| 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
|
|---|
Tomás Cano Binder wrote: Henry D wrote:
What if, with ProZ.com participating in this group, it were possible to make the pooled resource available to ProZ.com members? In that case -- with translators getting back access to the linguistic assets they create -- would some balance be restored?
Honestly Henry, I regret it enough when I accept to use 100% matches as is from a translation memory supplied by a customer. A scenario with pooled translation memories with 147 different translators and 87 different levels of quality makes me shiver! 
I fullly agree, Tomás!
As long as TMs are not quality checked, properly maintained and consistence is not fostered, just gathering together a lump of TMs simply won't do - it will make things even worse.
And up to now, I have NEVER come across a single TM that could be regarded as consistent both in term usage and quality - AND being in line with my own quality approach. It is almost never ever possible to accept exact matches in the flow of a current project without giving up your own creativeness and headroom of translating, changing sentence structures or even rearranging sentences in a text to make it more suitable for the target language/audience or purpose. As such, I never liked TMs and will not like them in the future, at least as long as they are imposted on me by those who just want to reduce translation cost.
I am not denying their usefulness in general, though - if used at the translator's discretion, they can be a valuable tool. But all in all, TM is very much overestimated.
And, Tomàs, I also fully agree with your translation of the press release - excellent piece of dismantling the truth behind it!
All the best
Marcus
| | | | | Working together is far better than working alone | Aug 1, 2008 |
Hello,
I am replying to some quotes from a previous post:
"One, TAUS is clearly a body representing large-volume buyers of translation. For freelance translators to have "representation" on it strikes me as illogical - rather like a business seeking representation in a trade union."
But that's the point - to have a seat at the table with those companies interested in our services. Open communication (as open as it can be) is preferable to closed doors.
... See more Hello,
I am replying to some quotes from a previous post:
"One, TAUS is clearly a body representing large-volume buyers of translation. For freelance translators to have "representation" on it strikes me as illogical - rather like a business seeking representation in a trade union."
But that's the point - to have a seat at the table with those companies interested in our services. Open communication (as open as it can be) is preferable to closed doors.
"... it would at least be compatible with ProZ' business structure. Acting as a lobby for freelance translators is not, as I see it."
In my (rather limited) experience with professional translators' associations, this commerical group seems to include a much broader cross-section of members of our profession than the (by necessity) highly differentiated non-profit membership groups. Just such a wide variety of players working in common is what is necessary for us to work on issues such as low compensation, low quality, interfaces between relevant technologies, etc. Why not use an existing larger, more diverse group to achieve goals sought by a myriad of smaller groups?
"... it should perhaps prompt the question of whether translators should begin charging for providing translation memories, or for assigning copyright to them. "
Exactly this issue is what common action could help to find and promote solutions for.
Are there are other organizations that would better fill this need and which have also been invited to work with TAUS?
Paula ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Wordfast Web 2.0 Project | Aug 1, 2008 |
Some might want to check this out...
The Very Large Translation Memory (VLTM) Project
The VLTM project offers translators a set of Very Large Translation Memories, accessible with Wordfast through the web. VLTM use is free and anonymous. The translator works as usual, but can leverage valuable information from a very large public TM in addition to her/his local TM. The VLTM does not replace the local TM, it complements it. All languages are supported. (a free and exist... See more Some might want to check this out...
The Very Large Translation Memory (VLTM) Project
The VLTM project offers translators a set of Very Large Translation Memories, accessible with Wordfast through the web. VLTM use is free and anonymous. The translator works as usual, but can leverage valuable information from a very large public TM in addition to her/his local TM. The VLTM does not replace the local TM, it complements it. All languages are supported. (a free and existing service, also for groups of "one")
http://www.wordfast.net/index.php?whichpage=jobs&lang=engb
"Should we be there?"... We are there already... just click it on your Wordfast now... ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Henry D wrote:
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.
But Henry, aren't all or most people here bound by non-disclosure agreements with the customers? How could we be sharing memories? No way we can do that. Privacy and confidentiality of our customers sounds like something to me...
| | |
|
|
|
| Sharing TMs "privately"? | Aug 1, 2008 |
Henry D wrote:
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.
I beg your pardon? Are you saying that 20% of translators (or Proz users, or freelancers, or whatever, for that matter) are sharing the text their customers have entrusted to them with an explicit or customarily assumed requirement for confidentiality? I hope I misunderstood. If I was a customer here, the thought of this would make me shiver!
What does privately mean here, if the materials we are translating do not belong to us, but to our customers? Does privately mean that it is OK to give away our customers' belongings and IP to other people, as long as we don't get caught?
| | | | RobinB 
United States
Local time: 01:21
German to English
| Don't overdo the privacy issue... | Aug 1, 2008 |
Tomás Cano Binder wrote: I beg your pardon? Are you saying that 20% of translators (or Proz users, or freelancers, or whatever, for that matter) are sharing the text their customers have entrusted to them with an explicit or customarily assumed requirement for confidentiality? I hope I misunderstood. If I was a customer here, the thought of this would make me shiver!
As we don't "share" TMs with anybody, I have no proprietary interest in this issue. But I would point out that:
a) TMs for texts that are in the public domain following translation can't be classed as confidential. The shelf-life of most translations is very limited (which may in itself have a negative impact on the cost/benefit of any TM sharing).
b) I doubt very much that even the most soft-headed translator is going to pass on TMs containing segments relating to texts that are in fact deemed to be confidential. I understand "privately" to mean by way of a private arrangement, not an open market transaction.
Confidentiality is an overarching issue that affects the sharing of any resources, so I wouldn't overstate its specific importance to the topic at hand.
Robin
| | | | | Shouldn't we ask the customers/end customers about "private" sharing | Aug 1, 2008 |
RobinB wrote:
a) TMs for texts that are in the public domain following translation can't be classed as confidential. The shelf-life of most translations is very limited (which may in itself have a negative impact on the cost/benefit of any TM sharing).
Yes, but who is going to check whether something we are translating is already in the public domain or not? I foresee some huge work maintaining just that piece of information in the memories.
b) I doubt very much that even the most soft-headed translator is going to pass on TMs containing segments relating to texts that are in fact deemed to be confidential. I understand "privately" to mean by way of a private arrangement, not an open market transaction.
Yes, but even if it is a "private arrangement" as you say, shouldn't our customers know about it? And how about their end customers if we work for an agency? I know their answer already: "No way, José! No sharing of our materials with people outside our control, no use of our memories in jobs for competing companies, or any other companies watsoever, without our express approval. And thanks for the hint; we will look for some other translator who is serious about our NDAs!"
| | | | Oleg Prots
Ukraine
Local time: 09:21
English to Ukrainian
+ ...
| Inspired by the project at hand... )) | Aug 1, 2008 |
Just some thoughts on another aspect of the problem:
In order to gain the most out of "pooled" TM resources, big companies will also need to standardize their authoring processes. This, along with some benefit, will also bring more and more of poorly digestable "most context neutral" constructions that translators will be required to translate in an equally "most context neutral" way so that they could be reused over for different products...
Just now I am editing a manual where the ... See more Just some thoughts on another aspect of the problem:
In order to gain the most out of "pooled" TM resources, big companies will also need to standardize their authoring processes. This, along with some benefit, will also bring more and more of poorly digestable "most context neutral" constructions that translators will be required to translate in an equally "most context neutral" way so that they could be reused over for different products...
Just now I am editing a manual where the client is intentionally avoiding to call a PC monitor a "monitor" - it is referred to as "product" instead. And although a lot of "product", "product", "product" look ugly in the translated text, I can't use the word "monitor", as "it will corrupt the client's TM".
I would not want to see this happening on a greater scale, to be honest. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Power Shifts in Web-Based Translation Memory | Aug 1, 2008 |
This paper addresses some issues about TM ownership:
"Web-based translation memory (TM) is a recent and little-studied development that is changing the way localisation projects are conducted. This article looks at the technology that allows for the sharing of TM databases over the internet to find out how it shapes the translator’s working environment."
"The study finds that, while the interests of most stakeholders in the localisation process are well served by this... See more This paper addresses some issues about TM ownership:
"Web-based translation memory (TM) is a recent and little-studied development that is changing the way localisation projects are conducted. This article looks at the technology that allows for the sharing of TM databases over the internet to find out how it shapes the translator’s working environment."
"The study finds that, while the interests of most stakeholders in the localisation process are well served by this web-based arrangement, it can involve drawbacks for freelancers. Once an added value, technical expertise becomes less of a determining factor in employability, while translators lose autonomy through an inability to retain the linguistic assets they generate. Web-based TM is, therefore, seen to risk disempowering and de-skilling freelancers, relegating them from valued localisation partners to mere servants of the new technology."
http://www.springerlink.com/content/5618063651089kj8
This means Terms of Trade should expressively include that only the core translation is within the delivery scope, and that the TM as a derived support entity is owned by the freelancer as a separate good to be purchased.
The ownership issue is clearly put forward in this TAUS paper:
The End of Old School Localization Thinking, Jaap van der Meer, TAUS, 2008
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4392144/The-End-of-Old-School-Localization-Thinking
Thus leading to this...
2008-02-20 Lionbridge's Logoport Web-Based Translation Memory Used by More Than 700 Clients and Over 14,000 Translators Around the Globe
http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2008-02/artikel-10157833.asp
[Edited at 2008-08-01 18:26] ▲ Collapse
| | | | RobinB
United States
Local time: 01:21
German to English
| NDAs, take two | Aug 1, 2008 |
Tomás Cano Binder wrote: Yes, but who is going to check whether something we are translating is already in the public domain or not?
You mean you don't do that already? That should be on every translator's checklist. It forms part of the translator's responsibility to ascertain the nature and purpose of the text they're going to translate.
Yes, but even if it is a "private arrangement" as you say, shouldn't our customers know about it? And how about their end customers if we work for an agency? I know their answer already: "No way, José! No sharing of our materials with people outside our control, no use of our memories in jobs for competing companies, or any other companies watsoever, without our express approval. And thanks for the hint; we will look for some other translator who is serious about our NDAs!"
I don't know about your NDAs, but our NDAs always contain a clause about materials in the public domain, i.e. that confidentiality doesn't apply. We don't work for agencies, BTW, but we trust the few solo freelances who work with us to respect confidentiality where it's appropriate, and to use the resources we provide to them judiciously. We take the view that we're grown-ups, dealing with other grown-ups, and if we provide them with something that they might use for other clients, then that's our risk. And we accept it, possibly because that's the most sensible business approach to take.
Robin
| | | | | Possible use for other clients | Aug 1, 2008 |
RobinB wrote:
We take the view that we're grown-ups, dealing with other grown-ups, and if we provide them with something that they might use for other clients, then that's our risk. And we accept it, possibly because that's the most sensible business approach to take.
Yes, you might give freelancers a memory they might use for other customers, but what we are discussing here is whether you think your freelancers are entitled to giving away your memory to other freelancers out there without you or your customer knowing. Is that still "judicious"?
[Edited at 2008-08-01 14:45]
| | | | Jeff Whittaker
United States
Local time: 02:21
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Sharing TMs already exists | Aug 1, 2008 |
I wonder how many people already contribute their TM's without realizing that they are breaching their (specified or implied) obligation of confidentiality not to mention copyrights (the original source text belongs to the client).
http://tse.elanex.com/
| | |
|
|
|
Paul Greer
United States
Local time: 23:21
English to Arabic
+ ...
| No privacy issues | Aug 1, 2008 |
Tomás Cano Binder wrote:
Yes, you might give freelancers a memory they might use for other customers, but what we are discussing here is whether you think your freelancers are entitled to giving away your memory to other freelancers out there without you or your customer knowing. Is that still "judicious"?
Tomás:
The TAUS model specifically distinguishes "content contributors" from "content users" and "end-customers". Of course only content owners are able to contribute content.
Nobody would expect a user to contribute intellectual property that is not his own of course.
Best regards
Paul
| | | | | You seem to know a lot about what TAUS will/intends to do | Aug 1, 2008 |
AFLSSInc wrote:
Nobody would expect a user to contribute intellectual property that is not his own of course.
You seem to have an inside track when it comes to TAUS intentions (or at least assume to have such knowledge). Could thus please enlighten the rest of us as to TAUS ultimate aims.
| | | | | TAUS looks unwieldy to me | Aug 1, 2008 |
Aside from the liabilities that sharing proprietary TM's may bring, and the fact that the TM's would likely have uneven quality surveillance, the project is too ambitious.
Whenever a large group of organizations come together to launch a new project, they either set up committees with no authority or influence, which bog down in squabbles about miniutiae or a power broker seizes control and the other players are either reduced to minority status or walk away completely.
... See more Aside from the liabilities that sharing proprietary TM's may bring, and the fact that the TM's would likely have uneven quality surveillance, the project is too ambitious.
Whenever a large group of organizations come together to launch a new project, they either set up committees with no authority or influence, which bog down in squabbles about miniutiae or a power broker seizes control and the other players are either reduced to minority status or walk away completely.
I don't think the translation community has anything to fear and certainly not in the immediate future. That said, if there were to be TM database access (in some legally sanitized form) that could be added to our annual fee here as an option, I would consider sampling it. Why not? It could be just one more resource, another arrow in the quiver no different materially from glossaries, dictionaries and the like that everyone shares right now. Far from hindering our processes, it can only enhance them, if properly done -- about which prospects I am highly skeptical. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | 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 » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
