Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Simplest way to get freelancers up and running with a CAT tool?
Poster: Michael Wetzel
Post title: OmegaT would have been my suggestion
As a Wordfast Classic user, my first thought was also to suggest the free tool OmegaT. I think it is basically the same thing as WfC, except that it is based on .odt files instead of .doc/.docx.
This would permit the translators to build up and use a glossary, search their corpus of previous translations, have TM matches automatically recognized and - last but not least - to have their translation displayed segement-by-segment together with the original, which helps a lot for editing and preventing omissions. And it is presumably extremely easy to learn!
Expecting amateurs to figure out and reliably use real CAT tools (that is, probably anything except Wordfast Classic or OmegaT) seems unfair and unwise.
My understanding is that switching between CAT tools is always problematic in terms of generating TMs, etc. In combination with amateur users, no solution is likely to consistently produce adequate results. Aligning the incoming translations and source texts yourself with your own tool seems like a much better strategy anyway. Something along those lines would probably also be the most effective solution in terms of inserting matches into incoming texts.
And I can't resist commenting on the business model: Why? Given the choice between a non-native translator with very good English and a native non-translator with good or very good source-language skills, why would you choose the native speaker over the translator? Or is the issue subject-matter experts?
Topic: Simplest way to get freelancers up and running with a CAT tool?
Poster: Michael Wetzel
Post title: OmegaT would have been my suggestion
As a Wordfast Classic user, my first thought was also to suggest the free tool OmegaT. I think it is basically the same thing as WfC, except that it is based on .odt files instead of .doc/.docx.
This would permit the translators to build up and use a glossary, search their corpus of previous translations, have TM matches automatically recognized and - last but not least - to have their translation displayed segement-by-segment together with the original, which helps a lot for editing and preventing omissions. And it is presumably extremely easy to learn!
Expecting amateurs to figure out and reliably use real CAT tools (that is, probably anything except Wordfast Classic or OmegaT) seems unfair and unwise.
My understanding is that switching between CAT tools is always problematic in terms of generating TMs, etc. In combination with amateur users, no solution is likely to consistently produce adequate results. Aligning the incoming translations and source texts yourself with your own tool seems like a much better strategy anyway. Something along those lines would probably also be the most effective solution in terms of inserting matches into incoming texts.
And I can't resist commenting on the business model: Why? Given the choice between a non-native translator with very good English and a native non-translator with good or very good source-language skills, why would you choose the native speaker over the translator? Or is the issue subject-matter experts?