 |
customer@davidpublishing.com |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Wang Tongjun
Full-Text PDF
XML 92 Views
DOI:10.17265/2328-2177/2026.10.001
Beijing International Studies University, Beijing, China
AI‑driven machine translation has been widely adopted in the academic output of humanities, social sciences and legal studies. Yet, human post‑editing, nowadays, is of great necessity to reconcile machine‑generated texts with academic values. As risks of AI‑aided translation manifest not merely in technical defects like erroneous terminology and logical fragmentation in target discourses, but also go into real‑world academic‑ethical spheres including project application, publishing performance and allocation of research resources. Current domestic studies on AI‑translation ethics mostly center on technical dimensions such as algorithmic bias, copyright protection and translation quality. Few integrated researches are based on traditional Chinese Confucian‑Daoist philosophical points, practical sector‑specific legal‑translation operations, and tangible risks implanted in the academic ecosystem of research projects. This paper introduces Confucian‑Daoist doctrines of Zhongyong (the Golden Mean) and the Unity of Man and Nature to construct a local ethical analytical framework for human‑machine collaborative translation. Along with ten parallel AI‑drafted and human‑revised translation cases from Zhang Mingkai’s The Critical Cores of Criminal Law, it systematically dissects inherent limitations of AI when translating legal‑academic texts and elaborates the logic of professional creative translation in post‑editing. It further sorts out academic‑ecology risks in translation‑related research programs, including contract‑performance defaults, nominal authorship and biased resource allocation. A multi‑layer governance system for AI‑translation ethics is built from three dimensions: value orientation, practical translation norms, and institutional supervision over research projects. This study presents solutions rooted in traditional wisdom and practical experience for the sound AI’s application in legal‑academic translation.
AI post‑editing, Confucian‑Daoist Zhongyong, the Unity of Man and Nature, legal translation, academic ethics
Chen, L. X. (2025). Ethical puzzles and governance breakthroughs for Generative‑AI‑Powered translation. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, (06), 134-141.
Feng, Q. G., & Liu, M. (2018). Construction of the Three‑Dimensional Competence Model for translation post‑editing. Foreign Language World, (03), 55-61.
Hu, B. (2026). Reconciliation between “the Unity of Man and Nature” and instrumental rationality: Constructing a green‑cultural dimension for AI governance. Journal of South China Normal University (Social Science Edition), (01), 31-42.
Lu, Y. (2024). Construction of ethics for translation technology in the Artificial‑Intelligence era. Chinese Translators Journal, 45(01), 117-125.
Ministry of Science and Technology et al. (2019). Rules for Investigation and Handling of Research‑Integrity Cases (Trial Implementation). Document No. Guo Ke Fa Jian〔2019〕No.323.
Tan, Z. X. (2026). Dialectical reflections on translation in the AI era—Dynamic balance between technology worship and pursuit of translation essence. Chinese Translators Journal, 47(03), 113-122.
Wang, H. S. (2025). Research on ethical risks of Generative‑AI translation technology in legal translation. Journal of Gansu University of Political Science and Law, (01), 1-12.
Zhao, L. C. (2025). Ethical crises and reflections on translation in the age of intelligence. Foreign Languages, 48(06), 115-121.