Personal Tech|A Score or More of Languages in Your Pocket
Advertisem*nt
SKIP ADVERTIsem*nT
You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.
Supported by
SKIP ADVERTIsem*nT
In Douglas Adams’s “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” the hero sticks a so-called Babel fish in his ear and can understand everything said to him in any language. Today’s apps for language translation try to accomplish the same thing. While not as accurate or instantaneous, they are nevertheless useful and greatly improved from just a couple of years ago. And you don’t have to put anything slimy in your ear.
The reason these kinds of apps have gotten so much better is simply that more people have been using them, said John Garofolo, a senior adviser at the National Institute of Standards and Technology who has studied and tested the software. The more a translation app is used, the more it learns to statistically make correct associations with sounds, text and meaning.
The latest translation apps incorporate voice-recognition software so you can speak as well as type in the word or phrase you want translated and then get both a text and audio response. While there are a bewildering number of translation apps, most use one of just three voice recognition programs (Google, Microsoft or Nuance) mixed with translation software (either Google or Microsoft) plus the app developer’s own tweaks. An exception is the app Jibbigo, which has its own system, developed by computer scientists at Carnegie Mellon University.
The language apps differ markedly in price, user interface, added features and functionality offline. Accuracy seems to depend on your accent and dialectical proclivities as well as the range of words you use and how noisy the environment is where you say them. Some apps may be better at translating, say, curse words, while others might be better at culinary terms. Some may be super at French, but miserable at Hungarian.
But no matter which app you choose, you can’t use it for long and involved conversations. These apps work only when you speak very slowly and distinctly and in short sentences. Be prepared to rephrase when you get quizzical looks or uncomfortable giggles — as when asking in English for a baby’s “crib” in your hotel room and the app’s French translation intones that you need a “favor” in your hotel room. Mon Dieu!
After testing most of the voice-recognition translation apps available (and listening to more mechanical speech than a healthy person should), I found a few standouts in reliability and usability. The trials occurred over several days, in different noise environments, and involved at least three languages. Here are my picks:
GOOGLE TRANSLATE for iOS and Android: When Google Translate works, it’s fast and accurate. It has a way of seizing up at times, usually in loud places or when you give it a long sentence or multisyllabic word. After a long wait, you might get a message saying “Speech recognition not available.” Also, it’s not particularly good at recognizing proper names or names of cities.
Advertisem*nt
SKIP ADVERTIsem*nT