This study evaluates the performance of DeepL as an AI-based translation engine, in translating German Easy Language Texts into Italian. The evaluation is based on a corpus of 26 German fact sheets and their Italian human translations. The results show that DeepL’s translations exhibit significant errors in terminology, accuracy, and language conventions. The machine-translated texts often lack consistency in terminology, and the use of technical or unfamiliar words is not adapted to the difficulty level of the target language. Furthermore, the translations tend to normalize the texts towards standard administrative language, making them less accessible. The study highlights the need for human post-editing to ensure both accuracy and suitability of the translated texts. The findings of this study will help identify where to prioritize post-editing efforts and facilitate comparisons with the results obtained from other artificial intelligence tools used for interlingual translation of Easy Language texts in the administrative domain.

In this paper, we describe results of a study on evaluation of intralingual machine translation. The study focuses on machine translations of medical texts into Plain German. The automatically simplified texts were compared with manually simplified texts (i.e., simplified by human experts) as well as with the underlying, unsimplified source texts. We analyse the quality of the translations based on different criteria, such as correctness, readability, and syntactic complexity. The study revealed that the machine translations were easier to read than the source texts, but contained a higher number of complex syntactic relations than the human translations. Furthermore, we identified various types of mistakes. These included not only grammatical mistakes but also content-related mistakes that resulted, for example, from mistranslations of grammatical structures, ambiguous words or numbers, omissions of relevant prefixes or negation, and incorrect explanations of technical terms.

In this paper, we describe results of a study on evaluation of intralingual machine translation. The study focuses on machine translations of medical texts into Plain German. The automatically simplified texts were compared with manually simplified texts (i.e., simplified by human experts) as well as with the underlying, unsimplified source texts. We analyse the quality of outputs from three models based on different criteria, such as correctness, readability, and syntactic complexity. We compare the outputs of the three models under analysis between each other, as well as with the existing human translations. The study revealed that system performance depends on the evaluation criteria used and that only one of the three models showed strong similarities to the human translations. Furthermore, we identified various types of errors in all three models. These included not only grammatical mistakes and misspellings, but also incorrect explanations of technical terms and false statements, which in turn led to serious content-related mistakes.

This study sets out to investigate the feasibility of using ChatGPT to translate citizen-oriented administrative texts into German Easy Language, a simplified, rule-based language variety that is adapted to the needs of people with reading impairments. We use ChatGPT to translate selected texts from websites of German public authorities using two strategies, i.e. linguistic and holistic. We analyse the quality of the generated texts based on different criteria, such as correctness, readability, and syntactic complexity. The results indicated that the generated texts are easier than the standard texts, but that they still do not fully meet the established Easy Language standards. Additionally, the content is not always rendered correctly.