Medires Publishers - Article

Abstract

Translation as one of the types of human activity is related to topical philosophical issues, including transhumanism, as well as the need for its application in modern technologies for creating a man-machine and the upcoming AI singularity. The accuracy and unambiguity of language content is the foundation of AI software. For a specialized technical translation, this is an undeniable advantage in terms of the speed and efficiency of the process. The reduction of heterogeneity and polysemy of any language as a reflection of the activity of human consciousness to unambiguous definitions is an absolute limiter of creative mental activity. Specific examples of the intervention of an automatic editor in the process of individual activity of an AI user demonstrate real conflict situations. According to the author, translation is a universal property of human thinking, and cognitive processes are generated by the activity of the brain, and not exclusively by its structure. Combinatorial thinking is unique to humans. Reflection - the subject's appeal to himself - is one of the most important acts of consciousness, which makes it possible for an individual translation of thoughts into their native and any other language.

Introduction

Recently, there has been an increased practical interest in Artificial Intelligence, and even an attempt to absolutize the capabilities of AI at the highest scientific level.

To begin with, what does translation as one of the types of human activity have to do with current philosophical problems, including transhumanism. 

The European organization COST - European Cooperation in Science & Technology has developed a project with three strategic priorities: 

1. promotion and dissemination of best practices;
2. development of interdisciplinary research for breakthroughs in science;
3. empowerment to attract young researchers and innovators.

In the document sent by the COST to the Institute of Romanian Philology “Bogdan Petriceicu-Hashdeu” by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Research of the Republic of Moldova in order to attract employees who want to join the COST project, I was interested in the direction CA19102 Language in the Human-Machine Era (p. 4): “In the next 10 years, many millions of people will…wear relatively unobtrusive…devices that offer an immersive and visually enhanced high-resolution world” (Perlin 2016: 85). This is the "human-machine era", a time when our senses are not just augmented by portable mobile devices, but are fully augmented. (…) Can our theory, methods and epistemology handle this? Could dependence on real-time language technologies increase? Can the structure of the language change? In the long term, is it possible for a brain machine to emerge where interfaces serve to complement or even replace the language as a whole? [1] 

To some extent, the developers of the project outlined ethical consequences: inequality of access to technologies, privacy and security issues, new vectors for deceit and crime, etc.

In the first place in the COST project - languages and literature: translation and interpretation. And not by accident. Translation, for all its antiquity and for all its significance in most areas of human activity, still continues to remain terra incognita in many of its aspects. Translation, like an X-ray, reveals secrets hidden under the clothing of words.   

In the philosophy of postmodernism, the phenomenon of the power of language is widely analyzed. According to the concept of R. Barth, theoretically only two alternative options for the relationship between power and language are possible: the cooperation of language with power and its opposition to it - linguistic neutrality in relation to power, according to R. Barth, turns out to be impossible in principle [2]. In the terminology of R. Barth, the languages of the first type are designated as "encratic languages", the languages of the second - as "acratic"[3]. Translation and interpretation are inseparable, and the influence of external factors on translation activity is ubiquitous, as evidenced by numerous examples of inadequate translations created under the pressure of socio-historical factors of a particular era.

Transhumanism is a trend in philosophy that is gaining momentum, focusing its attention on the main aspects of social life with a focus on the future, and declares its main goal the constant improvement of man as an incomplete link in evolution based on scientific and technical discoveries and new technologies. However, if at the end of the 20th century this direction was generally perceived positively by futurologists, then over time, assessments of the ideas of transhumanism began to acquire a clearly ambiguous character. Opponents of this direction of philosophical thought came to the conclusion that the implementation of the ideas of transhumanism would undermine the traditional values of humanism in all spheres of human existence, developed over thousands of years of human development.

Without delving into the origins of the emergence of transhumanist ideas in their modern sense, one should still turn to the teachings of Ludwig Feuerbach with his thesis that man created God in his own image and likeness. Feuerbach clearly traces the ideas of collective consciousness and the conclusion that the human community can never achieve perfection and happiness, provided that it contains individuals (4, p. 82).

Kai-Fu Lee, a well-known Chinese scientist in the field of modern technologies, emphasizes that one can be optimistic in the development of Artificial Intelligence only by remembering the responsibility in this area. As an example of the technocratic direction of transhumanism, he cites the ideas of Ray Kurzweil, the inventor and major ideologist of GOOGLE, who believes that in the future people and machines will merge together. “According to his idea, people will ... constantly renew body tissues with the help of nanorobots introduced into the bloodstream. Kurzweil predicts that by 2029 we will have computers with human-like intelligence, and the singularity point will be reached by 2045” (5, p. 144).

Singularity as a term means the superiority of machine intelligence over the capabilities of the person who created it. We should not forget about the susceptibility of the majority to professional deformation - intellectual limitation to the sphere of their own activity, which gives vastness for the promotion of the ideas of the singularity.  However, in any case, with all the cybernetic improvements of an intellectual creature with the inclusion of a truncated biostructure (mainly brain structures), its modifiers - the technocratic elite - pursue the main goal - the management of intellectual energy within the strict framework of technology while maintaining the subordinating hierarchy within the framework of AI.

The goal is old as the world - the focus is on the question of power. Thus, there is a return to the old ideas of creating an artificial man by man, it is enough to mention the homunculus, the Golem, and then Frankenstein (we will not mention all the automata that imitate a man, which the great Leonardo da Vinci also did).

Mark O'Connell, author of “To be a machine: Adventures among cyborgs, utopias, hackers, and the futurists solving the modest problem of death”, demonstrates that for all his aspirations to the future, transhumanism is characterized by “the paradoxical power of its anachronism. […] In the future that transhumanism is looking forward to, it will one way or another be turned into the past” (6, с.15). 

The inability to perceive reality in a multidimensional way inevitably turns into the indifference of technocrats, and such indifference is a demonstration of the absence of humanitarian instruments of difference.

Research Subject

The research subjects are focused on the study of main trends in translation development in the digital era influenced by the impact of AI and technologies. The use of Intelligent systems for the further development of the economy to manage it with or without partial participation of a person is of interest not so much by the absolution of the advantages of a machine over human intellectual potential, but by the one-sidedness of the technocratic approach to the existing problem. My analysis on total algorithmization, revealed by current publications, scientific and practical experience in the field of translation, empower to demonstrate the discrepancies between technological forecasts and real facts of the unpredictability of innovative systems. 

Methodology

The process of studying translation activity is complicated by the fact that only the data “at the input” and “at the output” of transferring text from one language sphere to another can be observed and scientifically analyzed, while the intellectual process of translation transformation itself takes place covertly. The conclusions about the mechanisms of translation are made on the basis of a comparison of the initial and resulting data. Thus, the main research method used in our study are the comparative analysis, where” the input” data is the original source text and” the output” are represented by the final text created by the translator. But, for all its subjectivity, the method of introspection is considered one of the basic methods of language studying.

1. It was used two basic methods:
2. Comparative analysis (in revising the content of translation).

Introspection (in defining the translator intuition as a form of counsciosness in representing the authors subjective reality among their manner and style).

According to J. Locke [7], there are two sources of knowledge: the objects of the external world and the activity of one's own mind. The external senses are directed to the former, as a result of which impressions (ideas) about external things are obtained. As for source of knowledge, and it includes thinking, doubt, faith, reasoning, knowledge and the second desires, it is known by a special inner feeling - reflection. Thus, spiritual activity can proceed, as it were, at two levels: a) perception, thought, desire; b) observation, contemplation of these perceptions, thoughts and desires (8, p.257). Everyone has the first activity, the activity of the second level requires a special organization: the researcher can conduct research only on himself, introspectively. Wanting to know what is happening to others, he puts himself in their conditions and observes himself, which allows him to draw conclusions about the content of the consciousness of another person by analogy.

Discussions

In the specialized literature, such a direction as natural language processing is noted, the purpose of which is to gain knowledge independently by reading a text available on the Internet. Some direct applications of natural language processing include information retrieval (including text mining) and machine translation.

A very important idea is that translation begins much earlier than interlingual translation itself, when an attempt is made to recreate the text of one language within the framework of another, that is, an attempt to transfer it from one language space to the bizarre structures of another language. If we approach the problem of translation more broadly, then, in principle, translation is a universal property of human thinking. Before putting a thought into a speech form, a process takes place in the mind, the sequence of which, in our opinion, is as follows: amorphous thought-form > thought-idea > thought-text > translation (transmission) into the source language for communicative exchange.

The success of a translation largely depends on how the author's world view is combined with the translator's world view. The text is not a complete, closed result, but a “connection” to other texts, to the sphere of what stands behind the text and is associated with the associativity of human thinking. According to Georgian researchers Vardzelashvili Zh. and Pevna N., “even a single key word of linguoculture (basic concept) can be read as a text that generates hypertextual connections” (9, p.12)

In psycholinguistics, there is the concept of a precedent text, that is, a text that is known to culture and to which there are references in speech. The reference can be untransformed and transformed, up to a single component - a word, increasing the semantic load of the text, and activates the reader (in our case, the translator).

From our point of view, what is translated namely, the author's literary text, is a separate stable mega-unit (I draw your attention: it is a mega-unit), i.e. a huge unchanging combination of words united by the author's idea.

The transfer of the volume of an idea depends on the translator's understanding of its meaning and his ability to identify notch marks (markers), which are the key to opening the doors to the extratextual (subtext, intertext, intratext, etc.) associative space.

Schematically, the explicit sequence of the translation process is a double logical-semantic chain, where the external level is an emotional manifestation → determining the originality of the original text → establishing a key lexical sign; and the internal (psychophysical) level - deliberation/spiritual attitude → cognitive system → conflict at the intercultural level → establishing interaction between the author/translator. These two sides of the process are combined in the inter- and extra-action of compiling a commentary, the result of which is the selection and reproduction of an adequate idiolect key sign.

Before discussing about the translation made by AI machine, I want to dwell on the features of natural literary creativity and literary translation. Many aspects of translation are of the same type and are applicable to all types of this process. But translation is not just the transformation of a text in one language into a foreign language structure. It is also the presence of a person and it’s an inner voice, attitude, thinking style, capabilities and temporal environment, which is a combination of ethno-social, historical, cultural, mental and psychological contexts of the formation and existence of a creative individuality.

The possibilities of AI in the field of technical, natural science, narrow professional translation is indisputable.

However, literary translation, based on the creative mental image of the translator, is fundamentally different from all other types of translation, which require the utmost accuracy of wording, the absence of ambiguity of both vocabulary and the text as a whole.

A clear sign of artistry (according to Psurtsev V.D.) of the text and the text of its translation is, first of all, the absence of one-dimensional meaning (10). Based on this, the figurative-associative component is a marking of the artistry of the original text and its translation. We are talking about the specifics of the normative approach to artistry.

If we compare the process of creating an original with the process of translating it, we come to the following conclusion:

- the author's original, imagination and primary mental image leads to the original material nature of the text, to the original work.

- the translator has to do double work - to feel for the author the whole way of creating the original, and then make it available to native speakers of the target language. This can be called the creation of the second material nature of the original work of art.

So, the translation is secondary. But its secondary nature is paradoxical, since the recreation of the original is primary (creativity of the translator), because it has no analogues in the target language, even if there are other translations of the same original. And secondary, as it is dependent on the original author. The reason for the paradoxical situation is that each of the translations bears the imprint of the translator's personality and his temporal environment.

The difficulty of translation lies in the fact that the translator needs to convey the bulk of the idea to the target language without deviating from the text. There was a risk, trapping every translator, to become a slave to the visible, linear part of the content.

The transfer of the volume of an idea depends on the translator's understanding of its meaning and his ability to determine the key signs leading to the extra-textual (subtext, intertext, intratext, etc.) associative space.

All elements of creative mental manifestations are an integral part of the mental activity of a translator of fiction (I emphasize, fiction), which is inextricably linked with mental image, representations and imagination.

As a result of analytical work based on a comparative and introspective research method, I present the following main aspects of the functioning of AI in the field of translation in comparison with natural authoring and translation activities.

Table 1: Stages and conditions of creation of the original text and its translation

As we noted earlier, the figurative-associative component is the artistry marker of the original text and its translation.

Where modern machines are inferior to humans?

AI functions better than humans in a stable environment with static, well-defined rules and consistent input. However, humans are much better than AI at handling surprises, filling in gaps, and operating in an environment with vaguely defined rules and lack of information.

Yes, a computer can win a chess match, but not a polysemic text, where the little things of human life put it in a dead end.

Can there be a conflict situation between a computer user and the so-called artificial intelligence, that is, the computer itself in modern ordinary conditions? 

From my point of view as a translator, I can answer in the affirmative way: YES! I will give simple examples of the conflict between the intervention of an automatic editor in the process of individualized speech. When translating a word from everyday speech a se șușoti (Rom. lang.), that is, to whisper in secret, I used the colloquial word шушукаться shushukatsya (Russian) - with the same meaning in Russian. My choice was underlined in red as incorrect. I found a neutral word – шептать” sheptati” (to whisper), and the red color disappeared. Second example. Having sent an SMS to a colleague, I turned to him with the playful distortion of his name, Sashoka, accepted between us. It was immediately replaced by the "editor" with the generally accepted Sasha. I dialed it again in my own way, the reaction was the same. And yet I achieved my goal, but partially: my choice was underlined in red. Can this be called a meaningful mental reaction of the machine? Of course not. A machine is a slave of a program laid down by a person, a programmer. The programmer, in turn, may consciously or unconsciously, to the best of his intellect, introduce his own preferences or biases. The program of the machine is an imitation of the "movement" of thought, created by one person to perform, facilitate (or replace) the activities of another person in various fields of activity. That is, with his algorithm, the programmer determines the sequence of movement, but not the thought itself.

Instantly mixing ideas, genres, heterogeneous and unsystematic information from two or more areas and meaningfully connect them together and thereby solve an unexpected problem - only a person is capable of this.

Kevin Roose, in his book Resilient to the Future, quotes Maria Popova, author of the blog Brain Pickings, who calls this ability "combinatorial creativity"(11). Let me give you an example from my life practice. My acquaintance, an elderly woman, a native language teacher at a lyceum, was preparing to move to another country with her family. Her vocabulary of words was far ahead of all family members. When needed, it was consulted more often than a dictionary or computer translator. However, the matter did not progress beyond this. She could not understand speech in the general flow of words and combine words into a meaningful text, as well as translate and, moreover, exchange information. At the same time, her family members were much more successful at the household level. Using her "living dictionary" abilities, they at the same time laughed at her failures in mastering a new language. However, when moving to a new country of residence, having joined in an unfamiliar multifactorial environment, her vocabulary quickly began to move: new impressions became a powerful impetus, and she overtook her scoffers. That is, the combinatorial connections of consciousness have begun to work.

As for literary translation, which, like any other creative activity of a person, largely reflects the intellectual and mental activity of a person in general, the use of AI is quite applicable for preliminary line-by-line text processing for two purposes:

- speeding up the translation process;

- as a stimulus for creative work.

The accuracy and unambiguity of terminology is the foundation of AI for fast and efficient specialized technical translation. As for the linguistic heterogeneity and ambiguity of any language is an absolute limiter of creative mental activity, as a reflection of the activity of human consciousness by reducing it to precise definitions. 

All elements of creative psychic manifestations are an integral part of the mental activity of the translator of artistic literature (I emphasize, artistic), inextricably linked with mental images, representations and imagination.

The main similarities and differences between the author and the translator in terms of creative and psychological terms are as follows: 

a) the expenditure of the author's mental energy is aimed by the creative materialization of its own imaginary object in the space of its native language; 

b) the costs of the psychic energy of the translator are aimed at the materialization of someone else's real object in a different ethno-linguistic and cultural space; 

c) the author is FREE in its creative process and do not depend on any learned algorithm; 

d) the translator is dependent on the original, and the quality of its work is directly proportional to the empathic capacities, i.e. its ability to simultaneously experience those emotions that arose in the author in the process of creating a translated work and to be staked in the author's temporal environment, i.e. 

The translator must combine all three types of empathy:

- emotional, based on the mechanisms of projection and imitation of the reactions of another;

- cognitive, based on intellectual processes: comparison, analogy, etc.;

- compassionate, manifested in desire to help and support another in certain situations. 

The author and the translator have different types of creative mental images, representations and imagination: 

a) for the author, it involves the independent creation of images in the original work; 

b) for the translator - recreating, on the material of an already created work, but in both cases, there could be somehow influenced by an arbitrary and involuntary mental image based on proper imagination.

Let us clarify that voluntary mental images are typical for solving purposeful artistic tasks, while involuntary mental images is inherent in dreams and meditations. This includes both intuition and heuristic insight.

Machine translation as a product of scientific and technical research is very far from literary creativity, which is the process of literary translation, based on the translator's creative mental images and imagination.

In the table about internal processes of creating and translating a literary text, it was demonstrated the differences in the functioning of human and artificial intelligence (machine) on the psychological side.

Table 2: Human mental activity and AI (machine) functions in translation (by the author)

As we can see from the table, AI does not cope with the tasks of translating a work of art of both natural participants in the translation process.

However, a caveat is needed here. Not every translator can perform literary translation. This requires both personal intellectual, creative and psychosocial capabilities, as well as multifaceted professional training, for example: The poem "Luceafărul" by the great Romanian poet Eminescu has been translated into most of the world's major languages. But few come close to the original. The recent translation into Russian surprised by the abundance of literalisms. So, the translator did not go far from the unambiguity of the machine and attributed to one of the characters the beauty of a flower and a high position in society, making a literal translation of the folklore expression “a young man from flowers” (Rom.: Băiat din flori și de pripas), which in Romanian means “bastard of low origin"[12].

The very interpretation of the concept of intelligence, which is inextricably linked with consciousness - a unique property of highly organized matter, is limited by the majority of technocrats to the pragmatic aspect. A huge role in this, as we have already mentioned, is played by the social factor.

Bart R. noted: “By the way, the encratic language (the one that arises and spreads under the protection of power) is by its very nature a language of repetition; all official language institutions are machines that constantly chew the same gum: schools, sports, advertising, popular culture, song production, the media constantly reproduce the same structure, the same meaning, and it happens that the same words: a stereotype is a political phenomenon, it is the very embodiment of ideology” [Quoted from the Russian translation of G.K. Kosikov] (13, p.494).

In adapting (conformist) personalities, thinking is extremely limited by worldly limits. Their collective thinking and behavior are dominated by stereotypes, which indicates certain intellectual deformations: a negative attitude towards an unfamiliar phenomenon, prejudice and adherence to established preferences. Such deformations can also take place in the activities of an ordinary translator, and, as we have already noted, are reflected in AI algorithms created by a programmer.

Stereotypes of thinking narrow the horizons of consciousness, imposing automatic algorithms, and suppress individual thinking. An example of the theory of target translation is the Scopos theory [14], which declares that the correspondence of the translation to the original is not important if it serves a certain purpose. Before us is not a theory of translation, but a theory of text rewriting, a theory of its commercialization on the world market. In the famous prophetic dystopian book “1984”, published in 1948, J. Orwell wrote: “Pre-revolutionary literature could only be subjected to ideological translation, that is, with the replacement of not only the language, but also the meaning. Only an ideological translation could become a complete translation... By the way, a significant part of the literature of the past was remade in this way (15, p.277).

Reality quite often coincided with the forecasts of visionary authors. Thus, “Translation activities in the Republic of Moldova, like all activities, limited until 1991… were referred to activities that could have a great ideological impact on individual groups or society as a whole (...). Due to censorship, Moldovan journalists had to first write their articles in Russian, and only then the text was translated into the so-called "Moldovan" as the spoken language is Romanian (16, p..24).

We often attribute human qualities to anything in our desire for miracles. From the very birth, a human child loves games, toys, personifying them into creatures similar to him and even stronger in some way. A person grows up, but games and toys do not disappear, but change, helping a person overcome the difficulties of being, modifying him and ... destroying him. Children's toys and games turn into dangerous mind games on the verge of exhaustion of civilizations.

AI is, first of all, a product of the modern technology market. By itself, the term "artificial intelligence" contains a denial of equivalence with human intelligence. Artificial does not mean natural or congenital. Speaking of translation activity, in our examples, following the algorithm of the program leads to linguistic unification, and if we go further, to the automatic erasure of individual features of thinking, and even further to the deformation of consciousness. The machine does not think, its "controls".

Machines do not have a holistic model of the world and an idea of how people interact with it. Most intelligent circuits are designed to perform a single task, and AIs cannot cope with the slightest deviation from it.

On the Internet, I found several reviews of the book “2062. Machine time” by Toby Walsh, a member of the Australian Academy of Sciences, a recognized expert in AI (17).  Like all reviewers, I drew attention to the author's curious opinion that language is not only not an ideal medium for communication, but probably not even the language of our thought process: one person translates his thoughts into language, then writes them down or voices them. Another person has to translate this language back into thoughts. And this is too slow, and therefore the last step in the process of transferring knowledge is “homo digitalis”, which transfers knowledge not by means of a language, but by means of a computer code. And in the same place, arguing about the need for self-learning computers, he believes that programming by hand is a long time, and machines can do it without human intervention. And it seems quite natural to him that if it is necessary to teach a child to calculate the maximum of a mathematical function or to decline a German verb, then how much easier it could be done if he were ... a computer. It is enough to give him the necessary code.

However, Walsh accepts that first one will have to "manually" create a program for such machines and second one should not exclude the biases of the creators because:

1. it is almost impossible to eliminate biases; 
2. the processing speed alone will not lead to a singularity; 
3. those faster computers are not more intelligent.

 “The key to understanding the role of artificial intelligence now and in the future is the transformation of business processes,” is the conclusion of the authors of the book “Man + Machine. New Principles for Working in the Age of AI” by Paul Doherty and James Wilson, IT and business professionals. [18] From these devotees of the digitization of human consciousness, we learn that only a machine can perform operations, perform repetitive operations, predict and adapt. We will learn how people complement machines, and how AI gives people superpowers.

The contempt for the liberal arts has always been exacerbated by political and business leaders who claim that you can achieve far more with skills that are in demand in industry or commerce than with an art history degree.

Behind all this advice is a rather old idea: personality is a defect, not a distinguishing feature.

In his book “The Science of Consciousness”, Princeton University professor Michael Graziano [19] discusses the possibility of transferring personality to artificial media, that is the digitization of human consciousness [19]. From a neurobiological point of view, this idea looks remarkably weak, since Graziano talks about the transfer of static connections, while cognitive processes are nevertheless generated by the activity of the brain, and not solely by its structure. 

The inability to perceive reality in a multidimensional way inevitably turns into the indifference of technocrats, and such indifference is a demonstration of the absence of humanitarian instruments of difference.

Native speakers of a technocratic language - an applied language that has no emotional, psychological, ethnic, ethical, etc. content, most often they are the pillar of strength, which is interested in the mechanistic restraint of consciousness and the closeness of man to the machine, accustoming him to the thought of the benefits of his own improvement.

And a curious picture emerges: when urgently translating our own text into another language, with the help of a computer, quite consciously (as we noted in an introspective observation of our own translation process), we strive to adapt to the machine's algorithm. That is, we deliberately go “towards the car” in order to make our work easier. It is easier to take control of individual mental activity than to create the Perfect AI.

This is how the "education" of the user as an appendage to the machine takes place.

O'Connell M., reflecting on the far-reaching goals of technocracy, demonstrates his gloomy view of technology as "an instrument of human depravity in the service of power, money and war" (6, p.133).

I would like to complete my vision of the problem with the words of Constantin Noica, a Romanian philosopher, a man of difficult fate. Speaking of "the primacy of bare precision", "technical demonism" and "ultimate formalism in culture", in his book "The Six Diseases of Modern Spirituality" (1978), he said: ".... To the extent that existence is a value or is the "value" of the essence of the real, it can be counterfeited in the same way: just as certain people slip counterfeit money, so the scientist can slip us a fake (20, p.22).

And further he reminds that a person should “regain his own spiritual wealth, having overcome spiritual illnesses, “in order to thus return several lost roads to the truth, by passing the spirit of accuracy, and find himself as a truly spiritual person, and not a laboratory assistant” (20, p. 160)

Conclusion

• Translation is a universal property of human thinking, and cognitive processes are generated by the activity of the brain, and not exclusively by its structure. 
• Reflection - the subject's appeal to himself - is one of the most important acts of consciousness, which makes it possible for an individual translation of thoughts into their native and any other language. 
• All elements of creative psychic manifestations are an integral part of the mental   

activity of the translator of artistic literature (I emphasize, artistic), inextricably linked with imagination.

• Technical approaches and algorithms of thinking processes as an applied part of unpredictable volumetric thinking tends to rationalize, systematize and regulate. The same is true with the scientific and technical areas of the language, which do not tolerate synonymy, polysemy, i.e., variability. The whole complex of recognition and decoding of human communication abilities is inaccessible to a machine, which is AI.
• The machine does not have the integrity of the all picture of the world.
• Combinatorial thinking is unique to humans.
• The difference between the “mental” operations of artificial intelligence and human activity in the process of literary translation is a decisive moment in understanding the impossibility of conveying the volumetric aspect of an idea through technological sources, because, with all the desire, a machine cannot fully include the naturalness and unpredictability of human consciousness.
• AI is a technology tool that has a dual role depending on the purpose of the algorithm developer, namely: service and manipulation. And this refers to the psychological aspects of the formation of intellectual conformist thinking, including culture, education, information technology, business, etc.

From our point of view, it is necessary to single out the theory of literary translation as an interdisciplinary science about the transformation of the figurative-emotional reflection of the world into a linguistic form and as an independent part of the general theory of translation.

References

1. www.cost.eu/cost-action/language-in-the-human-machine-era
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
2. Le Conferenze dell’Associazione Culturale Italiana, 1973: Roland Barthes. Le bruissement de la langue P Seuil, 1984, p 127—132
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
3. http://vanko.lib.ru/books/cultur/bart-all.htm
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
4. Korsakov, Al. Religion and Science in the Works of the Founder of the First Positivism. In: Bulletin of PST Series 1: Theology Philosophy. Issue 2 (40) Moscow, 2012.
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
5. Lee, K. F. (2018). AI superpowers: China, Silicon Valley, and the new world order. Houghton Mifflin.
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
6. O’Connell, Mark. Artificial intelligence and the future of humanity. Moscow: Eksmo, 2019.
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
7. Locke, J. Works in three volumes: T. 3. - M.: Thought, 1988. - 668 p.
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
8. Golovin Yu. Practical Psychologist Dictionary 2nd ed., Rev. and add. Minsk: Harvest, Moscow: AST, 2001
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
9. Vardzelashvili, J., Pevnaya, N.P. Hypertextual function of lexical reduplicants (on the basis of predicative attributive constructions), pp.5-15, in collection. Hypertext as a Linguistic Object Materials of the V International Scientific and Practical Conference; June 20, 2017. – Samara, 2017. - 144 p.
   View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
10. Psurtsev V.D. On the problem of translation and interpretation of a literary text on one criterion of adequacy Problems of translation interpretation of the text in the works of Russian linguists of the late 20th, early 21st centuries. Yerevan: Lingua
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
11. Roose, Kevin. “Futureproof. 9 Rules for Humans in the Age of Automation”. Random House. New York, 272 p. Translated into Russian: «Ustoichivy k buduschemu. 9 pravil dlia ludei v epohu mashin», - Moscow: «Mann, Ivanov and Ferber», 2021, 254 p.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
12. Eminescu Mihai. Luceafărul. Translations -Bucureşti: Cartea Românească, 1985. 299 p.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
13. Barthes, Roland. Selected works. Semiotics. Poetics. Moscow: Progress, 1989.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
14. Reiss, Katharina. Classification of texts and methods of translation. In: Questions of the theory of translation in foreign linguistics. Moscow, 1978.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
15. Orwell, George. “1984”, pdf, 393 p. Free eBooks at Planet eBook.com
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
16. Condrea, Irina. Traducerea din perspectivă semiotică. Chişinău: Cartdidact, 2006.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
17. Walsh,Toby. "2062: The World that AI Made". La Trobe University Press, 2018
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
18. Translated into Russian: Walsh,Toby. “2062: vremia machin”. - Москва: АСТ, 2019 - 320 p.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
19. Daughherty, Paul R., Wilson, H. James. Human + Machine. Reimagining Work in the Age of AI. Harvard Business Review Press Boston, Massachusetts. Translated into Russian: “Chelovek +Machina. Novye printcipy raboty v epohu Iskusstvennogo Intellekta”. - Moscow: “Mann, Ivanov and Ferber”, 2019, 304 p.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
20. Graziano, Michael S. A. Rethinking Consciousness: A Scientific Theory of Subjective Experience. Translated into Russian: Michael Graziano. “Nauka soznania. Sovremennaia teoria subiektivnogo opyta”. - M.: Alpina non-fiction, 2021. - 254 p. — (Books of the Polytech). https://www.litres.ru/book/maykl-graciano/nauka-soznaniya-sovremennaya-teoriya-subektivnogo-opyta-63172803/chitat-onlayn/
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
21. Noica, Constantin. “Șase maladii ale spiritului contemporan” (“Six diseases of the contemporary spirit". Translated into Russian “Shesti boleznei sovrememmoi duhovnosti”/ - Târgoviste, Bibliotheca, România. 2012,180 p.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar