John Fossey Canada Local time: 17:53 Member (2008) French to English
Oct 9, 2009
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.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Deborah Shannon United Kingdom Local time: 22:53 Member (2002) German to English
Wordfast QC
Oct 9, 2009
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.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Laurent KRAULAND France Local time: 23:53 Member (2007) French to German + ...
Heartsome
Oct 9, 2009
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]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
John Fossey Canada Local time: 17:53 Member (2008) French to English
TOPIC STARTER
Brains + QC/QA
Oct 9, 2009
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!
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Laurent KRAULAND France Local time: 23:53 Member (2007) French to German + ...
Try it out
Oct 9, 2009
Then John you have to try out Heartsome (www.heartsome.net) and Swordfish (www.maxprograms.com) and see how efficient these tools can be for you...
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Pablo Bouvier Spain Local time: 23:53 Member German to Spanish + ...
Proofreading techniques"
Oct 10, 2009
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.
The translation workplace 
Translation news