“General-purpose LLMs are best for translating straight expository prose without much technical or organization-specific vocabulary.”
Full comment
As I explained in a sister comment, it is not possible to rate translation quality objectively, as opinions and positions about what constitutes a good translation vary. But in my tests of reasoning models since the release of o1-preview, they have not seemed as reliable as the straight nonreasoning versions of ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini. The translation process itself usually doesn’t seem to require the kind of multistep thinking those reasoning models can be good at. For more than a year, regular LLMs, when properly prompted, have been able to produce translations that would be indistinguishable from those of some professional translators for some types of translation. General-purpose LLMs are best for translating straight expository prose without much technical or organization-specific vocabulary. Results are mixed for texts containing slang, dialogue, poetry, archaic language, etc.—partly because people’s tastes differ for how such texts should be translated. Because most translators are freelancers, it’s hard to get a handle on what impact LLMs have been having on their workloads overall. I have heard reports from experienced translators who have seen work drop off precipitously and have had to change careers, while others report an increase in their workloads over the past two years. Many translation jobs involve confidential material, and some translators may be hanging onto their jobs because their clients or employers do not allow the use of cloud-based LLMs. That sa