Proofreading practice: Repetitions Thread poster: Rolf Kern
|
|---|
Rolf Kern 
Switzerland
Local time: 00:05
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam
I do a lot of proofreading of bilingual files (from CAT tools) for agencies. When they do not accept my rate, they often write "you do not have to look at repetitions".
My questions: What are repetitions? Why could they not be repetitions of the same error, lack, stylistic inconvenience, etc.?
Thanks for your comments.
Rolf
| | | |
Repetitions usually propagate forward. But, you are right, they sometimes require different translations.
The only way is to apply factors to the total count.
| | | | | "you do not have to look at repetitions" - Exactly the opposite | Sep 30, 2015 |
In general, the entire document, including repetitions should be looked at during the final editing/proofreading step. That is the whole point of proofreading.
They think if you are using a CAT-tool, and correct an error in the first instance, the correction will carry over to all the repetitions, so you have nothing to do. Well, this is incorrect, because first of all, not all CAT-tools do that automatically (or at all) at the proofreading phase, and secondly (more importantly) the contex... See more In general, the entire document, including repetitions should be looked at during the final editing/proofreading step. That is the whole point of proofreading.
They think if you are using a CAT-tool, and correct an error in the first instance, the correction will carry over to all the repetitions, so you have nothing to do. Well, this is incorrect, because first of all, not all CAT-tools do that automatically (or at all) at the proofreading phase, and secondly (more importantly) the context could be entirely different, requiring a different target sentence. Just to give an example: the English greeting "Welcome!" (popular for website landing pages) can be translated into Hungarian at least 4 different ways, depending on the target audience and the communication style of the website. I have had jobs where part of the text had to be written in formal register, and others in informal. Entire sentences that were identical in English (therefore recognized as repetitions) had to be modified to fit the context.
I avoid agencies where they would want to skip this important step.
[Edited at 2015-09-30 13:22 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Repetition is a fault | Sep 30, 2015 |
Katalin Horváth McClure wrote:
Entire sentences that were identical in English (therefore recognized as repetitions) had to be modified to fit the context.
I avoid agencies where they would want to skip this important step.
This is a fallacy. A big machinery company in UK ignored my warning about repetitions. Their translation was correct with regard to TM and QA checking but too poor as the natural style of target language.
Soonthon L.
| | |
|
|
|
Rolf Kern
Switzerland
Local time: 00:05
English to German
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER In memoriam
"They think if you are using a CAT-tool, and correct an error in the first instance, the correction will carry over to all the repetitions, so you have nothing to do."
They know in every case, that I do not use a CAT tool. That's the reason, why I only work into bilingual Word files.
[Bearbeitet am 2015-09-30 13:40 GMT]
| | | | Rolf Kern
Switzerland
Local time: 00:05
English to German
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER In memoriam
That's what I do. I calculate my rate always based on the total word count. Thus the discrepancy with the so-called "budget" of the agencies.
Rolf
| | | | Thayenga
Germany
Local time: 00:05
Member (2009)
English to German
+ ...
What might be a repetition in one language, might mean something completely different in the target language. When agencies ask me for discounts, for the very same reasons Rolf stated, I always inform them about the two different understanding of "repetitions" in 2 different languages. If they ask me to "not look at repetitions", I politely reject the job.
A while back one client kept coming back, urging me to accept the (by then urgent) job. I kept rejecting it. In the end, he was ... See more What might be a repetition in one language, might mean something completely different in the target language. When agencies ask me for discounts, for the very same reasons Rolf stated, I always inform them about the two different understanding of "repetitions" in 2 different languages. If they ask me to "not look at repetitions", I politely reject the job.
A while back one client kept coming back, urging me to accept the (by then urgent) job. I kept rejecting it. In the end, he was willing to pay an hourly rate, which made looking at repetitions irrelevant.
The simple word "engagement" can be translated in about 5 different ways, each with its own meaning, which might not have anything to do with the source text and what it tries to convey. So when an agency wants a thoroughly proofread/revised file, then they either pay an hourly rate (which is best for both parties) or one that covers the total work count.
Not looking at repetitions, btw., is in violation of any translation standard. If the agency wants a mediocre document, well, then it should find a proofreader who doesn't care. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 00:05
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| What are repetitions | Sep 30, 2015 |
Rolf Kern wrote:
When they do not accept my rate, they often write "you do not have to look at repetitions". My questions: What are repetitions?
A repetition is a segment that is identical to another segment somewhere in the file.
How you should deal with repetitions would depend on the exact format that you get the file in, and/or on what CAT tool the client uses to create the file that you're proofreading. Some CAT tools can mark repetitions in a different colour (then you can ask the client if it's helpful if you simply delete the entire segment, or or if you should simply leave the repetition alone).
Unfortunately I know of no macro or too that can mark repetitions for you in e.g. MS Word, but such a tool would be ideal for you, who do not use CAT tools.
| | |
|
|
|
LEXpert
United States
Local time: 17:05
Member (2008)
Croatian to English
+ ...
| Autopropagation limitations | Sep 30, 2015 |
Rolf Kern wrote:
"They think if you are using a CAT-tool, and correct an error in the first instance, the correction will carry over to all the repetitions, so you have nothing to do."
[Bearbeitet am 2015-09-30 13:40 GMT]
Even so:
1) You still have go to through the entire text and visually identify any repetitions, which takes time, and may take as much time a proofreading them anyway, and
2) Autopropagation usually only works within the same file. If there are multiple files, the repetitions won't propagate across files. There are workarounds in some tools, but these take extra time as well.
| | | | | In that case they are either morons or think you are a pushover | Oct 1, 2015 |
Rolf Kern wrote:
"They think if you are using a CAT-tool, and correct an error in the first instance, the correction will carry over to all the repetitions, so you have nothing to do."
They know in every case, that I do not use a CAT tool. That's the reason, why I only work into bilingual Word files.
Talking about repetitions and how to handle them makes absolutely no sense when no CAT-tool is used.
| | | |
Agencies should just remove from the file anything that shouldn't be translated.
| | | | Rolf Kern
Switzerland
Local time: 00:05
English to German
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER In memoriam
Good suggestion, but however in my case it is not about translation but proofreading of a translation.
Rolf
[Bearbeitet am 2015-10-01 08:22 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
I Agree with Katalin Horváth McClure. Not every CAT-tools proofread file mechanically as the context could be entirely different, requiring a different target sentence. Operating with this translation tool means that the effort & time that translators must invest in their work is directly related to the level of coincidence with the content of the translation memory. I think, some CAT tools can be configured to skip segments that have already been translated. But if you skip them altogether, yo... See more I Agree with Katalin Horváth McClure. Not every CAT-tools proofread file mechanically as the context could be entirely different, requiring a different target sentence. Operating with this translation tool means that the effort & time that translators must invest in their work is directly related to the level of coincidence with the content of the translation memory. I think, some CAT tools can be configured to skip segments that have already been translated. But if you skip them altogether, you are not translating a text, but a list of disjointed segments. This can be counted as a drawback. If we print our text at some stage and read it on paper with a translator, there would be less chances of repetitive errors. This is generally a good practice. ▲ Collapse
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Proofreading practice: Repetitions | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
