Abstract

The author argues that translation, whether literary or technical, is a creative art, not a mechanical process, and machines have failed to give useful translations of serious texts for this reason. The conventional distinctions between `literary' and `technical' translation are misleading and perhaps false. Literal or word-for-word translations are not translations at all and their use should be discouraged. Translation requires a full command of both languages and some understanding of the subject. Quality is difficult for a layman to judge, but idiomatic English (or whatever the target language is) is one good sign, and there are others.