Search the AI Handbook

4. Case Study 4: Translation of Text

Table of Contents

In this section, we delve into two case studies that explore the efficacy of AI platforms in translating content into languages other than English. As global markets become increasingly interconnected, the ability to effectively communicate across linguistic barriers becomes paramount for successful advertising strategies. This case study evaluates ChatGPT 44.0, Bard, and Claude AI, examining their accuracy, cultural sensitivity, and applicability in the realm of advertising. First, we examine how these three AI platforms translate the ARF’s Privacy Report into German, French, Spanish, Hindi, Mandarin Chinese, and Hebrew. Second, we examine how the same AI platforms translate one of Erwin Ephron’s newsletters into German, French, Spanish, Hindi, Mandarin Chinese, and Hebrew. While the privacy report translations might yield results that are related to the type of text, i.e., a concise summary of survey findings, translation of Ephron’s newsletters (ironic, humorous, more nuanced, very American-centered) might yield different results. Comparing the two cases studies, we seek to provide valuable insights into how AI can be leveraged to overcome language barriers.

ARF Privacy Report:

German #

  • All three AI platforms did extremely well, with consistent translations across the platforms: same headlines, similar language.
  • Translation is very literal across all three platforms.
  • Interestingly, all three platforms similarly translated “The ARF Privacy Report,” as “The ARF Data Protection Report,” which is how a German person of any position would phrase it.
  • Notably, ChaptGPT and Claude AI made the same error in the following sentence: “Respondents are more consistent with the way they perceive what search engines and social media sites do with their data; their perception of government sites is more varied.” Instead of translating “more consistent,” the AIs translated “consistencies.” This may, however, be related to the slightly confusing English text.
  • Bard did not translate the last paragraph and misplaced one headline. Bard also incorrectly translated the following: “Across all institutions (including scientists, advertising, TV news, etc.), trust has increased from 2022” as “Since 2022, trust in all institutions (including scientists, advertising, TV news, etc.) has increased.”

Key takeaways:

  • This exercise, which involved summarizing survey findings through multiple brief sentences and other summarization techniques, may have led to the infrequent error observed. However, it’s important to note that this approach might not be applicable to all research reports. The absence of slang, irony, or exaggerated language in this context suggests that these elements could pose additional challenges in different types of research documentation.
  • We can hypothesize that the clearer and possibly simpler the original content, the lower the probability of errors in the outcome.
  • Additionally, it seems that the quality of translation improves with the availability of more reference material in the target language. For instance, there is likely a wealth of information on German perspectives regarding privacy and data protection.
  • Consequently, it may well be that the accuracy observed in these German translations cannot be reliably extended to translations into other languages.

French #

  • French translation from English in Bard, Claude AI and ChatGPT 4 isn’t 100% grammatically perfect, and varies somewhat between the three platforms. However, their near-perfect accuracy is suitable for French readers in terms of overall comprehension.
  • Despite a few mishaps, ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI fared best in terms of capturing the nuances and idiomatic expressions in French.
  • Bard demonstrated consistent use of modern terminology.
  • Notably, the choice of “courier électronique” or “messagerie électronique” over the official term “e-mail” by all three platforms is an interesting deviation from standard French terminology.

ChatGPT 4

  • Word Choice: Exhibited a mix of literal and idiomatic translations. For example, its choice of “Concernant la vie privée” was more idiomatic than Bard and Claude AI’s “Sur la confidentialité.”
  • Sentence Structure: Demonstrated a better grasp of nuance in sentence structuring compared to Bard and Claude AI, as seen in the phrase “en vue d’une réanalyse,” translated from “All previous years of survey data are available to members for reanalysis.”
  • Grammatical Errors: Occasionally made formal grammatical errors, such as omitting ‘ne’ in the subjunctive when translating the sentence “…they were concerned about data being used for purposes other than advertising” into “qu’ils craignaient que les données NE soient utilisées.”
  • Interpretation: ChatGPT 4 sometimes introduced interpretation issues, as in the case of incorrectly translating “When asked about recent privacy changes…” as asking about people’s point of view (“Lorsqu’on a demandé leur avis sur…”).

Bard

  • Word Choice: Demonstrated consistent use of modern terminology.
  • Literal vs. Nuanced Translations: Tended to be more literal. For example, used “SmartTV” in line with contemporary usage.
  • Sentence Structure: In some instances, the translations were straightforward and lacked contextual depth, as seen in the translation of “pour réanalyse” for the sentence “All previous years of survey data are available to members for reanalysis.” ChatGPT 4’s “en vue d’une réanalyse” was more nuanced as in ‘in case of reanalysis’).
  • Grammatical Errors: Made similar errors to Claude AI in translating certain sentences, like incorrectly comparing respondents to previous years.
  • Interpretation: Bard did not deviate significantly from the original text’s intent.

Claude AI

  • Word Choice: Varied in capturing idiomatic expressions. For instance, used “répandu” for
    “prevalent,” which is more natural in French.
  • Literal vs. Nuanced Translations: Showed a mix of literal and nuanced translations. For example, the translation of “feeling more informed” as “mieux informés” captures nuances better than its counterparts.
  • Sentence Structure: Similar to Bard in some respects, such as the straightforward translation of “pour réanalyse.”
  • Grammatical Errors: Made similar errors to Bard in sentence comparison structure.
  • Interpretation: Occasionally, Claude AI’s translations were grammatically awkward or altered the meaning of the original text, as seen in the translation of “When asked about recent privacy changes…” into “Lorsqu’on eur a demandé des changements récents” (which translates to “when we asked them recent changes”).

Key takeaways:

  • Each platform shows its unique strengths and weaknesses in translating English to French. While none is perfect, their translations are generally effective for comprehension, and maintain a high level of accuracy, making them suitable for French readers in terms of overall comprehension.
  • ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI tend to fare better in capturing nuances and idiomatic expressions in French, often providing translations that are more aligned with the natural flow of the language. Bard, while sometimes less nuanced, is noted for its consistent use of modern terminology.
  • Grammatical Precision: ChatGPT 4, while generally nuanced, sometimes makes formal grammatical errors, contrasting with Bard and Claude AI’s more literal but grammatically aligned translations.
  • All three platforms interestingly deviate from standard French terminology, such as using “courier électronique” or “messagerie électronique” instead of the official term “e-mail”.

For a more detailed review of the LLM responses see.

Spanish #

ChatGPT 4
ChatGPT 4 displayed a balanced approach in translation, navigating between being literal and providing nuanced translations. However, this balance sometimes led to variations in the smoothness and accuracy of its translations.

Examples:

  1. Word Choice/Structural Issues:
    • Correctly included ‘la’ before ‘primavera’.
    • Used “Hallazgos” for ‘findings.’
    • Omitted the article “la” in headers, opting for a more direct approach.
    • Came closest in translating “In People Like Me, We Trust”.
    • Used “género” for ‘gender.’
    • Used “telefonos inteligentes” for ‘smartphone’ and “Segmentación” for ‘targeting’.
  2. Word Choice (Correct vs. Literal; Smooth vs. Clunky):
    • Opted for a clunkier “se llevó a cabo” for ‘was conducted’.
    • Chose a literal translation for “based on” and “for reanalysis”.
    • Most accurate in sections like “On Targeting”.
    • Less nuanced in translating “people most commonly indicated”.

Bard

Bard often leaned towards more literal translations, closely following the source language structure, which sometimes impacted the fluency and contextual accuracy of its translations. Bard demonstrated contextually appropriate term choices in some instances, like using “sexo” for ‘gender’, indicating a nuanced understanding of certain terms. However, its adherence to literal translations led to variations in the overall smoothness and authenticity of the translated text.

Examples:

  1. Word Choice/Structural Issues:
    • Omitted ‘la’ before ‘primavera’ in the introductory paragraph.
    • Used “Hallazgos” for ‘findings.’
    • Followed the literal “Sobre la” structure for headers like “On Privacy” and “On
      Targeting.”
    • Less inventive in translating “In People Like Me, We Trust”, sticking close to the English
      structure.
    • Used “sexo” for ‘gender,’ which is contextually more accurate.
    • Used “telefonos inteligentes” for ‘smartphone’ and “Segmentación” for ‘targeting.’
  2. Word Choice (Correct vs. Literal; Smooth vs. Clunky):
    • Used “se realizó” for ‘was conducted,’ which is smoother.
    • Chose a literal translation for “based on” and “for reanalysis.”
    • Varied translations in sections like “On Targeting.”
    • Chose a more nuanced translation for “people most commonly indicated.”

Claude AI

Claude AI exhibited a propensity for accurate and nuanced translations, especially in complex sentences. This approach was evident in its choice of words like “según la” for ‘based on,’ which were more contextually fitting than literal translations. However, Claude AI occasionally opted for more literal translations in certain terms, such as using ‘resultados’ for ‘findings.’ Despite this, Claude AI’s translations generally maintained a good balance between being literal and providing depth, demonstrating an understanding of subtleties in language. Claude AI’s weakness was apparent in some awkward translations, like its rendition of phrases related to ad targeting, which could disrupt the natural flow of the translated text.

Examples:

  1. Word Choice/Structural Issues:
    • Also omitted ‘la’ before ‘primavera.’
    • Chose ‘resultados’ for ‘findings,’ which is more literal.
    • Followed the literal “Sobre la” structure in headers.
    • Provided an accurate but lengthy translation for “In People Like Me, We Trust.”
    • Used “género” for ‘gender,’ which is less accurate.
    • Opted for “televisores inteligentes” for ‘smartphone’ and directly used “Targeting”
  2. Word Choice (Correct vs. Literal; Smooth vs. Clunky):
    • Chose “según la” for ‘based on,’ which is more accurate.
    • Opted for smoother translations in the introductory paragraph and other sections.
    • More nuanced in translating “people most commonly indicated.”

Key Takeaways:

  • Each platform has its strengths and weaknesses: Bard in literal translations, Claude AI in nuanced translations, and ChatGPT 4 in balancing between the two with occasional clunkiness.
  • Bard: Tends to stick closer to the source language structure, making its translations
    more literal at times. It is contextually more accurate in some term choices like “sexo” for
    gender.
  • Claude AI: Shows a tendency towards more accurate and nuanced translations, especially in complex sentences. However, it sometimes opts for more literal translations in terms like ‘findings.’
  • ChatGPT 4: Demonstrates a balance between literal and nuanced translation, but can be clunky in some phrases. It stands out in handling complex sentences and omitting unnecessary articles for a more direct approach.

Hindi #

  • In some cases, Bard and Claude AI produced identical translations, suggesting either a high degree of accuracy or a potential limitation in translation variability.
  • Bard demonstrated superior accuracy in certain translations, such as correctly translating the phrase “The ARF has conducted its sixth annual Privacy Study” and using the Hindi word for “Device” instead of the English term. This indicates Bard’s effectiveness in maintaining linguistic authenticity while translating into Hindi.
  • Literal vs. Contextual Translation: ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI, in some instances, relied on direct translations (e.g., using “Device” in Hindi), which might not resonate as well with native Hindi speakers who would expect a more localized term.
  • Performance Comparison: Both ChatGPT 4 and Bard performed similarly and were generally better than Claude AI in terms of translation quality, indicating their effectiveness in translating complex texts into Hindi.
  • Translation of Numbers: Bard’s ability to translate numbers into Hindi in specific contexts shows a higher level of attention to detail.

ChatGPT 4

  • Introduction Translation: ChatGPT 4 translated the introduction well but inaccurately translated “The ARF has conducted its sixth annual Privacy Study.”
  • Accuracy in Terms: ChatGPT 4 correctly translated terms like “Median” and “opt-in.”
  • Performance Comparison: ChatGPT 4’s overall translation quality was adequate, excelling in certain areas.
  • Specific Translations: ChatGPT 4 performed better in translating certain phrases like “What happens to your data?”

Bard

  • Introduction Translation: Bard translated the introduction well but failed to recognize that “U.S” and America are synonymous, not using the Hindi word for “U.S.”
  • Accurate Translation: Notably accurate was Bard’s translation of “The ARF has conducted its sixth annual Privacy Study.”
  • Numbers Translation: Bard occasionally translated numbers into Hindi, exemplified in the smartphone usage section.
  • Word Usage: Some words, like “relationship,” were contextually misplaced in the translation.
  • Device Translation: Bard accurately used the Hindi word for “Device” as opposed to English, showing a good grasp of context.
  • Sentence Structure: Differing from the original English order, Bard re-arranged phrases in a way that enhanced the translation.
  • Human-like Quality: Some translations were on par with human translators in terms of
    quality and understanding of nuances.
  • Minor Errors: There were small mistakes, like translating “Average” instead of “Median.”
  • Summary Tendency: Bard tended to use traditional Hindi words more suited to formal Hindi literature than everyday use.

Claude AI

    Introduction Translation: Claude AI effectively translated the introduction and accurately
    used the Hindi word for “U.S.”
  • Literal Translation: Claude AI’s translations were more literal, maintaining the original
    order but sometimes affecting the natural Hindi flow.
  • Cohort Translation: Unlike Bard and ChatGPT 4, Claude AI did not translate certain
    phrases, like “cohorts.”
  • Accuracy and Satisfaction: Some phrases were translated with complete accuracy,
    providing high satisfaction in their Hindi rendition.

Key insights:

  • The performance of these translation tools varies depending on the context and the specific demands of the text being translated.
  • Bard generally outperformed Claude AI in Hindi translation accuracy.
  • The use of traditional Hindi words by Bard and ChatGPT 4 might be difficult for the younger generation but appreciated by formally educated Hindi speakers.
  • Language translation from English to Hindi where cultural nuances, audience preferences, and the balance between traditional and modern language use play significant roles is particularly complex.

Mandarin Chinese #

In the translations to Mandarin Chinese by all three AI platforms, the approach was highly literal. Each model strictly adhered to the original sentence structures and phrases, without adapting them for better grammatical flow or tonal consistency in Mandarin. This resulted in translations that, while understandable, lacked the fluidity and nuance necessary for effective communication. Consequently, the outputs from all three platforms are not ready for direct
use with Mandarin-speaking audiences without further refinement.

Despite the similarities, Claude AI slightly edged out in performance due to its proficiency in translating complex advertising and marketing terminology while maintaining the report’s overall tone. However, the quality gap between Claude AI and the other two models was relatively narrow in this instance.

ChatGPT 4

  • Unlike the other models, ChatGPT 4 displayed sections of 1-2 sentences in English, followed by the Chinese translation (the other models only returned the Chinese version of the text). This made it more seamless to compare the input and output.
  • ChatGPT 4’s translation capabilities were intermediate in their performance.
  • Literal Translation: ChatGPT 4 used extremely literal translations.
  • Preservation of Tone: ChatGPT 4 Displayed a slightly better ability to preserve the academic tone, making sentences somewhat more readable than Bard’s.

Examples:

  • ChatGPT 4’s translation of “Median daily Smart TV usage” was word-for-word, not reflecting the natural phrasing in Mandarin.
  • In the phrase “The percentage of people willing to share their data with marketers,” ChatGPT 4 translates “marketers” to a word more closely meaning “salespeople.”
  • ChatGPT 4 directly translates each of the two words in the phrase “Perhaps unsurprisingly” – the result is nonsensical in Chinese.
  • In the sentence “Generally, tolerance for sharing data decreases with age,” ChatGPT 4 uses a phrase for “generally” that is fairly colloquial and used in everyday speech, rather in academic writing.

Bard

  • Literal Translation: Bard struggled with literal translations, consistently preserving the original structure of sentences and phrases.
  • Passive Voice: Bard’s translations maintained the passive voice, which is uncommon in Mandarin, especially in formal writing. This resulted in confusing translations for Mandarin speakers unfamiliar with English grammatical structures.
  • Overall Readability: The translation by Bard did not read fluidly and was challenging to understand due to the direct word-for-word approach.

Examples:

  • In the phrase “‘sharing data’ involves data being sold and sent to other parties,” Bard directly translates both the words “share” and “data,” neither of which are correct for the context. Bard uses a word for “share” that is usually used to describe people enjoying something together (i.e., food), and the word used for “data” is more commonly used in the context of statistics and finance (a closer word would have meant something closer to “information” rather than “data”).
  • Bard translates word-for-word the section header “In People Like Me, We Trust,” a phrase that does not exist in Chinese, rendering the result nonsensical.
  • Bard translates the section header “What happens to your data?” into a much more colloquial exclamation, loosely meaning “What’s up with your data?”

Claude AI

  • Sophisticated Translation: Claude AI displayed the most advanced translation capabilities.
  • Technical Language: Claude AI excelled in dealing with technical terms, translating them accurately even when they weren’t explicitly mentioned in the original text.
  • Tone Replication: Claude AI was mostly successful in replicating the tone of the original report, with fewer instances of colloquial language or awkward phrasing.
  • Contextual Understanding: Claude AI demonstrated a strong ability to identify marketing terms by their context and return the correct translation.

Examples:

  • When translating the word “campaign” (in the context of a marketing campaign), Claude AI incorrectly uses the Chinese word for “event” or “activity.”
  • Claude AI uses a more colloquial term for “interestingly” in the sentence: “Interestingly, heavy usage declined across the board for all devices.” Rather than use a term that highlights that this data point is unexpected or notable, Claude AI uses a phrase loosely translating to “What’s weird is that…”
  • Claude AI translated “The ARF” into “The American advertising research nonprofit.”
  • Claude AI was also able to correctly identify marketing terms by their context and return the correct translation, such as for the terms “cookie” and “segment.”

Key Takeaways:

  • Literal Approach: All three AI models primarily utilized a literal translation approach, resulting in Mandarin translations that were grammatically awkward and difficult for Mandarin speakers to fully understand.
  • Preservation of Tone: Claude AI was most effective in preserving the overall tone of the original text and dealing with technical language, making it the strongest translator among the three.
  • Readability: Bard’s translations were the most challenging to understand due to a rigid adherence to the original sentence structure, which is often incompatible with Mandarin syntax.
  • Balanced Performance: ChatGPT 4 offered a balance between the two, preserving the academic tone slightly better than Bard but not as effectively as Claude AI.
  • Final Product Quality: The translations by all three models would require significant refinement before being suitable for sharing with Mandarin-speaking audiences, as none of them produced a final product that was entirely grammatically fluid or tonally consistent with the original text.

Hebrew #

ChatGPT 4

  • Literal Translation: ChatGPT 4 often translated the text literally from English to Hebrew, which sometimes resulted in awkward or unclear sentences.
  • Technical Terms: Demonstrated a decent understanding of technical terms but occasionally missed the nuances.
  • Phrase and Sentence Structure: Some translations were overly direct, lacking the natural flow of Hebrew language.

Examples:

  • For the terms “quotas” and “cohorts” ChatGPT 4 translated into the same word in Hebrew, instead of using the Hebrew term for this word. Although this is a common practice for some words, this is not the case for these specific terms.
  • “More informed” was translated “a higher sense of awareness.”
  • “Median” was translated “average.”
  • “Targeting” was translated into gibberish, although there is a commonly used term in Hebrew.

Bard

  • Accurate translation for first paragraph of text.
  • However, for second prompt, responded with the following: I can’t translate text to Hebrew because I am a large language model, also known as a conversational AI or chatbot trained to be informative and comprehensive. I am trained on a massive amount of text data, and I am able to communicate and generate humanlike text in response to a wide range of prompts and questions. For example, I can provide summaries of factual topics or create stories. However, I am not able to translate languages. If you would like to translate text to Hebrew, you can use a translation tool or service.
  • When prompted once again, responded in Hebrew to repeat previous claim that it is not capable of translating languages and recommends using a dedicated translation tool or service for such needs.

Claude AI

  • Sophisticated Translation: Claude AI’s translations were more sophisticated and closer to the natural flow of Hebrew.
  • Technical Language: Showed proficiency in translating technical terms and complex phrases.
  • Contextual Understanding: Better at understanding the context and providing translations that fit the Hebrew language style.

Examples:

  • Marketers was translated “salespeople.”
  • “Cookies” was literally translated into “cookies,” instead of the correct data-related term.
  • “Informed” was translated “awareness.”
  • “interests” was translated into “matters.”

Key Takeaways:

  • Overall Approach: ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI predominantly used a literal translation approach, which sometimes led to translations that were grammatically awkward or unclear in Hebrew.
  • Claude AI was generally more effective in delivering translations that were contextually appropriate and stylistically closer to natural Hebrew.
  • None of the translations were perfect, indicating that any direct use for a Hebrew-speaking audience would require further editing and refinement to ensure clarity and natural flow.

The Flying Account Planner. (February 2002)

In this newsletter, Ephron reflects on the evolution of the strategic planning role within advertising agencies. The newsletter credits Stanley Pollitt of Boase Massimi Pollitt in the UK for revolutionizing the strategic planner role. Before Pollitt, strategic planning was a shared task among agency brand teams. Pollitt’s innovation was to designate a dedicated role for it, elevating its significance and ensuring a consumer-oriented brand plan. This strategic planner, co-equal with account management and creative teams, is portrayed as the consumer’s representative, brand’s champion and the communication plan’s architect. However, the newsletter points out an inherent challenge: this model is rooted in the full-service agency paradigm, which may be outdated given the rise of specialized media agencies and the changing advertising landscape.

German #

  • All three AI platforms performed adequately, but there is room for improvement.
  • It is hard to determine which of the platforms performed best. One platform made a factual translation error but was otherwise accurate. Optimally, we would combine the three versions to receive the best translation.
  • Main errors stemmed from unclear or obscure formulations and the use of technical terms in the original content.
  • Overall, the AI’s performance is impressive considering Erwin’s complex prose, but such translations require expert review for style and accuracy based on a deep understanding of the German and US TV industries.
  • In general, the translations were not as witty and elegant as Erwin’s prose, and they sometimes appeared too literal.
  • Notably, each of the AIs employed distinct terminology for the term ‘Account Planner.’ It is hard to decide which is most suitable.
  • Interestingly, despite Erwin’s use of “kaput,” which originates from German “kaputt,” none of the AIs kept the German term, opting instead for various translations.

ChatGPT 4

    This platform made one inaccurate translation that resulted in an error. In general, the translation tends to be overly literal. This does not necessarily result in mistakes, yet in language that is awkward and inelegant.

Examples:

  • In the sentence “What Pollitt did that was revolutionary… He focused agencies on the primary importance of developing a consumer-oriented brand plan…” ChatGPT 4 translated “the primary importance” as “primäre Bedeutung,” which is overly literal and would perhaps be better translated “wichtigste Aufgabe, die” which is “the most important task.”
  • In the sentence “the embroidered function…” ChatGPT 4 translated “embroidered” literally to “bestickte.”
  • In the sentence “The clinker in account planning is the rise of the media agency as the brand’s other marketing partner,“ ChatGPT 4 literally translated “clinker” as “Der Knackpunkt,” a rarely used German word. A better translation could be “der Haken,” which is the obstacle or the problem.
  • In the sentence “So in a strange twist the media agency may become the seat of account planning simply because creative is too important not to be able to fire,” ChatGPT 4 mistakenly translated “um nicht feuern zu können,” which is the opposite of what was intended, “Creative is too important not to have the ability to fire.“ The correct translation would be “um nicht gefeuert werden zu können,” which translates “to avoid being fired.”

Bard

  • Bard’s translations seem to better capture Erwin’s style and tone, using some colloquial and everyday language.
  • Still, in general, these translations also tend to be overly literal, resulting in some awkward language.

Examples:

  • For the headline, “The Flying Account Planner” Bard used “Kundenbetreuer,” which translates as “client caretaker.” This is an overly broad and general term. In this case, a more literal translation “Kontoplaner” would have been more appropriate.
  • In the sentence, “The late Stanley Pollitt, a brilliant advertising man at Boase Massimi Pollitt in the UK…“Bard translated “Werbeprofi,” which is an colloquial term for advertising expert, consistent with Erwin’s style.
  • In the sentence “He focused agencies on the primary importance of developing a consumer oriented brand plan by putting a researcher in charge of doing it and made that person co-equal with account management and creative“Bard literally translated “creative” as “Kreation.” A more appropriate term in this context would have been “Kreativabteilung” which translates “creative department.” This literal translation of Erwin’s short-cut expression “creative” appears throughout this translation.

Claude AI

  • Claude AI’s translations are oftentimes literal, resulting in awkward sentences.
  • At times, when deviating from literal translations, Claude AI provided excellent translations, outperforming the other two AIs.
  • Claude AI was inconsistent, using different terms for “the account planner” in headline and throughout the text.

Examples:

  • In the sentence “…since agencies could make fair claim to the strategy thing before Stanley,” Claude AI translated “strategy thing” with “die Strategiesache,” which translates “startegy matter.” A better translation could have been “Strategiethema,” which translates “strategy topic.”
  • In the sentence ”It sounds like a hi-powered way to create advertising until you realize it’s a full-service agency concept at a time when full-service agencies are kaput,” Claude AI went a step too far, with the translation “in the full service agency they don‘t exist anymore.”
  • In the sentence “agencies will have to rebundle around a new concept of creative management” “rebundle” was literally translated whereas it may have been better to translate “to group” (“gruppieren”).
  • In the sentence “The supreme importance of creative means advertisers need choice. But no agency provides choice, only the illusion,” Claude AI translated the first “choice” as “Wahlmöglichkeiten” which translates “possibility of choice.” This is a deviation from literal translation that is more elegant.

Key takeaways:

  • In terms of performance assessment, all three AI platforms showed adequate performance but need to be reviewed. Determining the best performer is challenging; ideally, a combination of all three versions would yield the best translation.
  • Translation challenges are related to the specialized technical terms and complex formulations in the original content.
  • These insights reflect the varied capabilities and limitations of each AI platform in handling complex translation tasks, especially when dealing with stylistically unique and industry-specific content.

French #

Translating Ephron’s witty, idiomatic prose posed challenges in French due to the complexity of idiomatic expressions, which varied in translation. For instance, the word “clinker” yielded different results across platforms: Claude AI came closest with “l’accroc” (which means “hitch” or “snag”), ChatGPT 4 opted for an elegant “le point délicat.” Bard was the least ambitious with “le problème.”

Industry-specific terms like “creative” that were used in different contexts also resulted in diverse interpretations. For example, in the sentence “the account planner needs to sit with creative,” all platforms correctly translated it. However, in more nuanced sentences like “Creative loses accounts; media doesn’t,” Claude AI’s translation was the most accurate and idiomatic. For “creative agency,” Claude AI correctly translated it as “agence de creation,” while Bard and ChatGPT 4 were incorrect with “agence de créativité” and “agence créative,” respectively. In describing personnel as “creatives,” there’s no direct French equivalent, but Claude AI came closest in various contexts. The variance between translations showcases the complexity and variability in translating industry-specific jargon like “creative” across different AI platforms.

As an example of awkward sentences resulting in awkward translations, consider the sentence “With media separated from creative, where you put the account planner is important.” This posed a translation challenge for all three AI platforms, translating “where” as “l’endroit,” which directly means “the place” or “location.” A more sophisticated and contextually appropriate French phrase would be “là où vous placez,” which better captures the intended nuance of “where you put” in this context.

Overall, it seems ChatGPT 4 bested the other two platforms, in terms of offering fewer literal translations, suggesting accurate phrasing and word choices, and providing sophisticated verb conjunctions. However, this was not consistent, and at times Claude AI and Bard bested ChatGPT 4 at word choices.

ChatGPT 4

  • Strong in translating idiomatic expressions.
  • Sometimes overly literal in word-for-word translations.
  • Good at maintaining sentence structure and context.

Examples:

  • Inaccurately translated “creative agency” with “agence creative.” Additionally, for the sentence “creative is too important to not be able to fire,” ChatGPT 4 incorrectly translated “la créativité.” In “Creative loses accounts; media doesn’t,” ChatGPT 4 lost the idiomatic nuance with “Les agences créatives perdent des comptes, les agences medias non.” However, it correctly translated “creative director” as “directeur créatif,” capturing the professional title accurately.
  • “Today’s strategic planner has broad horizons but no proper home.” “Home” in this context doesn’t translate well because it’s more about the planner not being integrated well anywhere, but the word in French “foyer” can work. ChatGPT 4’s “véritable domicile” was not a good choice (“veritable” has a truth context as opposed to appropriate and “domicile” is too literal for home in Ephron’s context).
  • For “By now, the embroidered function is familiar” ChatGPT 4 used “Aujourd’hui la function du planificateur est bien établie” vs. Bard and Claude AI’s literal “la fonction brodée est familière.”
  • Last paragraph’s “Full-service agency”: ChatGPT 4 got it right with “agence à service complet.”
  • For “no agency provides choice,” ChatGPT 4 used the elegant “aucune agence ne propose de choix.”

Bard

  • Struggles with industry-specific jargon.
  • Better at verb conjugations and syntax.
  • Inconsistent in context understanding.
  • Demonstrated strength in translating complex advertising terms, maintaining the context effectively.

Examples:

  • Inaccurately translated “creative agency” with “agence de créativité.” Similarly, in “Creative loses accounts; media doesn’t,” Bard’s was close but not as pithy as Claude AI with “La création perd des comptes, pas les medias.”
  • Bard offered three other options of idiomatic options with different contexts of “regroup” and “home” as well as the nature of the account planner:
    1. Avec la restructuration des agences, le nomade du planning trouvera enfin sa place. This emphasizes the nomadic nature of the account planner; also instead of “have a home” it’s “will find his place.”
    2. Quand les agences redeviendront multiservices, le planificateur de compte toucheà- tout aura enfin son port d’attache. This emphasizes the multi-skilled nature of the account planner; also instead of “have a home” an expression uniquely French: “touche-à-tout aura enfin son port d’attache” which means “jack of all trades will finally have his home base.”
    3. Le grand chamBardement des agences permettra enfin au planificateur de compte globe-trotter de poser ses valises. This emphasizes the constant travel of the account planner; also instead of “have a home”: “poser ses valises” or “put down his bags or suitcases.”
  • “The traditional answer would have been”, and the next sentence “Creative agencies are too transient.” For “transient” Bard (and ChatGPT 4) chose the more elegant “ephémère” vs. Claude AI’s literal “transitoire.” For “strange twist” Bard came closest with “étrange revirement” (strange turnaround) but incorrectly placed the adjective before the noun; ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI opted for the clunkier “un étrange retournement de situation,” also with the adjective wrongly placed.

Claude AI

  • Excels in translating creative industry terms.
  • Occasionally misinterprets idiomatic phrases.
  • Strong in word choice and contextual relevance.
  • Demonstrated strength in translating complex advertising terms, maintaining the context
    effectively.

Examples:

  • Accurately translated “creative agency” with “agence de creation.” Additionally, in “Creative loses accounts; media doesn’t,” Claude AI came closest with “La création perd des comptes, les médias non.”
  • “When agencies rebundle, the flying accountant planner will finally have a home.” Claude AI (and Bard) used the better “se regrouperont” but ChatGPT 4’s “se réorganiseront” was close enough.
  • For “She or he is said to have broad knowledge of…” Claude AI’s translation “Elle ou il est censé avoir” is not only clunky and overly literal but creates the problem of masculine/ feminine verb correlation.
  • “The planner uses these skills to lead … to the point where the craftsmen … can take over and create the campaign.” Claude AI was most eloquent out of the three platforms. Instead of the clunky “jusqu’a” structure it used “au point où” which does not require subjunctive.

Key Takeaways:

  • Overall, each platform had its strengths and weaknesses, with Claude AI showing a slight edge in industry-specific terms and idiomatic accuracy.
  • ChatGPT 4 excelled in translating idiomatic expressions and maintaining sentence structure but was sometimes too literal. It struggled with nuanced sentences. ChatGPT 4 offered sophisticated verb conjugations but occasionally missed in word choices.
  • Bard struggled with jargon but was effective in complex advertising terms and syntax. Bard provided alternative idiomatic options, demonstrating versatility in context understanding.
  • Claude AI was strongest in translating creative industry terms and contextual relevance and it closely captured idiomatic nuances. Occasionally Claude AI misinterpreted phrases but showed eloquence in complex sentences.

For a more detailed review of the LLM responses see.

Spanish #

In the Spanish translations by the three AI platforms, differences were not overly pronounced. However, this did not always equate to accuracy, with literal translations being a common issue. When variations did occur, they were typically linked to awkward English phrasing, the use of industry-specific terms like “creative,” or idiomatic expressions.

Awkward sentences that result in awkward translations: “Today’s strategic planner has broad horizons but no proper home.” “Proper home” does not translate well in Spanish. All 3 platforms chose “hogar adecuado,” literal for home. “Lugar” or “sitio” (meaning “place”) would probably be the better choice but worded differently as in “hasn’t found his place.”

Word choice/turns of phrase also differed between platforms. For instance, “Clinker” proved too difficult for the three platforms: they all chose “El problema”; but “enganche” (which means snag or hitch – which is closer in meaning than “problem”) might have been a better choice.

Word-for-word translation led to errors in syntax. In Spanish adjectives sometimes preceded the nouns they modified (which made for literal translations); this is incorrect. With few exceptions, the adjective should follow the noun. Examples: “brilliant publicist” all three platforms wrote “brillante publicista;” “strange twist”, all three wrote “extraño giro.”

ChatGPT 4

  • ChatGPT 4’s translations tend to be accurate and maintain good sentence structure, but they can sometimes be overly literal, missing nuances in idiomatic expressions.
  • While it generally provides well-structured translations, its approach can lead to less idiomatic or contextually sensitive results, especially in complex or industry-specific scenarios.
  • ChatGPT 4 excels in standard translations but may require human review for more nuanced or creative content.

Examples:

  • “The upside is any talent with a pencil can be in the running” was translated “Lo positivo es que cualquier talent con un lápiz puede estar en la competencia” – which is correct but doesn’t attempt to find a parallel idiom.
  • “By now the embroidered function is familiar”: for “by now” ChatGPT 4 chose a less literal “a estas alturas” which means “at this stage” vs Bard and Claude AI’s literal “por ahora” and “par ahora.” ChatGPT 4 also did better at “embroidered”, choosing “la función detallada” vs Bard and Claude AI’s literal “fonción bordada.”
  • For “before Stanley” ChatGPT 4 chose “antes que” which is incorrect. “Antes de” (for before) would have been the better choice.
  • In the sentence “He focused agencies on the primary importance…” ChatGPT 4 correctly chose the past tense “Enfocó” as in “He focused.”

Bard

  • Excelled in providing idiomatic alternatives and showed creativity in translating complex sentences.
  • Was inconsistent, sometimes choosing incorrect verb tenses.

Examples:

  • “When agencies rebundle, the flying accountant planner will finally have a home.” While all three platforms came up with literal translations, Bard went the extra mile offering more idiomatic options, bringing in contexts of “regroup” and “home” as well as the nature of the account planner:
    1. Con la reestructuración de las agencias, el nómada del planning encontrará por fin su sitio. This emphasizes the nomadic nature of the account planner – also, Bard chose “will find his place” – “encontrará por fin su sitio,” instead of “have a home.”
    2. Al volver a ser multiservicio, las agencias darán al todoterreno del planning un lugar donde echar raíces. This option had strange wording, emphasizing the multi-skilled (todoterreno which means “all-terrain”) nature of the account planner; also instead of “have a home”: “donde echar raíces” which means “where to take root.”
    3. El gran cambio en las agencias permitirá al planificador de cuentas trotamundos dejar las maletas. “Cuentas trotamundos” or globe-trotting emphasizes the constant travel of the account planner; also instead of “have a home”: “dejar las maletas” which means “leave one’s bags.”
  • “The upside is any talent with a pencil can be in the running” was translated “La ventaja es que cualquier talent con un lápiz puede estar en la carrera.” “Carrera” means “race” – closer in idiomatic context but not too literal to “the running.”
  • “The planner uses these skills to lead”: for “to lead” Bard had the better choice: “dirigir” versus ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI’s more literal “liderar.”
  • In the sentence “He focused agencies on the primary importance…” Bard incorrectly chose the imperfect “Enfocaba.”

Claude AI

  • Played it safe with translations, often choosing direct equivalents.
  • It correctly handled some verb tenses but was literal in translating idiomatic expressions.

Examples:

  • Claude AI played it safe for “The upside is any talent with a pencil can be in the running”: “La ventaja es que cualquier talent con un lápiz puede participar.”
  • In the sentence “He focused agencies on the primary importance…” Claude AI incorrectly chose “Centró” instead of using the reflexive “Se centró.”
  • In the sentence “could make fair claim” Claude AI correctly used the imperfect “podian.”
  • For “before Stanley” Claude AI (and Bard) correctly chose “antes de” (for before).
  • In the sentence “By now the embroidered function is familiar”: for “by now” Claude AI chose a literal translation “par ahora.” It would have been better to translate less literally “a estas alturas” which means “at this stage.” Claude AI also literally translated “embroidered” as “fonción bordada,” whereas “la función detallada” would have been a better translation.

Key Takeaways:

  • All platforms struggled with literal translations and idiomatic expressions to some extent.
  • Bard showed strength in offering idiomatic options, while ChatGPT 4 was more accurate in certain contexts.
  • Claude AI tended to be cautious, leading to more direct translations.

Hindi #

Overall, Bard and Claude AI outperformed ChatGPT 4, with Bard having a slight edge over Claude AI. This advantage was due to Bard’s ability to contextually translate into Hindi, whereas Claude AI often directly transcribed English words into Hindi without finding appropriate Hindi equivalents.

ChatGPT 4

  • Overall Performance: Least effective among the three.

Examples:

  • Translated “account planner” correctly, using the Hindi word for “account planner,” whereas Claude AI used “account planner” in the Hindi translation.
  • Did not translate “more accurately” correctly. Rather it translated it to “in a right way.”
  • Did not translate “consumer-oriented” to Hindi. Rather, it wrote it in Hindi as-is. The other two Ais translated consumer-oriented in Hindi.
  • “Creative loses accounts” was translated as “creative lost.”
  • “…either it will be…” translated as ”may be” in Hindi.
  • “competing” was translated as “struggling.”

Bard

  • Overall Performance: Outperformed both ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI.

Examples:

  • Bard provided the best translation for this sentence “By now the embroidered function is familiar. The account planner is described as the consumer’s representative, the brand’s champion and the communication plan’s architect…” The translation was more articulate and appropriate in the context in comparison to the other two AI platforms.
  • In this sentence “The planner uses these skills to lead, shape and nuance the development of a brand strategy to the point where the craftsmen – writers, art directors and media planners – can take-over and create the campaign,” Bard translated “shape” best according to context.
  • In the sentence “It sounds like a hi-powered way to create advertising until you realize it’s a full-service agency concept at a time when full-service agencies are kaput,” Bard translated “hi-powered” as “really nice.” “Concept” was literally translated.
  • For the sentence, “The traditional answer would have been “put account planning at the creative agency” but that often doesn’t work today….” Bard performed slightly better than other two AIs.
  • Bard provided an excellent translation for the sentence, “The supreme importance of creative means advertisers need choice….” Superiorly outperforming other two Ais in terms of the context and choice of words to articulate the meaning.

Claude AI

  • Claude AI showed notable competence.
  • Its approach often involved directly transcribing English words into Hindi, rather than
    seeking out contextually relevant Hindi equivalents.

Examples:

  • For the sentence, “The traditional answer would have been “put account planning at the creative agency” but that often doesn’t work…“ Claude AI wrote some of the English words in Hindi (“seat,” “fire,” “accounts”) rather than using the appropriate Hindi terms.
  • “It sounds like a hi-powered way to create advertising until you realize it’s a full service agency concept at a time when full-service agencies are kaput….” was better translated by Claude AI since it structured the sentences to best articulate the meaning.
  • Claude AI translated this sentence better than ChatGPT 4: “What Pollitt did that was revolutionary, was to turn a shared task of the agency brand team – strategic planning – into a staff assignment – strategic planner. He focused agencies on the primary importance of developing a consumer-oriented brand plan by putting a researcher in charge of doing it, and made that person co-equal with account management and creative.”
  • While ChatGPT 4 began this paragraph with “it can be heard/understood,” Claude AI wrote UK and Boase Massimi PollittI in English instead of Hindi.

Key Takeaways:

  • Translation Accuracy: Bard and Claude AI outperformed ChatGPT 4 in translation tasks. Bard had a slight edge over Claude AI, mainly due to its ability to find contextually appropriate Hindi equivalents, whereas Claude AI often transcribed English words into Hindi directly.

Mandarin Chinese #

  • The translation of Ephron’s work was surprisingly better than the Privacy Report.
  • Translations were more fluid and better preserved the original tone, unlike the informal language occasionally used in the Privacy Report translations.
  • Bard outperformed the other two models in translating Ephron’s newsletter, contrary to its performance with the Privacy Report.
  • All models had challenges with literal translations, especially with descriptive language, and oftentimes struggled with grammatical structures unique to Chinese.
  • The improved translation quality may be due to the models being better trained on more conversational words and phrasing like those used in Ephron’s newsletter, encouraging more natural re-phrasing in Chinese.
  • The translation of Ephron’s newsletter could serve as a foundation for native speakers to refine, whereas the Privacy Report translation required significant alterations.

ChatGPT 4

  • Struggled with literal translations, losing the intended meaning in several phrases.
  • Faced difficulties with out-of-context words and idiomatic expressions.

Examples:

  • “By now the embroidered function is familiar”: ChatGPT 4 translated “embroidered” literally, which does not make sense in Chinese.
  • “The craftsmen – writers, art directors, and media planners – can take-over”: ChatGPT 4 translated “craftsmen” literally.
  • “When agencies rebundle, the flying account planner will finally have a home”: ChatGPT 4 translates the word “rebundle” literally, into “re-tie,” which does not make sense.

Bard

  • Produced the most accurate translations, with fewer grammatical errors and contextually appropriate phrasing.
  • Excellently adjusted sentences and phrases for cultural context.
  • Demonstrated a strong grasp of language nuances, like correctly interpreting idiomatic expressions.

Examples:

  • In the phrase “to be effective the account planner needs to sit with creative,” Bard was the only model that correctly interpreted “sit with” as “collaborate” or “spend meaningful time together,” rather than physically sit together.
  • “The supreme importance of creative means advertisers need choice.” Here, Bard preserved the original meaning, which is more like “advertisers need the ability to choose.”

Bard produced the strongest translation of the phrase “the flying account planner,” which is used in both the title and the conclusion of the newsletter. Bard translated the word to a phrase in Mandarin meaning “floating,” which account planner doesn’t have a home.

Claude AI

  • Claude AI consistently translated “Erwin Ephron” into Japanese rather than Chinese, even after follow-up prompts.
  • Aside from this error, Claude AI’s translations were slightly better than ChatGPT 4’s, showing a moderate grasp of context and grammar.

Examples:

  • Claude AI translated “the craftsmen” into the word “workers,” which is more easily understood by a Native Chinese speaker.
  • “The supreme importance of creative means advertisers need choice” was translated by Claude AI as “advertisers need to choose,” which is not the intended meaning.

Key Takeaways:

  • Bard stood out for its nuanced handling of language, making it the most effective translator for this newsletter.
  • Claude AI showed potential but was marred by consistent misinterpretation of names.
  • ChatGPT 4, while useful, required significant edits for accuracy.
  • All models could serve as starting points for translations, with Bard’s output requiring the least editing.

Hebrew #

ChatGPT 4

  • Literal and idiomatic options provided.
  • Maintains the original metaphors and structures closely.
  • Offers direct translations while also providing natural-sounding Hebrew alternatives.

Examples:

  • “Angels” instead of “craftsmen.” In Hebrew, craftsmen is two words, “craft” and “owners.” However, ChatGPT 4 used only “crafts” which is translated “angels.”
  • “In a strange twist” was translated as “in a strange turn of events” – this translation captures the idea that is conveyed by using a more literal translation.
  • “Any talent with a pencil” was literally translated – yet, in Hebrew this translation is inappropriate and makes no sense. In Hebrew it would make more sense to write “Every talented person with a pencil in hand.”
  • “The Flying Account Planner: Today’s strategic planner has broad horizons, but no proper home” was translated “The Flying Strategic Planner: Today’s strategic planner has broad horizons, but no permanent home” which captures the meaning but slightly alters it.

Bard

  • Focuses on a straightforward, more direct translation approach.
  • Sometimes misses the nuances or idiomatic expressions.
  • Tends to provide a more simplified version of the original text.
  • Oftentimes offers multiple options according to different possible objectives. This is good to an extent, as sometimes all one wants is basic translation without multiple options or interpretations.
  • Needs ‘reminders’ on what needs to be done. Since there is no option to upload text, the text was copied and pasted in several prompts. However, between one prompt and the next, Bard would often ‘forget’ that the objective is to translate into Hebrew, instead providing various unrelated responses.

Examples:

  • Providing options according to context:
    The headline translation received the following response:
    Absolutely! Here are two options for translating “THE FLYING ACCOUNT PLANNER Today’s strategic planner has broad horizons, but no proper home.” into Hebrew:

    Option 1 (Literal translation):
    מִַּהַּתְְכַּּנֵּּן בּׁשְֶׁחֶַהַוֹנִִי מַהְַּ חֵַרֵַּף יוֹם שֶׁׁל מִתְְִכַּּנֵּּן אֲֲסָָטְְרָָטֶֶגִִי בֶּּעָָל רְְ יִאִָּּה לְְמֵֵרָָחוֹק, אֲֲבָָל אֵֵין לוֹ בַּּ תִיִ אֲֲמִִתִּּי. 

    Option 2 (More idiomatic translation):
    מִתְְִכַּּנֵּּן בּׁשְֶׁחֶוֹנוֹת נוֹדֵֵד לְְמִתְְִכַּּנֵּּן הָָאֲֲסָָטְְרָָטֶֶגִִי שֶׁׁל יַּהַוֹם יֵֵשׁ רְְ יִאִָּּה רחבה, אֲֲבָָל לֹא בַּּרְְדוֹ הּמָּ קְְבוּעָָה.

    •  

The first option is a more literal translation, sticking closely to the English sentence structure and word choices. The second option uses more idiomatic Hebrew expressions to convey the same meaning as the first, but in a way that feels more natural in Hebrew.

Both options are accurate translations, so the best choice for you will depend on your specific needs and context.

  • Forgetting what the request was: “I do not have enough information about that person to help with your request. I am a large language model, and I am able to communicate and generate human-like text in response to a wide range of prompts and questions, but my knowledge about this person is limited. Is there anything else I can do to help you with this request?”
  • Providing explanations on its outcome: “I used the term “ הריצי-יתב ” for “creative shops” to maintain a consistent and appropriate style in Hebrew; I capitalized “ היאסטרטג ” and ביצקת“ ” as per common style guidelines for nouns representing specific plans or budgets; I translated “why not?” to “ אל המלו ?” for a natural and idiomatic equivalent.”

Claude AI

  • Attempts to capture both the literal meaning and the spirit of the original text.
  • Includes idiomatic expressions that align with the original context.
  • Offers a balance between direct translation and natural Hebrew phrasing.

Examples:

  • “The Flying Account Planner” was translated “The flying customer planner.”
  • Like ChatGPT 4’s translation, “Any talent with a pencil” was literally translated, yet, in Hebrew this translation is inappropriate and makes no sense. In Hebrew it would make more sense to write “Every talented person with a pencil in hand.”

Key Takeaways:

  • None of the platforms consistently provided a good enough translation.
  • Each platform has its strengths and approaches to translation, reflecting different priorities in conveying the original text’s meaning and style.
  • ChatGPT 4 provides diverse options, catering to both literal and natural language needs. Bard’s translations are more direct and simplistic, possibly lacking in nuanced expression. Claude AI sometimes manages to strike a balance, maintaining the original text’s essence while ensuring the translation feels natural in Hebrew.

Key takeaways across the two case studies: #

German Translations

  • ARF Privacy Report: All platforms performed well but literally.
  • Ephron’s Newsletter: Hard to determine best performer: Bard appears to better capture Erwin’s style and tone, using colloquial and everyday language that is more in line with the original prose’s spirit. Claude AI shows instances of deviating from literal translations to provide more nuanced and contextually appropriate translations. Finally, despite its occasional overly literal translations, ChatGPT 4 maintains a consistent approach and seems to understand the context well, albeit with room for improvement in stylistic adaptation.
  • Overall: The “best performer” depends on the specific criteria one would prioritize (fidelity to original style, contextual accuracy, consistency, etc.). Combining the strengths of all three might provide the most effective translation.

French Translations

  • ARF Privacy Report: ChatGPT 4 captured nuances better than Bard and Claude AI. Bard and Claude AI scored higher on grammar but tended to be more literal. All three platforms had similar scores for accuracy, although Bard had an incidence of not translating at all while the other two at least tried.
  • Ephron’s Newsletter: ChatGPT 4 scored higher on nuance and accuracy, with Claude AI a close second on accuracy. ChatGPT 4 also had fewer incidences of being too literal than Bard and Claude AI. And although Bard in one scenario provided varied idiomatic interpretations, it had a greater incidence of translation errors than the other two.
  • Overall: Claude AI and ChatGPT 4 are noted for their effectiveness in handling creative industry terms and idiomatic nuances. Bard, while consistent, shows a lesser degree of nuance but is competent with complex advertising terms and syntax, offering varied interpretations. ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI are proficient in idiomatic expressions and maintaining sentence structure, but Claude AI’s tendency towards literal translations can impact the subtlety of word choices and nuanced sentences.

Spanish Translations

  • ARF Privacy Report: All three platforms had a tendency to opt for literal translation, with ChatGPT 4 making up for it with greater nuance and accuracy.
  • Ephron’s Newsletter: All three platforms leaned toward the literal, with the following exceptions: Bard showed strength in offering idiomatic options, while ChatGPT 4 was more accurate in certain contexts. Claude AI tended to be cautious, leading to more direct translations.
  • Overall: All three platforms tend toward literal translations. Bard is strong in idiomatic options, ChatGPT 4 balances accuracy and expressiveness, and Claude AI favors cautious, direct translations, and its approach, though nuanced, tends to be less dynamic.

Hindi Translations

  • ARF Privacy Report: Bard and Claude AI had similar translations; Bard showed superior accuracy.
  • Ephron’s Newsletter: Bard and Claude AI surpassed ChatGPT 4 in translation accuracy, with Bard slightly ahead for its skill in finding context-relevant Hindi translations, unlike Claude AI, which frequently transcribed English words directly into Hindi.
  • Overall: Bard emerges as the most accurate and contextually adept translator among the three, with Claude AI showing proficiency but limited by its direct transcription approach. ChatGPT 4, while functional, does not match the translation capabilities of Bard and Claude AI in these specific case studies.

Mandarin Chinese Translations

  • ARF Privacy Report: Claude AI slightly better; all models too literal.
  • Ephron’s Newsletter: Bard outperformed others, suggesting training on narrative structures helped.
  • Overall: Bard’s translation could serve as a foundation for refinement, while others needed significant alterations.

Hebrew Translations

  • ARF Privacy Report: Claude AI and ChatGPT 4 consistently used the same language, often repeating mistakes.
  • Ephron’s Newsletter: None of the platforms performed consistently well. Bard offered nuanced translations, demonstrating context sensitivity.
  • Overall: Although Bard showed stronger awareness of context, ChatGPT 4 and Claude AI provided better translations.

Key takeaways across six languages:

  • Cultural Sensitivity: Bard generally showed a better understanding of cultural nuances across languages.
  • Literal vs. Nuanced Translations: Claude AI and ChatGPT 4 tended to be more literal, while Bard often provided nuanced translations.
  • Complex Texts and Idioms: Bard’s ability to offer alternative translations for idioms and complex phrases stood out, particularly in Hebrew.
  • Overall Accuracy: Claude AI often demonstrated high accuracy, particularly in Hindi, but faced challenges in maintaining the tone and humor of the original texts.
  • Adaptability: Bard’s flexibility in offering multiple translation options was notable, especially for idiomatic expressions.
  • Tone Preservation: All platforms struggled to varying degrees with preserving the original tone, especially in humor and irony, with Claude AI and ChatGPT 4 often lacking the subtlety required for idiomatic and culturally rich texts.

Add a Comment