ui created the first printing press with moveable block characters in the 1200s. However, due to many factors, such as invasion into Korea and the fact that organizing the Chinese characters to print took quite a while, this printing press did not become widespread.

Gutenberg’s printing press, on the other hand, often printed works written in Latin, which is written with far, far fewer letters than there are characters in Chinese. Arranging the type pieces and going through the printing process was markedly easier than in Korea two hundred years earlier, and Gutenberg’s printing press was essential for the increase in literacy in the following century. In our last blog, we mentioned that Martin Luther’s German translation of the Bible was a major turning point in the history of translation; without the printing press, his translation would not have reached even half the people that it did.

The Rosetta Stone

The Rosetta Stone, first discovered in 1799, held a passage that was written three times—twice in two versions of ancient Egyptian, and once in ancient Greek. The passage, written in 196 BC, was key to deciphering Egyptian hieroglyphics, despite so much of the Rosetta Stone being broken and incomplete.

The Nuremberg Trials

The infamous Nuremberg Trials were held to take Nazis to court and to try them for war crimes that took place during World War II. Remarkably, the trials only took ten months to complete, despite the need to translate and interpret the proceedings into numerous languages. This was accomplished by implementing the world’s first simultaneous interpretation program, which likely saved years off of the Trials’ time. Simultaneous interpretation is difficult to learn the skills for, but is commonly used for conferences, such as for the United Nations.

The Internet

With the advent of the internet, the world became even more global than ever. While learning languages and speaking or writing to a language partner regardless of distance was possible with phone calls and letters, the internet sped up those processes to be nearly immediate.

With this, however, came increasing demands for translation and interpretation for global businesses. Translators and interpreters now had to learn how to not only navigate linguistic landscapes, but also digital ones.

Machine Translation

Very recently in the history of translation and interpretation has been the rise in machine translation. Essentially, putting one string from language A into a machine, which would produce that string in language B. This method vastly improves the speed at which translators can do their jobs, but as machines can’t understand language in the way that humans do, translators and proofreaders are necessary to ensure that the final product doesn’t sound unnatural.

Now

While looking back at history, we also look towards the future. In the past, human history has had lots of events that have influenced today’s translators and interpreters. Many events even had an impact on the world as a whole, such as the printing press and the internet. In the future, there will only be even more AI inventions and events that will shape the translation and interpretation sphere. However, one thing we have seen clearly is that language has been highly varied and shaped by human thought and action; in that vein, we in the translation and interpretation industry are still far, far away from being replaced by machines or robots.

A total of 63 people responded to our question, and these 63 responses amount to a total of 4,708 words. Of these 4,708 words, 192 relate to machine/technology/automation/social media/internet, while only 133 relate to humans/people/individuals^[1]. Two thirds (42) were in favor of technology. No one was against technology or had a completely negative outlook on the effects of technological automation^[2].

Some concerns or reservations with technology and automation had to do with humans losing jobs to machines and losing face-to-face interaction. However, 48 respondents (76%) mentioned humans having a role in the automated workplace. Of these 48 respondents, 7 elaborated that automation may replace jobs involving repetitive tasks, but will free up humans to do more important work: customer follow-ups, creative and critical thinking, and research and innovation. On the other hand, nine respondents did not mention humans/people/individuals in their responses, whereas all respondents mentioned technology or automation in one form or another. Moreover, only 19 respondents (30%) mentioned a need for human-to-human interaction.

Five respondents expressed their concerns with automating translation and interpretation services. Four of these five respondents believed that humans should still have a role in providing these services. For example, people will still need to correct the mistakes made by machine translation. Specialized translations and reviews of culturally-related work will require human intervention due to the complexity of human language, thought, and emotion. The overall sentiment was that translators and interpreters will not be replaced by technology, but by translators and interpreters who utilize technology to the best of its capabilities. One of the five respondents expressed concern that pay rates for human translators may decrease, since speed and ease of review may increase significantly through the use of technology.

Overall, more than three fourths of respondents mentioned humans having a role in automated workplaces, including in the translation and interpretation industry. In general, respondents had a positive outlook on the effects of technological automation^[3].

Monterey Language Services is committed to bridging the world’s languages by providing quality, professional and efficient translation & interpretation services in over 175 languages. Please feel free to request a quote from us.

^[1] These statistics were determined through word searches for human*/people/person/individual, and for machine/technolog*/automat*/social media/internet and related words.

^[2] These statistics were determined by categorizing whether a response was generally in favor of technology, and whether it had a positive or negative outlook on the effects of technological automation.

^[3] All other statistics were derived from statements made in the responses.