| Страниц в теме: < [1 2] | Is Translation Memory Losing You Money? Автор темы: Richard Hill
|
|---|
| No, they are not "losing me money" | Jul 9, 2011 |
Is it not quicker to look up terms one isn’t sure about, then use find and replace rather than working on each segment and copying tags etc?
I'm not sure what you mean. But if I understand you correctly, no: looking up terminology is much quicker from within a CAT tool ... whether you are looking up glossary entries from a term base, or are taking advantage of the concordance features to look for previous translation of some word or phrase.
Is it not true that the main reason translators are spending so much time and money on CAT tool usage is because of pressure from clients, and that the pressure from clients stems from the fact they they are the ones who benefit, not the translator?
No: it's not true.
Translation memory tools pay for themselves in several different ways:
1) Quicker translation.
How quicker, depends on tow main factors: efficient use the tools, and the kind of text you translate.
Efficient use of the tool requires time to master them (and some tools have steeper learning curves then others), and time to build up translation memories. Then there is the types of text you translate.
- If you translate fiction, don't bother: translation memory is not going to help you, and may in fact be rather harmful.
- If you translate mostly text that arrives to you in hard copy or formats that are difficult to convert cleanly (e.g., most pdf files), again, CAT tools are not going to be much use.
- If you always translate a variety of short texts that are markedly dissimilar, CAT tools may not speed you up by much (but they do offer other advantages... see below).
On the other hand, if you translate large documents, manuals, software documentation, legal agreements, and the like, CAT tools can pay for themselves very quickly. For example, when I worked in the translation department of a large business software company, we calculated that for Version 1 of a manual (i.e., a manual that had never been translated before, and with no previous translation memory), the time saving by the end of the translation was about 17% (which might sound little - but it is not when dealing with manuals hundreds of thousand words long) - but the real savings came with the translation of subsequent versions of the manual: If the saving for version 1 was 17%, the saving for version 2 was close to 85%.
2) More consistent translation.
Translating with a translation memory means that everything you translate is instantly retrievable. Which means that remembering how you translated some words you can't immediately recall, but that you are sure you encountered before, is just a keystroke away.
3) No more missed sentences.
Since a translation memory tool opens each sentence to permit you to translate it, it is much more difficult (although not completely impossible, for the truly inattentive) to skip a sentence.
4) A safety net against computer mishaps.
Even if the file you were translating gets corrupted and cannot be retrieved, you still have your translation saved in your translation memory - in most tools, this gets done automatically, sentence by sentence.
| | | | Werner Maurer 
Канада
Local time: 11:31
испанский => английский
+ ...
| What about MQ | Jul 10, 2011 |
In all this highly interesting and enlightening discussion, there has been no mention of MemoQ, which seems to be taking the market by storm. Is the jury still out on MQ?
| | | | Nicole Schnell
США
Local time: 11:31
английский => немецкий
+ ...
Памяти | Typing is much slower. | Jul 10, 2011 |
I often work on heavily formatted InDesign files. This can drive you nuts. I just finished translating a sentence of 24 words of source text, and I had to type around 8 (!) individual tags. How is this supposed to speed up my typing? Also, often sentences are split into two segments, and I have the pleasure to figure out which parts belong together.
| | | |
Nicole Schnell wrote:
I often work on heavily formatted InDesign files. This can drive you nuts. I just finished translating a sentence of 24 words of source text, and I had to type around 8 (!) individual tags. How is this supposed to speed up my typing? Also, often sentences are split into two segments, and I have the pleasure to figure out which parts belong together.
Nicole,
I have no idea on your setting, however I also used to waste too much time typing around tags.
I translate XML tagged files InFix Pro generates from PDFs. The whole story is described at http://www.lamensdorf.com.br/pdf-en.html . So I work on these XMLs using Word and WordFast Classic.
A friend, who is a WordFast trainer, taught me this trick... In Word, I use Search & Replace to mark all text in red (the tags) with the "marching red ants". Then I config WordFast to consider all text with "marching red ants" as untranslatable. This makes WF skip all tags, leaving them untouched.
Maybe you can develop an equivalent workaround there.
| | |
|
|
|
Laurent KRAULAND (X)
Франция
Local time: 20:31
французский => немецкий
+ ...
| Same here... | Jul 10, 2011 |
Christel Zipfel wrote:
Beyond that, I agree 150% with the post of José Henrique.
and as another known colleague would put it: "I am a translator, not a CAT operator".
| | | | | It should be a blossoming occupation, though just a stepping stone | Jul 10, 2011 |
Laurent KRAULAND wrote:
and as another known colleague would put it: "I am a translator, not a CAT operator".
Considering the way some translation outsourcers and some end-clients justifiably approch their needs with CAT tools, there should be indeed a bunch of "CAT operators" coming up.
First the needs... imagine a computer printer manufacturer that every few weeks launches a new model. Using Pareto's Law, I guess that 80% of their documentarion can be recycled from previous models'. Many other industries might have the same situation.
Then the likely incumbents... recent undergraduates from translation schools, fully trained, yet thoroughly inexperenced. Their training should include the use of all the tools and tricks in a few CAT tools. They would quickly recycle what can be recycled from available TMs, and attempt translating all the new stuff. Of course, more senior translators will revise their output... yet only what these guys actually translated.
Such intense exposure to time-proven translations should quickly lead them to some translation proficiency via osmosis, faster than trial-and-error like this has been traditionally done so far.
| | | | Heinrich Pesch
Финляндия
Local time: 21:31
Член ProZ.com c 2003
финский => немецкий
+ ...
| Customer is king | Jul 10, 2011 |
If the customer has invested in a previous translation and wants you to update his material using an existing TM you just do as told or lose this job.
Without Trados/SDLX I would lose half of my customers. And half of my money.
| | | | Nicole Schnell
США
Local time: 11:31
английский => немецкий
+ ...
Памяти | Thanks, José! | Jul 10, 2011 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote: I have no idea on your setting, however I also used to waste too much time typing around tags. I translate XML tagged files InFix Pro generates from PDFs. The whole story is described at http://www.lamensdorf.com.br/pdf-en.html . So I work on these XMLs using Word and WordFast Classic. A friend, who is a WordFast trainer, taught me this trick... In Word, I use Search & Replace to mark all text in red (the tags) with the "marching red ants". Then I config WordFast to consider all text with "marching red ants" as untranslatable. This makes WF skip all tags, leaving them untouched. Maybe you can develop an equivalent workaround there.
I will have to forward this information to my client in some way, because this is how I receive my files from this agency. 
| | |
|
|
|
Richard Hill
Мексика
Local time: 13:31
Член ProZ.com c 2011
испанский => английский
Автор темы
Glenda Janssen wrote:
The poster did not say that CAT and MT are the same thing, or even similar. He said that some people may believe that editing machine translations is quicker than translating outright, and he says that this is definitely not so. He then says that maybe those who believe that CAT make us faster make the same mistake as those that assume editing MT's is faster, i.e. it's not true, it's an illusion based on the fact that it /seems/ that some of the work is already done for you.
Thanks Glenda for clearing up Sergei's misunderstanding of my "prime assertion", I couldn't have put it better.
| | | | Richard Hill
Мексика
Local time: 13:31
Член ProZ.com c 2011
испанский => английский
Автор темы | Glenda is spot on | Jul 11, 2011 |
Sergei Tumanov wrote: Glenda Janssen wrote:
The poster did not say that CAT and MT are the same thing, or even similar. He said that some people may believe that editing machine translations is quicker than translating outright, and he says that this is definitely not so. He then says that maybe those who believe that CAT make us faster make the same mistake as those that assume editing MT's is faster, i.e. it's not true, it's an illusion based on the fact that it /seems/ that some of the work is already done for you.
but from the above I see that the editing of machine translation and use of CAT seem to be the same for the poster. But maybe I am wrong. [Edited at 2011-07-09 19:27 GMT]
Hi Sergei.
Glenda was spot on. Although I'm new to CAT tools, my point was not to compare CAT and MT in themselves, but rather to ask people's opinion as to whether the misconception that MT's may save time is also applicable to working with CAT tools.
| | | | Richard Hill
Мексика
Local time: 13:31
Член ProZ.com c 2011
испанский => английский
Автор темы | Thanks everybody for your responses | Jul 17, 2011 |
Thanks to everyone for responding.
The crux of my posting was to put out some feelers and look for some encouragement as to whether or not to take up the challenge and after quite a few late nights starting to get to grips with a couple of CAT tools and I'm starting to believe that they are worthwhile. I'll be sticking with it for a while at least.
thanks again everybody
rich
| | | | Barbara L Pavlik
США
Local time: 14:31
Член ProZ.com c 2011
испанский => английский
+ ...
| How is it working? | Dec 8, 2011 |
So, rich, now that you've invested in SDL Trados, what do you think about it? I ask because I am taking my first look at CAT tools. I was all set to buy Trados, but attended a Fluency webinar, and it looks so much more useable and spiffy than Trados. My only hesitation is that so many outsourcers require Trados. Has it boosted your business?
| | |
|
|
|
Valerie35 (X)
Local time: 20:31
немецкий => английский
I wouldn't use TRADOS (I gave up when I couldn't even activate TRADOS 2009 after having been a user for several years), but I WOULD use a CAT tool.
I personally use Atril Deja Vu - DVX2. My attitude is that every CAT tool has problems - although they are very useful - and DVX2 probably has the least amount of problems and the most amount of useful features.
| | | | Richard Hill
Мексика
Local time: 13:31
Член ProZ.com c 2011
испанский => английский
Автор темы | A few months later... | Dec 8, 2011 |
Hi Barbara,
My answer might not be that objective because of my lack of experience with other CAT tools but I can say I am glad I stuck with all the headaches and late nights (I get a bit obsessive when I’m learning). I guess I could have avoided a lot of headaches if I’d taken some of the courses that are available but I struggled through without the courses with a lot of help through this forum. Even installation was a headache (especially Multiterm (not everyone has problems ... See more Hi Barbara,
My answer might not be that objective because of my lack of experience with other CAT tools but I can say I am glad I stuck with all the headaches and late nights (I get a bit obsessive when I’m learning). I guess I could have avoided a lot of headaches if I’d taken some of the courses that are available but I struggled through without the courses with a lot of help through this forum. Even installation was a headache (especially Multiterm (not everyone has problems with installation)), so if you do buy Trados I’d recommend you clean you PC before installing and shut down all unnecessary programs.
Part of my decision to go with Trados was for the same reason as you. I had been working for the same agency for years and only recently started looking for new clients through Proz and thankfully it’s paying off but I wouldn’t say that owning Trados has led to these new clients, and actually, only one has required the use of a CAT tool (they didn't specify Trados), but I know many outsourcers do.
I definitely work faster with Trados, but more importantly it makes my work easier and more consistent, especially the autocomplete feature of the termbase/autosuggest dictionary/autotext which is incredibly handy. My paper dictionaries are gathering dust. If it had less bugs I’d be incredibly impressed and with bugs and all, I’m still pretty impressed.
I would recommend that you watch the Trados Studio and Multiterm videos http://www.translationzone.com/en/support/video-tutorials/ and weigh up the features against those of other CAT tools.
[Edited at 2011-12-09 00:48 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Who is losing money? | Dec 9, 2011 |
Over the years I developed a "bad" (?) habit of relentlessly advocating for the end client, sometimes for the end-client's end-client.
For instance, if I see that the entire process entails wasting money or resources in any way, I make sure to tell about it to my contact, the next link in the supply chain, and suggest some options. The potential savings may help providing the last stop in the chain with a better or more affordable product.
On a completely different fron... See more Over the years I developed a "bad" (?) habit of relentlessly advocating for the end client, sometimes for the end-client's end-client.
For instance, if I see that the entire process entails wasting money or resources in any way, I make sure to tell about it to my contact, the next link in the supply chain, and suggest some options. The potential savings may help providing the last stop in the chain with a better or more affordable product.
On a completely different front, I realized that this advocacy has been the key ingredient for my delivery of 'great' video subtitles. My QC question for each subtitle is... if this video were in Dutch (of which I don't understand squat), would this subtitle be good enough for me?
There are other requirements at play, however these two illustrate the concern for providing the final user with the highest possible quality at the lowest possible cost (and not the other way around).
I have noticed that the frequency of the incident I am about to describe has been increasing lately. It goes like this... An outsourcer posts a translation job here with a host of very specific and reasonable requirements, yet the only thing they will not compromise under any circumstances is the ownership and use of one specific CAT tool. After two days, they have received 2-5 bids, and the ad expires. Apparently none of these bids was acceptable, because the job ad is reposted unchanged, and the results are the same. The conclusion is that not so many translators bought and learned to use that very CAT tool in these two days. Sometimes I see the the job posted for the third time.
It makes me wonder what did this outsourcer compromise on. Did they take a translator who had that specific CAT tool, but not enough experience or knowledge in the subject area? Or did they hire a more expensive translator, jeopardizing their profit, simply to uphold their vows to that CAT tool? It's obvious they didn't hire anyone who uses another - or no - CAT tool, because these are prevented from bidding by the settings they entered on the Proz jobs system.
I envision them standing on the street at night, under heavy rain, waiting for a taxicab to take them home, yet they'll only board a vehicle made by a specific manufacturer. Getting drenched won't make them change their mind.
In order to get that job done the way they want, they'll either pay more or get less-specialized translators, simply for the luxury of having that CAT tool used. So blindly and obdurately demandng one specific CAT tool may be causing translation outsourcers to lose money indeed.
[Edited at 2011-12-09 10:46 GMT]
[Edited at 2011-12-09 10:46 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Страниц в теме: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Is Translation Memory Losing You Money? | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
