 Track this topic | User | Thread poster: John Fossey Proofreading techniques |
|---|
John Fossey 
Canada
Local time: 22:30
 Member (2008)
French to English
|
I am approaching the end of a long translation with thousands of short, highly technical phrases. Once completed, I am trying to plan the best way to proofread it. I'm especially concerned about maintaining uniformity in translating short phrases within segments, phrases that are too short to be separate segments in the CAT program (Wordfast, in this case).
I generally find proofreading from printed material is better than onscreen, for me anyways, which would mean converting the uncleaned document into a table of some sort, otherwise it would mean trying to compare the source and target in two separate paper documents.
Alternatively, is there any software that is particularly suitable for proofreading, aside from a standard CAT like Wordfast or Trados? I would interested to know how others approach this task.
| | | | Deborah Shannon
United Kingdom
Local time: 03:30
Member (2002)
German to English
|
Hi John, have you looked at the quality check functions in Wordfast?
(Tools => Setup => QC in Wordfast 5, not sure about Wordfast Pro)
On the kind of text you’re talking about, I’d run a few of these checks individually before doing my final proofreading pass.
To pick up omitted dates, incorrectly transferred amounts, typos in figures, etc.:
Tools => Setup => QC => Check “Identical untranslatables”,
then run Tools => Quality Check
To check consistency of short phrases, they need to be saved in a Wordfast glossary:
Terminology => Glossary => “Use for QC verification”
then run Tools=>Quality Check as above,
this time with other QC settings unchecked, I would suggest.
Both the above procedures generate a report of any problems, which can then be reviewed directly in Wordfast.
This is not my whole process by any means, but illustrates how the tool can help.
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND
France
Local time: 04:30
Member (2007)
German to French
+ ...
|
Heartsome (and Swordfish too, as far as I can remember) offer a terminology concordance analysis feature. I nevertheless think that the human brain is the best tool to provide QC/QA.
[Edited at 2009-10-09 21:07 GMT]
| | | | John Fossey
Canada
Local time: 22:30
Member (2008)
French to English
TOPIC STARTER |
Thanks for the suggestions. I wholeheartedly agree that the human brain is the best QC/QA tool, but late on a Friday and a few tens of thousands of phrases later, this brain needs some technological assistance!
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND
France
Local time: 04:30
Member (2007)
German to French
+ ...
| | Pablo Bouvier
Spain
Local time: 04:30
German to Spanish
+ ...
| | Proofreading techniques" | Oct 10 |
John Fossey wrote:
I am approaching the end of a long translation with thousands of short, highly technical phrases. Once completed, I am trying to plan the best way to proofread it. I'm especially concerned about maintaining uniformity in translating short phrases within segments, phrases that are too short to be separate segments in the CAT program (Wordfast, in this case).
I generally find proofreading from printed material is better than onscreen, for me anyways, which would mean converting the uncleaned document into a table of some sort, otherwise it would mean trying to compare the source and target in two separate paper documents.
Alternatively, is there any software that is particularly suitable for proofreading, aside from a standard CAT like Wordfast or Trados? I would interested to know how others approach this task. |
|
You can use the 30 day trial of Errorspy: http://www.dog-gmbh.com/index.php?id=336&L=1
And after using this tool, I would not say human brain is the best correction tool...
[Editado a las 2009-10-10 01:08 GMT]
  | | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator | |
