| Teemakohased leheküljed: [1 2] > | Poll: When you proofread full MTPE jobs (where a colleague did the PE), how good is generally the quality? Vestluse postitaja: ProZ.com Staff
|
|---|
This forum topic is for the discussion of the poll question "When you proofread full MTPE jobs (where a colleague did the PE), how good is generally the quality?".
This poll was originally submitted by Thorsten Schülke. View the poll results »
| | | |
It's a headache, and translation agencies reducing rates based on that the MTPE will take less time it takes longer than translating from scratch.
| | | | | I don't work on such jobs | Apr 28, 2024 |
I’ve only done a MTPE job so far (I’ve refused many as I don’t want to shoot myself on the foot)…
| | | |
Can be very good, but sometimes:
– placement of tags is completely ignored. MT has added all the tags to the end of segments or placed randomly, and the post editor has not moved them.
– if MT has created a fluent sentence, but some words are used in wrong context, then they are sometimes left in because the post editor has focused on grammar and not meaning.
| | |
|
|
|
Lieven Malaise
Belgia
Local time: 20:50
Liige (2020)
prantsuse - hollandi
+ ...
It's as good as the quality of human translations : sometimes good, more often mediocre and too often bad.
Good or bad translations have nothing to do with machine or human translation, but everything with the human behind it.
[Bijgewerkt op 2024-04-28 11:46 GMT]
| | | | Yuliya Sedykh
Venemaa Föderatsioon
Local time: 22:50
Liige (2024)
inglise - vene
+ ...
| Very strange experience in RU-EN | Apr 28, 2024 |
Not for legal texts for sure. No style, wrong sentence structures copied from legal Russian (that's a headache by itself), strange punctuation, no choice of right terms. It could be more or less acceptable for very simplified and brief financial statements with a good trained inhouse machine engine available for certain types of texts.
| | | | | I don't work on such jobs | Apr 28, 2024 |
The rare post-editing job I accept every once in a leap year only serves as proof of what I know either way: machine translations are a completely useless waste of time and I could provide a proper translation from scratch in the same amount of time and with far less headache.
The fact that companies have jobs that have been post-edited reviewed an additional time only shows that even they, who try to push their MT and AI brainwashing wherever they can, really do not trust this technology.
| | | | MagnusRubens (X)
Local time: 19:50
| Proofreading MT text takes more time than translating from scratch | Apr 29, 2024 |
---------------------
Workflow for MTPE:
---------------------
1) Read segment
2) Decide if segment is good enough or not
3a) If good enough > consider segment "passed" > press CTRL-ENTER to continue
3b) If not good enough > place mouse cursor at problematic part (lose a couple of seconds), edit part > press CTRL-ENTER to continue
3c) If very poor > place mouse in segment (lose a couple of seconds) > delete entire segment > retranslate entire segment > p... See more ---------------------
Workflow for MTPE:
---------------------
1) Read segment
2) Decide if segment is good enough or not
3a) If good enough > consider segment "passed" > press CTRL-ENTER to continue
3b) If not good enough > place mouse cursor at problematic part (lose a couple of seconds), edit part > press CTRL-ENTER to continue
3c) If very poor > place mouse in segment (lose a couple of seconds) > delete entire segment > retranslate entire segment > press CTRL-ENTER to continue
------------------------------------
Workflow for regular translation:
------------------------------------
1) Be able to use 25 years of full time experience
2) Translate segment > press CTRL-ENTER to continue
MTPE takes considerably MORE time, not less. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
jyuan_us 
Ameerika Ühendriigid
Local time: 14:50
Liige (2005)
inglise - hiina
+ ...
The survey question is not about doing MTPE, but about proofreading a file that has already been post-edited by another human translator.
I've not been assigned such a proofreading job, and if I do get a request in the future, I'll definitely work on it. The reason is I don't see a reason why not
| | | |
jyuan_us wrote:
The survey question is not about doing MTPE, but about proofreading a file that has already been post-edited by another human translator.
I've not been assigned such a proofreading job, and if I do get a request in the future, I'll definitely work on it. The reason is I don't see a reason why not
Proofreading a translation that has already been post-edited by another translator means enabling the translation industry in the use of a technology even they themselves do not trust enough. Big-picture stuff.
| | | | Lingua 5B
Bosnia ja Hertsegoviina
Local time: 20:50
Liige (2009)
inglise - horvaadi
+ ...
| Not only the technology | Apr 29, 2024 |
Alex Lichanow wrote:
jyuan_us wrote:
The survey question is not about doing MTPE, but about proofreading a file that has already been post-edited by another human translator.
I've not been assigned such a proofreading job, and if I do get a request in the future, I'll definitely work on it. The reason is I don't see a reason why not
Proofreading a translation that has already been post-edited by another translator means enabling the translation industry in the use of a technology even they themselves do not trust enough. Big-picture stuff.
Based on this question, not only the technology, but they don’t trust the post-editor either. What a wonderful process and industry, no head and no tail.
| | | | Zea_Mays
Itaalia
Local time: 20:50
inglise - saksa
+ ...
| ISO 18587 is your friend | Apr 29, 2024 |
I've never been asked to proofread a post-edited machine translation, but I do MTPE for only one agency which adheres to ISO 18587 standards. This means that only copy that is suited for MT is machine translated, and they use dedicated MT engines that are trained for that type of text. Therefore, the machine translated output is still not perfect but it is not the crap you often get from generic MT tools.
In a scenario like that, MTPE is not paid peanuts, is has its costs. Actually, MTPE ... See more I've never been asked to proofread a post-edited machine translation, but I do MTPE for only one agency which adheres to ISO 18587 standards. This means that only copy that is suited for MT is machine translated, and they use dedicated MT engines that are trained for that type of text. Therefore, the machine translated output is still not perfect but it is not the crap you often get from generic MT tools.
In a scenario like that, MTPE is not paid peanuts, is has its costs. Actually, MTPE is only suited - and worthwile - for some types of content and for large volumes. Provided that the client wants a high quality product of course.
Now, with ISO 18587 there, the next time you'll be asked to do MTPE, just ask the agency if they follow ISO 18587 standards.
Once an increasing number of agencies get ISO 18587 certified and use this certification as a selling point, there might occur a redimensioning of the MTPE market. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
jyuan_us
Ameerika Ühendriigid
Local time: 14:50
Liige (2005)
inglise - hiina
+ ...
| The point is | Apr 29, 2024 |
Alex Lichanow wrote:
jyuan_us wrote:
The survey question is not about doing MTPE, but about proofreading a file that has already been post-edited by another human translator.
I've not been assigned such a proofreading job, and if I do get a request in the future, I'll definitely work on it. The reason is I don't see a reason why not
Proofreading a translation that has already been post-edited by another translator means enabling the translation industry in the use of a technology even they themselves do not trust enough. Big-picture stuff.
A company that has the human proofreading step implemented after a file that has already been post-edited by another human translator is generally serious about the quality of their product. And usually a company like that would most likely pay their proofreaders the same rate for proofreading human translations.
| | | | jyuan_us
Ameerika Ühendriigid
Local time: 14:50
Liige (2005)
inglise - hiina
+ ...
| No enough information to support the claim | Apr 29, 2024 |
Alex Lichanow wrote:
jyuan_us wrote:
The survey question is not about doing MTPE, but about proofreading a file that has already been post-edited by another human translator.
I've not been assigned such a proofreading job, and if I do get a request in the future, I'll definitely work on it. The reason is I don't see a reason why not
Proofreading a translation that has already been post-edited by another translator means enabling the translation industry in the use of a technology even they themselves do not trust enough. Big-picture stuff.
Having you proofread a translation that has already been post-edited by another translator doesn't means the company does not trust the technology being used enough. It could just means they care more about their products. We should not rush to conclusions.
[Edited at 2024-04-29 17:01 GMT]
| | | |
jyuan_us wrote:
Alex Lichanow wrote:
jyuan_us wrote:
The survey question is not about doing MTPE, but about proofreading a file that has already been post-edited by another human translator.
I've not been assigned such a proofreading job, and if I do get a request in the future, I'll definitely work on it. The reason is I don't see a reason why not
Proofreading a translation that has already been post-edited by another translator means enabling the translation industry in the use of a technology even they themselves do not trust enough. Big-picture stuff.
Having you proofread a translation that has already been post-edited by another translator doesn't means the company does not trust the technology being used enough. It could just means they care more about their products. We should not rush to conclusions. [Edited at 2024-04-29 17:01 GMT]
I am absolutely jumping to conclusions here and I own it. They absolutely know the "quality" produced by the MT is poor (which, of course, they will never tell the client), and they at least suspect the first post-editor of half-assing it, because why would anyone give their best to post-edit what they could have done better themselves from the get-go? MT for anything more complex than run-of-the-mill parts lists and tech specs needs to die (and even machine-translated parts lists need to be taken with a major pinch of salt, because once you have "nuts" as part of your hardware, you can absolutely expect your beloved technological solution to make those nuts edible in its translation effort).
[Edited at 2024-04-29 17:23 GMT]
| | | | | Teemakohased leheküljed: [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 » Poll: When you proofread full MTPE jobs (where a colleague did the PE), how good is generally the quality? | 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 » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
