Elsnet
 
   


ELSNET-list archive

Category:   E-CFP
Subject:   AMTA 2006 -- Call for Panels and Roundtables
From:   Priscilla Rasmussen
Email:   rasmusse_(on)_research.rutgers.edu
Date received:   14 Apr 2006
Deadline:   07 May 2006
Start date:   08 Aug 2006

CALL FOR PANELS and ROUNDTABLES AMTA 2006 August 8-12, Cambridge, Mass. http://amta2006.amtaweb.org/index.htm AMTA 2006 is inviting proposals for panels and roundtables to be held during the main conference days, Wednesday August 9 through Friday August 11, 2006. We expect to have up to 3 or 4 such sessions during the conference. IMPORTANT DATES: Deadline for Proposal Submission: May 7, 2006 Notification of Acceptance: June 8, 2006 Deadline for Final Panel/Roundtable Description: June 30, 2006 FORMAT OF PROPOSALS AND PROCEDURE Proposal submissions for panels/roundtables should minimally include: 1) Contact information (e-mail and telephone) of the proposer. 2) The topic or theme of the session. 3) The proposed structure of the session (session leadership, participant presentations, interaction among participants and between participants and the audience); if applicable, the process for fostering interaction among participants prior to the conference. 4) Whether prospective participants have been identified and, if so, their names, affiliations and expected contribution. Proposals should be sent to the Panels/Roundtables Chair, Violetta Cavalli-Sforza (violetta_(on)_cs.cmu.edu). Their receipt will be immediately acknowledged. The Chair will then communicate with the proposers to discuss any issues that still need addressing or aspects that need further elaboration. Once proposals have been reviewed by the Chair and other members of the organizing committee for AMTA 2006, notifications of acceptance will be sent out, together with suggestions for revisions. When the final form of accepted proposals is submitted, it is expected that the list of participants will be firm. PANEL OR ROUNDTABLE? Both panels and roundtables are intended to present to spectators a panoply of viewpoints and concerns. Panels are typically more structured, with presentations by each panelist followed by questions and discussions among panelists and spectators. Roundtables typically have freer interactions, with specific issues related to the main topic introduced freely and explored and discussed by roundtable members and spectators. Different options for structuring the interaction in advance and during the panel/roundtable in order to make the exchange maximally productive, are presented below as suggestions. POTENTIAL TOPICS/THEMES OF INTEREST In case you are thinking about proposing a panel or roundtable, but are not sure whether the subject would be of interest at the conference, here are a few potential themes/topics that appear to be of current or ongoing interest. Other ideas and suggestions are more than welcome. 1. What are the limits of MT without linguistic knowledge and how do we know? What are the pros and cons of different approaches and are certain approaches better than others for different applications? 2. Who are the users and what are the uses of MT systems now, and is the state of the art in MT good and cheap enough for them? What applications is MT becoming indispensable for that might accept a higher price tag? Are there areas of application of MT that have not received sufficient attention, and how can those markets be opened up by good enough MT? How do MT research and development efforts need to change to support such applications? Can MT and smaller or more specialized tools be financially viable, or are they already? This is a very wide topic in which several subtopics could be emphasized, possibly in different sessions, for example: * Different requirements for use of MT: how useful is MT output and how to identify thresholds for usability in post-editing or information gathering and other applications. * The time, cost, and politics of integrating MT into high-volume production translation. * The pros and cons of generic MT, i.e. using an MT system the way it comes from a vendor vs. customizing it for a particular application, and what customizations might be most useful for different applications. 3. Why are professional translators not using MT even other tools such as TMs more? What are the practical and psychological barriers to the use of such tools? What educational structures within and outside conventional institutions need to be put in place in order to overcome those barriers and make effective use of existing and developing technology even if it is far from perfect? And what MT and related tool development and research efforts might allow at least some aspects of MT to become more useful to translators? 4. Can MT be deployed to serve needs of minority or neglected languages, and what other data, tools and technologies can be harnessed for this purpose? POTENTIAL WAYS OF STRUCTURING THE INTERACTION An important criterion for evaluating the success of a panel or roundtable is whether, in addition to presenting multiple perspectives to the audience, it creates a lively exchange and raises provocative questions. In addition, the session at the conference can be more productive if the participants have started the discussion and exchanged among themselves ahead of time. The following is a short list of ways in which the interaction prior to and during the conference could be guided and structured for this purpose. Proposal submitters should feel free to propose other alternatives, keeping in mind the goal of achieving maximal exchange among panel or roundtable members, as well as with the audience. 1. Set up the panel/roundtable as a mock debate or client-customer dialogue between the parties (e.g. users vs. developers/researchers, developers vs. researchers). What do clients want or don't want, like or don't like, need or don't need? Allow some participants to play the role they normally play but ask others to take the other side. 2. Prepare a list of questions to distribute to participants ahead of time. Ask them to write a 1-2 page response to those questions. Circulate the responses among other participants ahead of the conferences to stimulate new questions, new responses and material for discussion. Present the result of the process, including the dialectic interaction, at the conference. 3. Set up an assertion for the panel/roundtable as a topic of debate. Each participant must then develop multiple arguments both in favor of and against the assertion. As in 2 above, distribute arguments in favor of and against of the assertion to other panelists, in order to stimulate debate. Arguments and counterarguments are presented at the conference and can be further developed during the session. _______________________________________________ Elsnet-list mailing list Elsnet-list_(on)_elsnet.org http://mailman.elsnet.org/mailman/listinfo/elsnet-list
 

[print/pda] [no frame] [navigation table] [navigation frame]     Page generated 14-02-2008 by Steven Krauwer Disclaimer / Contact ELSNET