{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031423290203327174, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014787430683918669, 'mean_word_length': 5.188571428571429, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Tentative Proposal for Machine Assisted Human Translation (MAHT) – Tool-Specific General Text Typology

The aim of the present article is to contend the widespread but largely unfounded claim that MAHT tools (popularly known as translator ’s work-benches) are best suited for translating so-called technical texts. The article calls for establishing a separate MAHT tool-specific text typology by pre-senting what are – in the author ’s opinion – the most important features characteristic of an MAHT-suitable text. It transpires that it is difficult to simply relate this particular type of text to any of the existing classifications of translation-related or general text typologies (such as those advocated by, for example, Hatim & Mason 1990; Reiß 1983; Snell-Hornby 1988 or Kussmaul 1997) since the existing methodologies do not take MAHT-specif¬ic attributes into account. Therefore, the present article calls for an empi¬rical, corpus-based study that would help establish the relation between the proposed underlying features and actual text types as described elsewhere.