Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: DZiW
Post title: No statistics, no representative sample
According to a few (and old) sources like [url= [url removed] ]this blog[/url], with a relevant 50k+ units TM/glossary, translation via CAT could be some 30% faster for similar texts. However, even 100% fuzzy matches require checking and even modifying. The problem is ([b]1[/b]) agencies usually want several CATs and ([b]2[/b]) after sentence-by-sentence segmentation some languages and style-guides often require heavy post-editing (rewording, re/paraphrasing, re/moving, cutting, concatenating, and so on). Why, it's possible to combine free/online and commercial CATs, yet while paragraph-by-paragraph segmentation makes translation units (and texts) more coherent, such segmentation would result in lower fuzzy matching. Also note, that CAT does make translation rather choppy, so mostly it's not very good for literature/fiction. Here is where a balance man comes)
I agree that CATs are somewhat like getting about on crutches, slowly deteriorating one's natural skills and habits, so I used to print out bilingual texts and practiced reading, rephrasing, and translating back and forth on-fly. Unfortunately, nowadays fast-paced globalization perverts even good ideas, twisting translation into cheap MT post-editing.
[Edited at 2018-08-13 17:38 GMT]
Topic: Efficiency of using CAT tools in comparison to using none
Poster: DZiW
Post title: No statistics, no representative sample
According to a few (and old) sources like [url= [url removed] ]this blog[/url], with a relevant 50k+ units TM/glossary, translation via CAT could be some 30% faster for similar texts. However, even 100% fuzzy matches require checking and even modifying. The problem is ([b]1[/b]) agencies usually want several CATs and ([b]2[/b]) after sentence-by-sentence segmentation some languages and style-guides often require heavy post-editing (rewording, re/paraphrasing, re/moving, cutting, concatenating, and so on). Why, it's possible to combine free/online and commercial CATs, yet while paragraph-by-paragraph segmentation makes translation units (and texts) more coherent, such segmentation would result in lower fuzzy matching. Also note, that CAT does make translation rather choppy, so mostly it's not very good for literature/fiction. Here is where a balance man comes)
I agree that CATs are somewhat like getting about on crutches, slowly deteriorating one's natural skills and habits, so I used to print out bilingual texts and practiced reading, rephrasing, and translating back and forth on-fly. Unfortunately, nowadays fast-paced globalization perverts even good ideas, twisting translation into cheap MT post-editing.
[Edited at 2018-08-13 17:38 GMT]