| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] > | Clients / large translation companies now talking about pooling linguistic data. Should we be there? Thread poster: Henry Dotterer
|
|---|
| Go one step further in that thought process | Jul 31, 2008 |
Eleftherios Kritikakis wrote:
Do you seriously think that your little databases are "assets" when compared to the allignment of 5-10 million words per month in vast translation memories?
Sure, even personal collections are valuable assets today. But looking ahead, one might wonder whether even 5-10 million words per month would constitute a strategic asset. Confidential stuff excluded, many of the completed translations get published on the web anyway, where they can be harvested and aligned by anyone. Google, for example, feeds their translation systems with billions of words (some of which no doubt were translated by folks here and kept in private TMs, and later and stored up in the TMs of the agencies and then end clients.) Of course it is not the same thing, entirely, but that may be part of the new openness on the part of the industry to sharing.
| | | | Jeff Whittaker 
United States
Local time: 10:36
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Confidentiality / Project already exists right here | Jul 31, 2008 |
I just read through this whole thread and I still do not understand how companies can sell/market/give away databases containing what are supposed to be confidential documents? Would permission have to be obtained from each client? Why would they want their personal documents posted on the internet for all to see even if names and identifiers are removed?
So if nothing is left but phrases and terms, ProZ already has what it needs to build its own database. I think it would be grea... See more I just read through this whole thread and I still do not understand how companies can sell/market/give away databases containing what are supposed to be confidential documents? Would permission have to be obtained from each client? Why would they want their personal documents posted on the internet for all to see even if names and identifiers are removed?
So if nothing is left but phrases and terms, ProZ already has what it needs to build its own database. I think it would be great if ProZ could figure out a way to integrate the existing KudoZ term base and glossaries into an existing CAT tool term base (such as providing automatic links in the source text to KudoZ entries or having a separate window showing this data - in other words, negating the need to look up terms individually and automate the process within your CAT tool). I would purchase a CAT tool for that! More revenue for ProZ too as this would be a members-only service.
[Edited at 2008-07-31 19:22] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Noted. Thanks, Andrew | Jul 31, 2008 |
Andrew Steel MCIL, MITI wrote:
So, in terms of suggestions, I'd propose that Proz.com should:
a) Get involved in the TAUS Data Association to represent its members.
b) Start working with members to develop a new automation-based pricing model that translators, agencies and end clients are all happy with.
The potential exists to create a win-win situation in which translators/editors earn the amount per hour they want and clients get the productivity gains they're after.
An interesting suggestion. I'll think about that. Thank you.
| | | | John Alphonse (X)
United States
English
+ ...
| There are still writers, therefore... | Jul 31, 2008 |
If this perceived obsolescence was valid, then the profession of "writer" would have disappeared long ago, replaced by "writing databases" of books, reports, letters, legal statements, etc. Sure you can buy pre-packaged sets of these "forms" and the like, but none of this has put the writer out of business or forced him or her into another profession, for the most part anyhow (and it possibly has created more jobs instead of less). I see translation as being no different, as you are in the end... See more If this perceived obsolescence was valid, then the profession of "writer" would have disappeared long ago, replaced by "writing databases" of books, reports, letters, legal statements, etc. Sure you can buy pre-packaged sets of these "forms" and the like, but none of this has put the writer out of business or forced him or her into another profession, for the most part anyhow (and it possibly has created more jobs instead of less). I see translation as being no different, as you are in the end a writer who is expressing someone else's idea in an entirely different language. A database will always be just that: a base of data from which to draw. I have yet to see any clients' needs which matched so exactly that they could swap their text, and if they did, it would not be perceived as or appear very professional in my opinion. Customization is the key to a good, final word-based product. Not to deny that some projects, some of the time, may be able to get by with the "form" but any company that wants to stand out will demand originality and customization, all on their own, after dealing with a bland database for a few weeks, I believe! ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Automated translation needs automated writers | Jul 31, 2008 |
JohnAlphonse wrote:
If this perceived obsolescence was valid, then the profession of "writer" would have disappeared long ago, replaced by "writing databases" of books, reports, letters, legal statements, etc. Sure you can buy pre-packaged sets of these "forms" and the like, but none of this has put the writer out of business or forced him or her into another profession, for the most part anyhow (and it possibly has created more jobs instead of less).
I have been saying this here for several years now I think. And it is exactly my point. Let them have as many memories as they want, and as much automation as they want. Writers will exist in the future and unless you replace the writers with machines, you will need translators.
Let's not promote this end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it idea among ourselves. By doing so we are only making it even easier for TAUS members to lower our rates. Maybe making us fear poverty and lure us into reducing our rates is what they really want with all this hype of creating hyper-mega-memories...
| | | | mediamatrix (X)
Local time: 10:36
Spanish to English
+ ...
| You said it! | Jul 31, 2008 |
Tomás Cano Binder wrote:
...
Let them have as many memories as they want, and as much automation as they want. Writers will exist in the future and unless you replace the writers with machines, you will need translators.
...
On the TAUS website, in the 'Technology Reviews' section, there is some evidence that the companies involved are not limiting their attention just to translation; they are also investigating the means by which they can economise on the authoring of their product documentation.
The TAUS summary of one of these 'Technology Reviews' says:
Different Approaches to Authoring Management and Controlled Language
Controlling and managing the source in any localization project is a key issue in translation automation. This report looks at the various methods and tools developed over the past decade, drawing on a recent "authoring wish-list" survey, and then examines in detail a number of projects in organizations such as Symantec, Sun and SAS who are piloting managed authoring environments.
The authoring segment of the localization/translation value chain is assuming greater strategic importance as companies realize that global information management, translation quality and user-centric access and service are all conditioned by the quality of source content. So far, there has been very little coverage of why companies are looking at new authoring tools, how ‘controlled language’ fits into workflows, and what results documentation managers can expect from a managed approach to authoring. This TAUS Report on Different approaches to authoring management and controlled language provides an overview of this topic for non-specialists, including some historical background, the nature and objectives and of managed authoring systems, a comparative table of five corporate authoring projects, the results of a web survey of authoring wish lists, and links to available tools.
See report (link)
(They could usefully have mentioned: Don't forget to pay us a minimum of USD 3,500 before clicking that 'See report' link, otherwise it won't show you anything.)
That TAUS is looking squeeze the lemon from both ends - translation and authoring - suggests that they realise that to attain their goals of dramatically reducing translation costs and turn-around times they will have to give translation automation a serious 'helping hand' in the form of 'tailored authoring'. So, in years ahead the end-users of their manuals will presumably be faced with an even greater level of blandness and standardization than we are accustomed to seeing thus far - even in the source language. It also suggests that they understand that automation is not going to address the 'literary' sector of the translation market in any near or even medium-term future, and that should be encouraging for those who fear the demise of this profession altogether.
This may also serve as a warning to those human translators who might be tempted to switch to authoring when their translation workload dwindles to the point of extinction. Don't even dream of it, 'cos there'll be loads on authors out there looking for work too!
MediaMatrix
| | | | beermatt
Local time: 16:36
English to German
+ ...
| Yes, go ahead, by all means, BUT... | Jul 31, 2008 |
Now that our One and Only Henry D has taken a decision, we can only wallow a little in its wake and praise or criticise more or less intelligently from all sorts of angles. Not only now, but also if I'd found out earlier than today about this discussion, I would have said 'yes' to joining.
Despite obstinately refusing to use CAT tools of any kind, and, right from when they began to appear on the market, seeing them as an attempt to automate and standardise language to an extent wher... See more Now that our One and Only Henry D has taken a decision, we can only wallow a little in its wake and praise or criticise more or less intelligently from all sorts of angles. Not only now, but also if I'd found out earlier than today about this discussion, I would have said 'yes' to joining.
Despite obstinately refusing to use CAT tools of any kind, and, right from when they began to appear on the market, seeing them as an attempt to automate and standardise language to an extent where it is reduced to conveying nothing but the exact information in one word or a group of words in another language, ignoring any individual, cultural, regional, inter-personal, etc. etc. etc. differences or varieties. And from the start seeing them as tools to ultimately, FINALLY reduce the hiring prices of such annoying, ridiculously expensive but unfortunately necessary lowly minions such as translators.
Despite not being all that happy about the tighly and smartly business- money- and efficiency-oriented policy of ProZ.com and many of its members. But I can't really criticise that too much, as I'm a non-paying user with no squeaky-shiny CV, enjoying certain benefits of ProZ 'included' in my monthly telecom bill, and therefore I don't feel I should voice my views all to loudly and persistently as some paying members do.
Despite being severely worried about the future of the translating trade, as it's rapidly turning into a mere business, with global players discovering the potential of generating billions of $$$$$ out of nothing whatsoever by ATTEMPTING TO pool and more or less skilfully manage the language resources generated by others (a normal thing in business - banks do it all the time with other types of assets, don't they? And they're all right, as long as they pad their mess-ups in sufficiently professional-sounding LANGUAGE and promise to maybe do better next time under more favourable conditions), and also to make their system and standard of management the only acceptable standard in the world (see what we have to put up with from Microsoft, and see the painful-to-observe attempts at standardising and managing standardisation the EU has managed to come up with, thought up by eurocrats who can't even write or utter an intelligible sentence in their own native language, let alone in English or French).
Oh. Sorry. Very long sentences with lots of brackets. Hope you got through them, but as all readers are pro translators, we're all used to such monsters...
But it's still right to join this attempt, whether it's a success or fails abysmally, or, as a third possibility, totters along officially but is barely kept alive while a lot of skulduggery goes on in shady corners of its monstrous, creaky structures.
It's necessary to at least gather inside knowledge about the project, its goals, methods, effectiveness, potential. It's easier to do that as a maybe small but possibly authoritative, possibly critical member than as a complete outsider and possible small competitor to be swallowed or squashed.
So it's up to ProZ management and also to ProZ members to quickly discuss (!!!!!) and form a solid minimum platform of common interests, principles, goals,and policies for how to approach this thing, don't you think? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Abba Storgen (X)
United States
Local time: 09:36
Greek to English
+ ...
I fail to see how STANDARDIZING all phrases promotes ingenuity and improvement in language.
For the last 8 years I see errors that are repeated and are multiplying because they are in "sacred translation memories" and "previous material" and nobody dares to correct them because it will create inconsistency (!!!). Did I mention documents that have no flow, and in which half the phrases are in passive voice and the other half not? Documents in which the TM matches are 100% but they ma... See more I fail to see how STANDARDIZING all phrases promotes ingenuity and improvement in language.
For the last 8 years I see errors that are repeated and are multiplying because they are in "sacred translation memories" and "previous material" and nobody dares to correct them because it will create inconsistency (!!!). Did I mention documents that have no flow, and in which half the phrases are in passive voice and the other half not? Documents in which the TM matches are 100% but they make no sense...
The "huge database" project is not something negative, as long as the managers who handle it:
a) know foreign languages and cultures themselves
b) are open-minded and able to listen.
In my experience, about 40% of them are.
I have a feeling that the huge translation memory will become a Bible containing numerous errors. Talking about the industry becoming more and more like a deffective religion...
Excellent linguists will be told to change their writings according to the faulty translation memory. They will be given orders by 19 year old project managers who speak half a language and run around with a resume in one hand...
Forget syntax, forget expression, forget flow, forget cohesiveness - what really matters nowadays is that this thing on the left is 100% match to the thing on the right, according to the Bible translation memory.
That's what happens when you give the language to greedy kids, and that's what happened when they gave energy trading to Enron... to some kids stuck in front of their monitors, working for the big Agency...
[Edited at 2008-07-31 23:07] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| The position I have formed is that translators should have access on reasonable terms | Aug 1, 2008 |
Thanks for posting, beermatt.
beermatt wrote:
So it's up to ProZ management and also to ProZ members to quickly discuss (!!!!!) and form a solid minimum platform of common interests, principles, goals,and policies for how to approach this thing, don't you think?
I do, and that was the intention for this thread: to get a read on the interests and form a position for ProZ.com to take. (By the way, the point was made earlier in this thread about associations. Are the associations you belong to discussing this topic? Will any take any steps in relation to the idea of translation memory sharing? Encouraging your elected representatives to at least consider the topic, if they are not, may be a good idea.)
Anyway, my conclusion, after reading the posts here, is that it would seem to be in our members' interests (and therefore ours, as a company serving them) (1) to be involved in the discussion going on, and (2) to take the position that the circle of those who have access to the mother TM would best be drawn to be inclusive of translators.
In other words, if this effort is about lifting the industry as a whole (as it professes to be and logically speaking, should actually be), then giving every professional in the industry access to the linguistic data (on reasonable terms, as an optional additional resource) would seem to at least be a logical possibility--if not the only way to go.
I wonder if others would concur with this position as a "minimum platform" of sorts (to use beermatt's expression)?
| | | | Abba Storgen (X)
United States
Local time: 09:36
Greek to English
+ ...
By all means Henry, no objection to another good source. Personally, I would gladly pay a little more to have a vast translation memory in my hands.
As long as I don't have to click on a million buttons to search a term
So, if you' re planning to incorporate a reliable source in the proz site with an additional fee for the members, I'm 100% behind that. Just make sure it works easily and that it's not co... See more By all means Henry, no objection to another good source. Personally, I would gladly pay a little more to have a vast translation memory in my hands.
As long as I don't have to click on a million buttons to search a term
So, if you' re planning to incorporate a reliable source in the proz site with an additional fee for the members, I'm 100% behind that. Just make sure it works easily and that it's not considered as a "no fault source". By that, I mean that many translators use stuff they find on the internet as 100% reliable. Not the case. Any translation memory should come with a Notice that the contents may not be 100% accurate, and may not fit all purposes. That's essential, otherwise we'll have all the rookies supporting errors by reference to some "mother" or "Bible" translation memory...
[Edited at 2008-08-01 01:26] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phong Le
Vietnam
Local time: 21:36
Vietnamese
+ ...
| Not useful for Vietnamese | Aug 1, 2008 |
Hi,
For Vietnamese language, the TM software is likely not useful. Shane Wall used to try to introduce 01 in Vietnam but all the freelancers I know do not enjoy.
Prefer to stay away from the big business giant, like Intel, etc.
L. Phong
| | | | | Thanks for the paper on "Collaborative Translation", James | Aug 1, 2008 |
Thanks for sharing this interesting paper. I view it as one possible manifestation of what Siegfried Armbruster called "communitysourcing" earlier in the thread:
... not in "crowdsourcing" (where others gain the profits) but something I would call "communitysourcing". We as a community could and should build something that would benefit us -the community.
In part to get opinions, and in part to raise awareness of what I think is an accurate and important distinction, I posted a new forum topic pointing to the article.
| | |
|
|
|
| "To save the file, choose File > Save..." | Aug 1, 2008 |
mediamatrix wrote:
On the TAUS website, in the 'Technology Reviews' section, there is some evidence that the companies involved are not limiting their attention just to translation; they are also investigating the means by which they can economise on the authoring of their product documentation.
Honestly folks, will you be very sorry if translations of text like "To save the file, choose File > Save..." or "All rights reserved." disappear from the market? I won't!
| | | | | Are the companies in TAUS the only ones who translate? | Aug 1, 2008 |
Henry D wrote:
...and (2) to take the position that the circle of those who have access to the mother TM would best be drawn to be inclusive of translators.
Folks, I think we are forgetting some facts here:
1. TAUS' companies might be the lion's share of the localization business, but not the lion's share of translation business as a whole. I understand that big localization companies want to be there. They dislike IT companies' decision as much as we do, but they have no option but to follow them and try to look like "strategic partners". It's either that... or the end of nice offices in fashionable buildings!
2. In most industries, translation is not one of the main costs, and therefore reducing translation costs is not a big priority. I am thinking of industries that sell physical goods and services of all kinds and today are far more interested in becoming more energy-efficient and environment-friendly.
3. In most industries, the products of the different companies are designed, made, explained, and advertised differently. Each product is special and different, and must be advertised so. Thus the technical texts and value proposals are completely different. Company-wide translation memories serve these industries very nicely.
4. In most industries, competitors put together their translation memories as a result of acquisitions between them, but sharing translation memories is out of the question.
I understand Henry's desire to be part of the game in this whole TAUS thing. Having your name in the same list as the big guys must be certainly appealing. But let's not forget that localization it very far from being the lion's share of translation business.
Henry, isn't an hypothetical access to a huge memory just your value proposition to us as your customers, as part of your desire to have a "mandate" from us to get involved with TAUS?
| | | | | Mandate? No thank you. | Aug 1, 2008 |
Tomás Cano Binder wrote: Henry D wrote:
...and (2) to take the position that the circle of those who have access to the mother TM would best be drawn to be inclusive of translators. Henry, isn't an hypothetical access to a huge memory just your value proposition to us as your customers, as part of your desire to have a "mandate" from us to get involved with TAUS?
No. We don't need a mandate and frankly I wouldn't want the responsibility. That's what associations are for. We're just a business that makes stuff with translators and translation companies in mind. When we do that well, people buy it. When we don't, they don't.
By the way, I made TAUS the topic of this conversation, but I care less about TAUS than I do about the phenomenon. I won't put all of our eggs in one basket and would not recommend that any translator do so either.
The current survey shows that over 20% of respondents are already sharing TMs privately and getting good results (like >20% increase in throughput). Nothing is stopping anyone here from doing that, and if the data is any indication, experimenting with it may not be a bad idea.
Waiting around for TAUS, ProZ.com or anyone else, if this phenomenon is important to your business, is not what I would advise.
Thank you for asking the question!
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Clients / large translation companies now talking about pooling linguistic data. Should we be there? | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
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 
