11/30

 I found the "I, Translator" article very interesting, especially because this article was published in 2010, and stated that Google Translate had just been made in 2009. I never realized but I didn't start using Google Translate until I was in middle school which was 2011, so I don't know what life was like before Google Translate. The article states the obvious: Google Translate is not entirely reliable, so it could never replace human translators. I don't know why, but even the language you choose to start off with can make the translation vary. For example, if I were to translate English to French, the phrase I put into Google Translate would not be as correct if I started the translation in Spanish. This has happened to me many times, which is why I usually use Spanish if I'm using Google Translate. I found it interesting that Google. Translate essentially searches the web for similar sentences in already translated texts. I did not know that is how it works. It's 2020 now, so I'm wondering if that has changed in the past 10 years. The Hermeneutic Motion article was relatively dense and less interesting to me. It repeated what we've seen in previous texts: even if you try to stick close to the text, "the trust can never be final. It is betrayed" because sometimes there is no way to translate a certain word or phrase from one language to another. I do agree with the statement that "certain texts or genres have been exhausted by translation," but honestly even a different writing style can incline me to read a book, so the more options the merrier in my opinion. If the writing style is too difficult, I won't pick up the book, and I find that many writers attempt to have a unique style when it should just be simple.