Translationese refers to linguistic properties that usually occur in translated texts. Previous works study translationese by framing it as a binary classification between original texts and translated texts. In this paper, we argue that translationese should be graded instead of binary and propose the first measure for translationese -- the translationese-index (T-index), computed from the likelihood ratios of two contrastively fine-tuned language models (LMs). We use synthesized translations and translations in the wild to evaluate T-index's generalizability in cross-domain settings and its validity against human judgments. Our results show that T-index can generalize to unseen genres, authors, and language pairs. Moreover, T-index computed using two 0.5B LMs fine-tuned on only 1-5k pairs of synthetic data can effectively capture translationese, as demonstrated by alignment with human pointwise ratings and pairwise judgments. Additionally, the correlation between T-index and existing machine translation (MT) quality estimation (QE) metrics such as BLEU and COMET is low, suggesting that T-index is not covered by these metrics and can serve as a complementary metric in MT QE.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in machine translation, demonstrating impressive performance across diverse languages. However, translationese, characterized by overly literal and unnatural translations, remains a persistent challenge in LLM-based translation systems. Despite their pre-training on vast corpora of natural utterances, LLMs exhibit translationese errors and generate unexpected unnatural translations, stemming from biases introduced during supervised fine-tuning (SFT). In this work, we systematically evaluate the prevalence of translationese in LLM-generated translations and investigate its roots during supervised training. We introduce methods to mitigate these biases, including polishing golden references and filtering unnatural training instances. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that these approaches significantly reduce translationese while improving translation naturalness, validated by human evaluations and automatic metrics. Our findings highlight the need for training-aware adjustments to optimize LLM translation outputs, paving the way for more fluent and target-language-consistent translations. We release the data and code at https://github.com/yafuly/LLM_Translationese.

The breakthrough of generative large language models (LLMs) that can solve different tasks through chat interaction has led to a significant increase in the use of general benchmarks to assess the quality or performance of these models beyond individual applications. There is also a need for better methods to evaluate and also to compare models due to the ever increasing number of new models published. However, most of the established benchmarks revolve around the English language. This paper analyses the benefits and limitations of current evaluation datasets, focusing on multilingual European benchmarks. We analyse seven multilingual benchmarks and identify four major challenges. Furthermore, we discuss potential solutions to enhance translation quality and mitigate cultural biases, including human-in-the-loop verification and iterative translation ranking. Our analysis highlights the need for culturally aware and rigorously validated benchmarks to assess the reasoning and question-answering capabilities of multilingual LLMs accurately.

Neural machine translation (NMT) systems amplify lexical biases present in their training data, leading to artificially impoverished language in output translations. These language-level characteristics render automatic translations different from text originally written in a language and human translations, which hinders their usefulness in for example creating evaluation datasets. Attempts to increase naturalness in NMT can fall short in terms of content preservation, where increased lexical diversity comes at the cost of translation accuracy. Inspired by the reinforcement learning from human feedback framework, we introduce a novel method that rewards both naturalness and content preservation. We experiment with multiple perspectives to produce more natural translations, aiming at reducing machine and human translationese. We evaluate our method on English-to-Dutch literary translation, and find that our best model produces translations that are lexically richer and exhibit more properties of human-written language, without loss in translation accuracy.

Machine translations are found to be lexically poorer than human translations. The loss of lexical diversity through MT poses an issue in the automatic translation of literature, where it matters not only what is written, but also how it is written. Current methods for increasing lexical diversity in MT are rigid. Yet, as we demonstrate, the degree of lexical diversity can vary considerably across different novels. Thus, rather than aiming for the rigid increase of lexical diversity, we reframe the task as recovering what is lost in the machine translation process. We propose a novel approach that consists of reranking translation candidates with a classifier that distinguishes between original and translated text. We evaluate our approach on 31 English-to-Dutch book translations, and find that, for certain books, our approach retrieves lexical diversity scores that are close to human translation.

This study explores the distinctions between neural machine translation (NMT) and human translation (HT) through the lens of translation relations. It benchmarks HT to assess the translation techniques produced by an NMT system and aims to address three key research questions: the differences in overall translation relations between NMT and HT, how each utilizes non-literal translation techniques, and the variations in factors influencing their use of specific non-literal techniques. The research employs two parallel corpora, each spanning nine genres with the same source texts with one translated by NMT and the other by humans. Translation relations in these corpora are manually annotated on aligned pairs, enabling a comparative analysis that draws on linguistic insights, including semantic and syntactic nuances such as hypernyms and alterations in part-of-speech tagging. The results indicate that NMT relies on literal translation significantly more than HT across genres. While NMT performs comparably to HT in employing syntactic non-literal translation techniques, it falls behind in semantic-level performance.

Translated texts exhibit systematic linguistic differences compared to original texts in the same language, and these differences are referred to as translationese. Translationese has effects on various cross-lingual natural language processing tasks, potentially leading to biased results. In this paper, we explore a novel approach to reduce translationese in translated texts: translation-based style transfer. As there are no parallel human-translated and original data in the same language, we use a self-supervised approach that can learn from comparable (rather than parallel) mono-lingual original and translated data. However, even this self-supervised approach requires some parallel data for validation. We show how we can eliminate the need for parallel validation data by combining the self-supervised loss with an unsupervised loss. This unsupervised loss leverages the original language model loss over the style-transferred output and a semantic similarity loss between the input and style-transferred output. We evaluate our approach in terms of original vs. translationese binary classification in addition to measuring content preservation and target-style fluency. The results show that our approach is able to reduce translationese classifier accuracy to a level of a random classifier after style transfer while adequately preserving the content and fluency in the target original style.

Given a document in a source language, cross-lingual summarization (CLS) aims at generating a concise summary in a different target language. Unlike monolingual summarization (MS), naturally occurring source-language documents paired with target-language summaries are rare. To collect large-scale CLS data, existing datasets typically involve translation in their creation. However, the translated text is distinguished from the text originally written in that language, i.e., translationese. In this paper, we first confirm that different approaches of constructing CLS datasets will lead to different degrees of translationese. Then we systematically investigate how translationese affects CLS model evaluation and performance when it appears in source documents or target summaries. In detail, we find that (1) the translationese in documents or summaries of test sets might lead to the discrepancy between human judgment and automatic evaluation; (2) the translationese in training sets would harm model performance in real-world applications; (3) though machine-translated documents involve translationese, they are very useful for building CLS systems on low-resource languages under specific training strategies. Lastly, we give suggestions for future CLS research including dataset and model developments. We hope that our work could let researchers notice the phenomenon of translationese in CLS and take it into account in the future.

Recent work has shown evidence of 'Clever Hans' behavior in high-performance neural translationese classifiers, where BERT-based classifiers capitalize on spurious correlations, in particular topic information, between data and target classification labels, rather than genuine translationese signals. Translationese signals are subtle (especially for professional translation) and compete with many other signals in the data such as genre, style, author, and, in particular, topic. This raises the general question of how much of the performance of a classifier is really due to spurious correlations in the data versus the signals actually targeted for by the classifier, especially for subtle target signals and in challenging (low resource) data settings. We focus on topic-based spurious correlation and approach the question from two directions: (i) where we have no knowledge about spurious topic information and its distribution in the data, (ii) where we have some indication about the nature of spurious topic correlations. For (i) we develop a measure from first principles capturing alignment of unsupervised topics with target classification labels as an indication of spurious topic information in the data. We show that our measure is the same as purity in clustering and propose a 'topic floor' (as in a 'noise floor') for classification. For (ii) we investigate masking of known spurious topic carriers in classification. Both (i) and (ii) contribute to quantifying and (ii) to mitigating spurious correlations.

Large language models have shown surprising performances in understanding instructions and performing natural language tasks. In this paper, we propose iterative translation refinement to leverage the power of large language models for more natural translation and post-editing. We show that by simply involving a large language model in an iterative process, the output quality improves beyond mere translation. Extensive test scenarios with GPT-3.5 reveal that although iterations reduce string-based metric scores, neural metrics indicate comparable if not improved translation quality. Further, human evaluations demonstrate that our method effectively reduces translationese compared to initial GPT translations and even human references, especially for into-English directions. Ablation studies underscore the importance of anchoring the refinement process to the source input and a reasonable initial translation.