Emotion Profiling in LLM-Based Literary Translation: Systematic Shifts Across MT and Post-Editing
Authors: Antonio Castaldo, Johanna Monti, Sheila Castilho
Organizations: University of Naples “L’Orientale” · University of Pisa · Antonio Castaldo1,2 · Johanna Monti1 · Dublin City University · Sheila Castilho3
Abstract
This paper investigates whether LLM translations exhibit identifiable emotional profiles and how post-editing reshapes them toward human-like norms. We compare LLM translations of Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake with their post-edited versions and a human translation, using a large-scale corpus of contemporary Italian science-fiction as a baseline. We examine emotion through lexicon-based and multilingual modeling, conducting a fine-grained analysis of emotional variation across systems. We find that MT systems introduce model-specific and statistically significant emotional fingerprints across translations, leading to a limited preservation of an author's voice.
This paper investigates how post-editors of literary texts react and respond to the way metaphors have been translated by Neu ral Machine Translation (NMT) and Large Language Models (LLMs). The results show that one in three metaphors in the output were changed by the post-editors, demonstrating that the translation of fig urative language is indeed problematic in literary MT (LitMT). The responses indi cate that the post-editors were aware of overly literal translations, though mostly for multiword expressions. Moreover, at times they found it difficult to determine whether solutions were acceptable. They rated the overall quality of the MT out put as quite poor and stated that the post editing was more work and more effort than it would have been translating from scratch. This supports previous studies ar guing that post-editing constrains transla tors in their creativity and diminishes their sense of text ownership.
The recent shift from dedicated NMT systems to general-purpose LLMs has reshaped machine translation, with LLMs reported to produce more fluent, less literal output than their predecessors. We test whether this shift extends to the deliteralization hypothesis, the long-standing claim from translation studies that translations become progressively less literal as they are drafted and revised. Using the WMT24++ dataset, we compare the literality of human translations and post-editions to that of two NMT systems and six LLMs across 54 language pairs and three tasks: direct translation, iterative self-revision, and post-editing of human drafts. Literality is measured via a validated Synthetic Literality Index built from six heuristics. We find that (i) human translations remain significantly less literal than those of all tested MT systems, though recent LLMs narrow the gap; (ii) when prompted to iteratively revise their own output, LLMs deliteralize monotonically, providing the first evidence that the hypothesis applies natively to LLM generation; and (iii) as post-editors, LLMs invert the revision triggers of human post-editors, tolerating literal drafts and targeting idiomatic human formulations for revision.
Preserving affective nuance remains a challenge in Machine Translation (MT), where semantic equivalence often takes precedence over emotional fidelity. This paper evaluates the performance of three state-of-the-art Small Language Models (SLMs) -- EuroLLM, Aya Expanse, and Gemma -- in maintaining fine-grained emotions during backtranslation. Using the GoEmotions dataset, which comprises Reddit comments across 28 distinct categories, we assess emotional preservation across five European languages: German, French, Spanish, Italian, and Polish. Specifically, we investigate (i) the inherent capability of these SLMs to retain emotional sentiment, (ii) the efficacy of emotion-aware prompting in improving preservation, and (iii) the performance of ModernBERT as a contemporary alternative to BERT for emotion classification in MT evaluation.