for you input, Katalin, and although we hardly are going to change our minds I must admit it was my pleasure talking with you
Indeed, names and numbers are usually remain, but as for dates and amounts...
Your workflow approach makes sense and feasible too. Very reasonable.
Unfortunately 'time' is a rather abstract notion which cannot be objective in this case for one may be quick on the draw whereas the other may wail till the cows come home-whatever. But if the task is not far beyond the translator's level then it would take, say, about 30 minutes for a standard page (without researching and fact-proofing). So, when the translator is ready he should be able to cope with it for 1/2 hrs of number of pages, plus breaks, researching and other derivative procedures... Which is also rather subjective.
May be it's a source text words number the translator has to read? And how about the target text number the translator has to type? May be both? Neither? Nevermind.
The only condition I might consider infamous match discounts is a written client's disclaimer that the translator (me) is not liable for ANY possible errs regarding 100% matches. Alt + Down.
P.S. I did see some modern fiction (not poems) translated using CAT and it was very good by quality. The trick? Sure, the translator used a few similar texts with good En-Ru translations, which he aligned for his project. Yes, he proofread it and changed stylistic means and devices there and there, but overall it was 99% CAT work. That's it) Why, I know people who quite successfully translate belletristic literature via CAT, but they prefer 'paraphrasing' over 'translation'. With no distinct difference.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Katalin Horvath McClure United States Local time: 16:28 Member (2002) English to Hungarian + ...
Fiction and CAT-tools?
Feb 11
DZiW wrote: P.S. I did see some modern fiction (not poems) translated using CAT and it was very good by quality. The trick? Sure, the translator used a few similar texts with good En-Ru translations, which he aligned for his project. Yes, he proofread it and changed stylistic means and devices there and there, but overall it was 99% CAT work. That's it) Why, I know people who quite successfully translate belletristic literature via CAT, but they prefer 'paraphrasing' over 'translation'. With no distinct difference.
We are going off topic here, but I can't stop wondering WHY would someone use a CAT-tool for translating literature? What kind of advantage would a CAT-tool bring into that task? What practical purpose would it serve? I am assuming original literature, fiction, not plagiarized stuff, so frankly, I am quite puzzled about what you mean by "overall it was 99% CAT work".
I would be quite surprised to learn that any CAT other than Mrs. Norris was even remotely involved with the Harry Potter books...
Katalin
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Samuel Murray Netherlands Local time: 22:28 Member (2006) English to Afrikaans + ...
Oh, in that case...
Feb 11
carly wrote:
Looking at the files to be translated (something like a product catalogue), there were indeed several repeated words (mainly product names).
O, well, if a client wants me to treat multi-word product names as single words in the word count, and the client marks up those names for me in a way that allows me to treat them as placeables, then I would be willing to do that. In other words, the product name becomes a placeable -- but even then the placeable would have to count as at least one word (every time it occurs) because I have to place it every time.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Katalin, first, there're clients who want to get discount.
It's OK unless it's done at the expense of the translator.
Second, a rich polysemy enables the translator to use CAT tools for any texts.
It depends, as usually, on the level of the translator.
Third, using CAT is no excuse to cheat using per-word, per-syntagma, per-phrase, per-clause, and per-sentence discounts, because it's a quick step to per-letter discounts.
Fourth, I strongly believe there should be only valid, informed, and reasonable discounts, without '100% discounts' -- by any reason: there's no such thing as a free lunch!
Fifth, if the translator did agree to terms then he shouldn't be badmouthing his client for this
P.S. Yep, it were his translations and he was just starting CATing then. Later he reversed the TM and proofread and reorganized it again, so there were only relative TU's and so on. But if we get to copyrighting then you'll find that one can quite easily use somebody else's works as his TM's unless it's 100% match for x% (depending on the local legislation) of the text, which is not the case for belletristic literature. Moreover, I often see researches where students or other authors align TM's and analyze the authentic texts to check, find, or dis/prove something. Why, once I saw a term paper where some Shakespeare's works were aligned to translate a few modern works 'in his style'. So I see nothing bad for not/using CAT's or others' works (and TM's) for a good purpose, but in this case I, as a client, would prefer hourly pay
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
George Hopkins Sweden Local time: 22:28 Swedish to English
Before PCs
Feb 11
Before the days of personal computers a customer suggested no payment for numbers. I agreed, on condition that he (it was a he) put the numbers into my translation himself. One of several oddities is that decimal commas are used instead of decimal points in Swedish. He changed his mind and we experienced a very long period of cooperation.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Katalin Horvath McClure United States Local time: 16:28 Member (2002) English to Hungarian + ...
We agree on most things, I think
Feb 11
DZiW wrote:
Katalin, first, there're clients who want to get discount.
It's OK unless it's done at the expense of the translator.
Yes, I agree. Actually, there are many clients who want to get a discount. In fact, I imagine, all clients would LOVE to have a discount. And discounts could be given at the discretion of the translator. As I wrote in the Wiki article I mentioned, discounts are not something that the clients can or should demand, and they are not something to be taken for granted by translators either.
Second, a rich polysemy enables the translator to use CAT tools for any texts.
It depends, as usually, on the level of the translator.
Sure, CAT-tools can be used for any text. (Such as toothpicks can be used for many tasks, including building bridges...) But is it practical? Is t useful? Is it beneficial? Is it the best approach?
I am still not convinced that using a CAT-tool is practical and/or beneficial for translating literary works. I think the best tool for that is right between your ears.
Third, using CAT is no excuse to cheat using per-word, per-syntagma, per-phrase, per-clause, and per-sentence discounts, because it's a quick step to per-letter discounts.
I agree that cheating is bad. But I don't agree that discounts are equal to cheating. And I think the "quick step" you are describing is not that quick, and not a step, more like a leap (quantum leap, perhaps?).
Fourth, I strongly believe there should be only valid, informed, and reasonable discounts, without '100% discounts' -- by any reason: there's no such thing as a free lunch!
I fully agree with this.
Fifth, if the translator did agree to terms then he shouldn't be badmouthing his client for this
I fully agree with this, too.
Katalin
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
B D Finch France Local time: 22:28 Member (2006) French to English + ...
Generous?
Feb 11
Vladimír Hoffman wrote:
full matches, the rates are quite generous. I would try to agree on at least 10% for full matches and gladly accept other conditions (60% for matches between 95 and 99% is really fair).
I think that you have misunderstood the percentages: 60% FWR for 75-84% matches is extremely mean, as a segment in that category may well mean something entirely different and require a very different translation from its "matching" segment.
It an agency doesn't want to pay me for 100% matches, perhaps they would like me not to bother proofreading them either and not correcting any formatting problems, not commenting upon any errors in the source text in 100% matches etc.
[Edited at 2012-02-11 19:17 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Vladimír Hoffman Slovakia Local time: 22:28 Member (2009) English to Slovak + ...
I am sorry that
Feb 11
I can't agree with you in this matter. According to my experiences, at 75-84% matches (especially in the case of longer sentences) a translator usually only needs to make some proofreading, replacing, maybe concordance search and copying. Of course, we are talking about application of TM made for specific kind of translation, specific client or even specific document (such as annual accounts, amendments to contracts, updated technical manuls etc.) So, probability of entirely different meaning is rather low. Generally, there is less work to be done with 75-84% than 60% of the work to be done with no-matches.
I fully agree with you as for 100% matches, it seems to be a new trend in squeezing translation costs to as low as possible level. On the other hand, I insist that 60% for 95-99% (actually, proofreading work) is more than acceptable.
B D Finch wrote:
Vladimír Hoffman wrote:
full matches, the rates are quite generous. I would try to agree on at least 10% for full matches and gladly accept other conditions (60% for matches between 95 and 99% is really fair).
I think that you have misunderstood the percentages: 60% FWR for 75-84% matches is extremely mean, as a segment in that category may well mean something entirely different and require a very different translation from its "matching" segment.
It an agency doesn't want to pay me for 100% matches, perhaps they would like me not to bother proofreading them either and not correcting any formatting problems, not commenting upon any errors in the source text in 100% matches etc.
[Edited at 2012-02-11 19:17 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
A fully featured online CAT tool and TMS, with no installation required, and a simple, intuitive interface. Maximize linguistic assets by sharing in real time as you collaborate with colleagues. Make use of next generation, cloud-based translation technol
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.
The translation workplace 
Translation news