Quantcast
Channel: ProZ.com Translation Forums
Viewing all 3915 articles
Browse latest View live

Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none | CAT wins in every single aspect.

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: Richard Purdom
Post title: CAT wins in every single aspect.

[quote]Tom in London wrote:

[quote]Alistair Gainey wrote:

.... user manuals .... [/quote]

** recoiling in horror**

USER MANUALS? What? Have I gone back to the 1990s?

No software in 2018 should require a user manual. [/quote]

And yet it does. I've got some radical music software with a 1,200-page manual for a start.

As for CATs; worth having JUST to avoid any formatting.
And 30% more output, at least, more consistency, better workflow, better product, and lots of clients that insist on using them. I wouldn't get far if couldn't deal with sdlxliff files.
Of course you can be a Luddite and create a stick for your own back, use Windows 98, a typewriter of even feather and ink by gaslight, no doubt there's even some who prefer to chip words on slabs of marble.

Then again, I work for the Dutch market, a country always at the forefront of innovation, so y'all be following sooner or later.

Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none | Negative for me

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: Inga Petkelyte
Post title: Negative for me

In my personal experience, CAT tools only increased the time and not the other way round. I could, probably, have benefited of a CAT tool when translating noodle labels - but that's the only (ok, in addition to soft drinks labels) case I can remember where it could have been useful. Where I did use a CAT tool upon client requests, those tools proved to be a burden rather than a boon. With 7 morphological cases in one of the target languages, the probability of a 100% match to be true is just 1 to 7 in pure theory, as the probability of a nominative case is much lower in practice and I can tell that adapting 3 or more word terminations in "100% match" phrases usually takes me more time than writing those words entirely from scratch.

Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none | Too much technicality to the detriment of translation quality

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: Mario Cerutti
Post title: Too much technicality to the detriment of translation quality

The main reason why I hate CAT tools when they are forced on me — although I regularly use one of my choice just to leverage the tri-language glossary that I have been building in more than twenty years of translation — is that I find it quite difficult to do a final pre-delivery review inside the CAT tool itself if for technical reasons I cannot export the file and open it in its original application, for I am unable to see it in its fullness, with its original formatting, text flowing and so on.

Also, very often you can neither split, merge or move segments around as you see it fit, which is a serious limitation besides proving to be a formidable ostacle to translation quality. I am not talking about technical manuals, for which CAT tools continuously prove their usefulness. In fact, too many translation companies require that CAT tools be used even when there are no repetitions at all, or when even 90-95% fuzzy matches needs to be entirely rewritten (fashion, highly creative texts and the like). This is particularly true when translating from Japanese.

[Edited at 2018-08-21 08:47 GMT]

[Edited at 2018-08-21 10:47 GMT]

Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none | CAT tools are esential for manuals

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: Kaspars Melkis
Post title: CAT tools are esential for manuals

Manuals (for a mechanical device, for example) often have a complex design and the text part is exported with an extensive markup. CAT tools is an elegant way how to deal with them allowing to create an identical design with minimum work.

It is not an ideal though because when translating row by row, the view of the context is missing. One can always look at the original document but that is an extra work.

Over-reliance on TM and glossary hits makes a translator to work as a machine trying to follow matches and think less of the actual meaning of the text. Some short headings or chart items will be difficult to locate and will often give misleading hits.

I think some companies also use CAT tools as a primitive version control although they never really work well for this purpose. One reason is that reviewers don't use CAT tools and the final changes in the text or design are made in the different software. Then project managers wanting to preserve the purity of their TM, ask translators to re-enter these changes in the TM. It creates a quite a lot of overhead with very dubious gains.

Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none | There are CAT tool haters

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: Stepan Konev
Post title: There are CAT tool haters

who evade using CAT tools, and there are CAT tool lovers who never avoid using it. Nothing can change this balance. =)
In Russian folklore literature, there is a tale by Alexander Pushkin that describes a bet. The bet was to transfer a horse from point A to point B. The one who do it sooner wins. First bettor tried to put the horse onto his shoulder (as if it was a sack) and bring it to point B. The other one brought the horse "under his legs" (just rode it to point B). This is my percentage :D

Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none | Oh really?

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: Tom in London
Post title: Oh really?

[quote]Richard Purdom wrote:

....a country always at the forefront of innovation---
[/quote]

Where they still have user manuals you have to read before you can use computer software.

Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none | Efficiency of CAT tools

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: Michael Newton
Post title: Efficiency of CAT tools

Recently I used Google Translate for a complex medical text in Japanese. The results were laughable. Some of the names of the authors of the article popped up in Mandarin pronunciation rather than Japanese, syntax was thrown to the wind and one key word was given five different translations by GT.

This reminded me of an old comedy routine:

If you have enough monkeys, enough typewriters and enough time, sooner or later the monkeys will write the Great Books.
Snatching a page from one typewriter, sure enough: "To be or not to be, that is the grfzlplk".

Nuf said?

Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none | Not CAT

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: Alistair Gainey
Post title: Not CAT

[quote]Michael Newton wrote:

Recently I used Google Translate for a complex medical text in Japanese. The results were laughable. Some of the names of the authors of the article popped up in Mandarin pronunciation rather than Japanese, syntax was thrown to the wind and one key word was given five different translations by GT.

This reminded me of an old comedy routine:

If you have enough monkeys, enough typewriters and enough time, sooner or later the monkeys will write the Great Books.
Snatching a page from one typewriter, sure enough: "To be or not to be, that is the grfzlplk".

Nuf said? [/quote]

Maybe I'm missing your point, but when we're talking about CAT tools, we're not talking about Google Translate, or any other form of machine translation.

[Edited at 2018-08-22 12:02 GMT]

Xbench for QA - do you like it? | Free version doesn't support unicode

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Xbench for QA - do you like it?
Poster: Eyob Fitwi
Post title: Free version doesn't support unicode

[quote]Riccardo Schiaffino wrote:

[quote]Gabriele Demuth wrote:

You can use it for free for a while, but then you are asked to pay. [/quote]

That's not exactly right: Version 3 (the commercial version) is free for a trial period, then you have to pay, or it stops working -- but version 2.9 is free forever.

You can use v. 2.9 for the QA of Studio files, but not, (for example), of memoQ files: that capability was added after the release of v. 3, so it is not available in the free version. There are some other limitations in the "free forever" version... the main one is that it won't be updated, so if (for example) SDL in the future makes a change to the sdxliff format that makes it no longer compatible with Xbench, you'll be out of luck.

I recommend paying for the commercial version, if you find the program useful: Xbench is an excellent program, good software doesn't come out of thin air, and developers should be rewarded for their efforts. [/quote]

On top of that, the free version doesn't support unicode. So if you work on a language that isn't ascii-based, then Xbench won't work for you. It's simply replace the characters with question marks.

Support for xliff 2.0 and later | Swordfish supports XLIFF 2.0

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Support for xliff 2.0 and later
Poster: Rodolfo Raya
Post title: Swordfish supports XLIFF 2.0

[quote]Alyssa Yorgan wrote:

I'm trying to figure out which major tools offer support for the xliff 2.0/2.1 standards. I know that two tools that I use regularly (CafeTran, Swordfish) will export xliff 1.2 files if you translate a .pptx, for example. Any links to resources would be greatly appreciated, as I have had trouble finding this information. [/quote]

Current version of Swordfish allows you to convert XLIFF 1.2 to XLIFF 2.0 and XLIFF 2.0 to 1.2.

If you receive an XLIFF 2.0 file, convert it to 1.2 and translate with Swordfish. When you finish, convert the translated XLIFF 1.2 back to 2.0 and deliver.

Regards,
Rodolfo

Merge segment should always be possible | SnowmanCAT alsway allow segment merge

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Merge segment should always be possible
Poster: xulihang
Post title: SnowmanCAT alsway allow segment merge

I often get indesign-generated pdfs to translate. So I have to transcribe texts from these pdfs. But the result may not be fullfiling and I have to proofread it.

Then I will import it into CAT tools. But there still may be problems. And as for English-Chinese translation, several English sentences equal one Chinese sentence.

So the merge function is very important for a flexible translation.

The SnowmanCAT(雪人CAT) works just fine for me.

Comparing Memsource to TRADOS

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Comparing Memsource to TRADOS
Poster: Will Volny

Does anyone have experience in both of these CAT tools? I am new to CAT tools, I am ashamed to say and realize that I'd better jump in ASAP.
regards,
Will

Comparing Memsource to TRADOS | Don't be ashamed!

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Comparing Memsource to TRADOS
Poster: Christine Andersen
Post title: Don't be ashamed!

You are actually in very good company!
There are still plenty of professional translators who are not convinced of the blessings of a CAT tool.

However, there are a lot of us who do think they are worth spending money and especially time on - it does require patience to get familiar with a tool like Trados Studio. Don't give up - get someone to help you start, and keep trying.
It may be easier to start with a project that is already set up, and try out the features. Then it is easier to understand the options when you are faced with setting up a project for yourself.

I have never tried MemSource, but I know several colleagues who strongly prefer Trados.

Comparing Memsource to TRADOS | Trados is full of bugs...

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Comparing Memsource to TRADOS
Poster: Jakov Milicevic
Post title: Trados is full of bugs...

[quote]Christine Andersen wrote:

You are actually in very good company!
There are still plenty of professional translators who are not convinced of the blessings of a CAT tool.

However, there are a lot of us who do think they are worth spending money and especially time on - it does require patience to get familiar with a tool like Trados Studio. Don't give up - get someone to help you start, and keep trying.
It may be easier to start with a project that is already set up, and try out the features. Then it is easier to understand the options when you are faced with setting up a project for yourself.

I have never tried MemSource, but I know several colleagues who strongly prefer Trados.
[/quote]

From my personal experience I have never had problems when creating target files using MemSource but with Trados this issue comes very often and even the SDL Trados Support doesn't know how to solve it telling you that ''they sympathize the problem''. I strongly recommend MemSource as a tool since it's more efficient, easier to use, intuitive has better QA and fair way better technical support than SDL.

[Edited at 2018-09-09 08:58 GMT]

CAT tool that allows to work on the same MS Word doc. (source lang. and target lang. side by side)

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: CAT tool that allows to work on the same MS Word doc. (source lang. and target lang. side by side)
Poster: The Newbie

Hello. I'm new to the translating world and also to CAT tools. I only have OmegaT but I've never really used it. The thing is I'm working with a kind of document that requires the source language and the target language to be side by side inside a MS Word document, one in each column (it's a MS Word table). As far as I know, CAT tools create an exact copy of the original document, replacing the text of the source language with the text of the target language. But what if, as in my case, I want to insert the target language not in a separate document but inside the same document beside the source language (in different columns, as I said)? Is this possible at all with any CAT tool out there?

To clarify, the translations I work on are not technical or repetitive at all, but I still think a CAT tool would speed up the process for me for a peculiar reason: I'm translating from Spanish into English and English is not my native language. I know this is not an ideal thing to do but the company I do it for is okay with it because there's just a large amount of work. Anyway, why do I say this? Well, because although these translations are not technical, the fact that English is not my first language makes me be slow, obviously, because I constantly have to make sure I'm using correct and natural English (even if I'm pretty sure something's correct I still look it up to confirm it). And I find myself constantly looking up the same basic expressions (en este momento --> at this moment, on this moment, at this point, etc. / por teléfono --> by phone, over the phone), "in the report" or "on the report", "in the video" or "on the video", and things like these, which is annoying and tiring. With a CAT tool I wouldn't need to be looking up these same things over and over again and I could work faster.

So, in summary, this is what I'd need:

- Be able to work inside Microsoft Word.
- Not create a copy of the document replacing the language, but insert the target language in the column beside the source language.
- Everything I type into the second column of the Word document (the target language) should be automatically included in a translation memory. In every project (document) I work on (and I'd need this for my past projects too).
- Using this translation memory, suggestions should appear throughout the document where there's something that's similar to something I've already translated before.
- Doing the same as the previous thing with a glossary would be useful too because the source language often includes slang terms.

Any suggestions?
Thanks!

CAT tool that allows to work on the same MS Word doc. (source lang. and target lang. side by side) | Translating a side-by-side source-target table

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: CAT tool that allows to work on the same MS Word doc. (source lang. and target lang. side by side)
Poster: John Fossey
Post title: Translating a side-by-side source-target table

What you describe is a fairly common scenario. What I do is copy all the source text to the target column, then hide all the original source text and any other headers, etc., that should not be translated. Then proceed as normal in the CAT tool. The CAT tool will not see the hidden text and will not touch it. When finished you just unhide all the text previously hidden, leaving you with the untouched source text and the translated target text.

CAT tool that allows to work on the same MS Word doc. (source lang. and target lang. side by side) | Metatexis?

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: CAT tool that allows to work on the same MS Word doc. (source lang. and target lang. side by side)
Poster: Henry Dotterer
Post title: Metatexis?

I don't know of a tool that would do the column thing you are asking. But Metatexis works in Word, and last I knew at least, Wordfast does too. I think both let you start trying for free. Maybe they could do something close to what you want.

Others, feel free to correct me if I am behind the times on these tools.

CAT tool that allows to work on the same MS Word doc. (source lang. and target lang. side by side) | @Nameless

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: CAT tool that allows to work on the same MS Word doc. (source lang. and target lang. side by side)
Poster: Samuel Murray
Post title: @Nameless

[quote]Nameless person wrote:
As far as I know, CAT tools create an exact copy of the original document, replacing the text of the source language with the text of the target language. [/quote]

Yes, but you can often specify which parts of the document must be translated and which parts should remain untranslated. So if you have a table with two columns, and you have the same text in both columns, you can sometimes tell the CAT tool to leave the first column as-is and only make changes to the second column. In certain formats, you can even translate columns even if the second column does not yet contain a copy of the first column (e.g. Excel files).

[quote]But what if, as in my case, I want to insert the target language not in a separate document but inside the same document beside the source language (in different columns, as I said)? Is this possible at all with any CAT tool out there? [/quote]

Some CAT tools do indeed work inside the document itself (and does not simply create a translated copy of it). Wordfast Classic (WFC) is one such tool. To use WFC, you'd have to copy the source text from the first column into the second column, and then tell WFC not to translate the first column. So you're essentially translating the second column and gradually replacing the source text with the target text.

You can mark text as untranslatable in WFC by setting the font as "hidden", or by changing the style of the font to something, e.g. tw4winExternal style, or by using a font alteration that you specify as "do not translate". However, this is fairly advanced usage in WFC, so you'll probably spend some time figuring out how to do it.

[quote]I find myself constantly looking up the same basic expressions (en este momento --> at this moment, on this moment, at this point, etc. / por teléfono --> by phone, over the phone), "in the report" or "on the report", "in the video" or "on the video", and things like these, which is annoying and tiring. With a CAT tool I wouldn't need to be looking up these same things over and over again and I could work faster. [/quote]

Most CAT tools can only recognise segments, not phrases within segments. [Some CAT tools do attempt to recognise phrases, e.g. Trados 2019, but your mileage will vary -- it is unlikely that Trados will recognise "en este momento", for example.]

So, if for example you have the segment "Programas ejecutándose en este momento o concluídos en XYZ", the CAT tool won't tell you that you've already translated "en este momento" nor will it tell you what its translation is. Even if you have translated "en este momento" separately once before, the CAT tool will still not flag "en este momento" in the segment "Programas ejecutándose en este momento o concluídos en XYZ" because that phrase is only 25% of the full segment, and very few CAT tools serve 25% matches.

You would be able to search for "en este momento" quicker if you've used a CAT tool, however, because you can search the TM manually to see how the phrase was translated previously. Or, you can add "en este momento" to the glossary and then the CAT tool will automatically recognise it and offer the translation to you. But creating the glossary with each translated phrase is something you'd have to do manually.

[quote]- Everything I type into the second column of the Word document (the target language) should be automatically included in a translation memory. [/quote]

In order for a CAT tool do add something to the translation memory (TM), the CAT tool must have some way of accurately identifying the source text of the segment that you're trying to add to the TM.

[quote]In every project (document) I work on (and I'd need this for my past projects too).[/quote]

You can use a single TM with more than one document.

To create a TM from old translations, figure out how "alignment" works (often available as separate programs).

[quote]- Using this translation memory, suggestions should appear throughout the document where there's something that's similar to something I've already translated before. [/quote]

In WFC (and other tools that work inside the document itself), the suggestions do not appear automatically all over the document, but appear only at the point where you are currently busy typing a translation. Other CAT tools do have that feature, but they don't work inside the document itself.

[quote]Any suggestions? [/quote]

Yes... the suggestion given by John Fossey (who has a name) is a good one.

[Edited at 2018-09-26 09:03 GMT]

"Unique" words

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic:"Unique" words
Poster: anastasiawhite

I just received a 5,000 word project and they said that 2,000 of those words are unique. What does that mean? Should I only charge for the 2,000 unique words?

"Unique" words | CAT tools

$
0
0
Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic:"Unique" words
Poster: Jack Doughty
Post title: CAT tools

Some agencies expect you to use CAT tools and pay a certain rate for "full matches", a lower rate for "fuzzy matches" and nothing for "full matches". Personally I do not use CAT tools, they are not often much help for the sort of translations I do, so I refuse all offers of this sort. I don't think I lose much as a result.
Viewing all 3915 articles
Browse latest View live


Latest Images