Article

Name: Digital translation as a factor of variability in single-text translations: A case study of Siberian mining poetry

Authors: Lidia G. Kim, Artem G. Deryabin

Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russian Federation

In the section Linguistics

Abstract:

This paper identifies the factors determining variability in the creation of secondary (translated) texts. The study employs a comparative analysis of machine translation (MT) results produced by three neural networks, ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Gemini, to evaluate variants of secondary texts based on their degree of equivalence to the source. The focus is on three poems by Siberian authors, each concerning the labor of miners. The analysis establishes that digital translators significantly influence text variability, primarily due to discursive elements such as metaphors, idioms, and culturally specific professional vocabulary, which act as “points of tension.” The study reveals distinct stylistic profiles for each engine. ChatGPT frequently employs poetic modulation and compensation, achieving a balance between accuracy and artistic expression. DeepSeek prioritizes technically correct but literal solutions, often compromising the poetic nature of the work. Gemini tends toward calquing and transliteration, which reduces the emotional and cultural resonance of the target text. The findings indicate that the highest levels of expressiveness and accuracy are achieved through modulation, functional equivalence, and adaptation. Ultimately, the choice of a specific neural system confirms the role of the digital translator as a key determinant in translation variation and the overall quality of the poetic secondary text.

Keywords: variantology, translation variants, semantic equivalence, machine translation, artificial intelli-gence, digital translator, poetic text, mining poetry

Bibliography:

Antonova N. A., Kuz’mich I. V. Sravnitel’nyy analiz mashinnogo i “ruchnogo” perevoda nauchno-uchebnogo teksta: problemy i resheniya [Comparative analysis: Machine vs human translation of educational scientific texts. Challenges and solutions]. Discourse. 2024, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 82–92. DOI 10.32603/2412-8562-2024-10-4-82-92

Boyarkina A. V. Tsifrovye tekhnologii v khudozhestvennom perevode (na primere nemetskoyazychnykh tekstov) [Digital technologies in literary translation: a case study of texts in German]. Izvestia: Herzen University Journal of Humanities & Sciences. 2022, no. 205, pp. 14–20. DOI 10.33910/1992-6464-2022-205-14-20

Bol’shak A. V., Voloshina K. S. K voprosu o podkhodakh k perevodu poezii [Approaches to the issue of poetry translation]. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University. 2021, no. 9 (455), pp. 27–33. DOI 10.47475/1994-2796-2021-10904

Denisova G. V. Khudozhestvennyy perevod v kontekste tsifrovoy antropologii i voprosy interpretatsii [Translation in the context of digital Anthropology and the limits of Interpretation]. Moscow University Translation Studies Bulletin. 2021, no. 4, pp. 63–82.

Ermolaeva A. A. Polisemiya v kontekste neyronnogo mashinnogo perevoda [Polysemy in the context of neural machine translation]. Young Scientist. 2020, no. 32 (322), pp. 175–177.

Folaron D. Digital world communication and translation. Slovo.ru: Baltic Accent. 2019, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 9–27.

Garbovskiy N. K., Kostikova O. I. Intellekt dlya perevoda: iskusnyy ili iskusstvennyy? [Intelligence in translation: artful or artificial?]. Moscow University Translation Studies Bulletin. 2019, no. 4, pp. 3–25.

Golev N. D., Kim L. G. Variativno-interpretatsionnoe funktsionirovanie teksta (k voprosu o rasshirenii granits lingvisticheskoy variantologii) [Variational-interpretative functioning of the text (to the question of expanding the boundaries of linguistic variantology)]. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University. 2009, no. 27 (165), pp. 12–20.

Golev N. D. Makromodelirovanie yazykovoy variativnosti: k rasshireniyu granits lingvisticheskoy variantologii (aspektualizirovannyy obzor rabot rossiyskikh lingvistov) [Macro modeling of linguistic variability: towards expanding the boundaries of linguistic variantology (an aspectualized review of the works of Russian linguists]. Nauchnyi dialog [Scientific dialogue]. 2023, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 86–125. DOI 10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-8-86-125

Golev N. D., Napreenko G. V. Perevodimost’ i variativnost’ teksta v aspekte antinomii “tozhdestvo – razlichie” [Translatability and variability of text in terms of the antinomy “identity – difference”]. Sibirskii Filologicheskii Zhurnal [Siberian Journal of Philology]. 2023, no. 4, pp. 299–311. DOI 10.17223/18137083/85/22

Irkova A. V., Oprysk Ya. A. Sopostavleniye tekhnoperevoda i antropoperevoda na kitayskiy yazyk strofy iz romana v stikhakh “Evgeniy Onegin” A. S. Pushkina [Comparison of technological translation and Anthropopical translation in chinese language strophes from the novel in poems “eugene onegin” by A. S. Pushkin]. In Pushkinskaya traditsiya v russkoy kul’ture: yazyk, literatura, mediadiskurs: Sb. nauch. st. Natsional’noy nauch. konf., posvyashch. 225-letiyu A. S. Pushkina i 75-le-tiyu filologicheskogo obrazovaniya v Kuzbasse [Pushkin tradition in Russian culture: language, literature, media discourse: Coll. of sci. articles of the National Scientific conf., dedicated to the 225th anniversary of A. S. Pushkin and the 75th anniversary of philological education in Kuzbass]. Kemerovo, 2025, pp. 56–60.

Kim L. G., Deryabin A. G. Perevod v epokhu iskusstvennogo intellekta: markiruyushchiye priznaki mashinnogo perevoda publitsisticheskogo teksta [Translation in the age of artificial intelligence: marking features of machine translation of journalistic texts]. Virtual Communication and Social Networks. 2025, no. 2, рp. 103–114.

Kol’tsova D. A., Kol’tsov S. V. Istoriya i razvitie mashinnogo perevoda [History and development of machine translation]. The Russian language and culture in the mirror of translation. 2019, no. 1, pp. 130–135.

Mel’nik N. V. Derivatologicheskaya interpretatsiya vtorichnykh tekstov raznykh tipov [Derivational interpretation of secondary texts of various types]. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University. Philology. Art history. 2012, no. 13 (267), iss. 65, pp. 69–73.

Metreveli M. G. Kak uluchshit’ instrumenty tsifrovogo perevoda [How to improve digital Translation tools]. Moscow University Translation Studies Bulletin. 2021, no. 2, рр. 108–116.

Miftakhova R. G., Morozkina E. A. Mashinnyy perevod. Neyroperevod [Machine translation. Neural translation]. Bulletin of Bashkir University. 2019, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 497–502.

Panasenkov N. A. Evolyutsiya mashinnogo perevoda: ot analiticheskoy mashiny Bebbidzha k neyrosetyam [The evolution of machine translation: from Babbage’s analytical engine to neural networks]. Translation Industry. 2019, vol. 1, pp. 9–13.

Yan’ S. Problema perevoda kitayskoy lingvisticheskoy terminologii v aspekte perevodcheskoy variativnosti [The problem of translating Chinese linguistic terminology in terms of translation variability]. Modern Science: actual problems of theory and practice. Series of Humanities. 2019, no. 12, pp. 188–190.

Zhivotova A. A., Berdonosov V. D. Perspektivnye napravleniya razvitiya sistem mashinnogo perevoda [Perspective directions in the development of machine translation]. Information Science and Control Systems. 2022, no. 2, pp. 116–128.