Comments on: Believing the technology hype… http://www.jodybyrne.com/1343 Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:58:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: :::JodyByrne.com - Translation agencies turning the screw on freelancers ::: http://www.jodybyrne.com/1343/comment-page-1#comment-378 :::JodyByrne.com - Translation agencies turning the screw on freelancers ::: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 23:35:39 +0000 http://www.jodybyrne.com/?p=1343#comment-378 [...] a certain extent although from a translation and linguistic point of view, I’m still somewhat sceptical about the [...] [...] a certain extent although from a translation and linguistic point of view, I’m still somewhat sceptical about the [...]

]]> By: Jody Byrne http://www.jodybyrne.com/1343/comment-page-1#comment-320 Jody Byrne Sat, 08 Aug 2009 23:53:40 +0000 http://www.jodybyrne.com/?p=1343#comment-320 Hi Ailish, Thanks for the comment... I remember you from DCU alright. The article I mentioned was by Magnus Merkel and he found that many translators either consciously or unconsciously modify their translations to suit TMs by eliminating things like anaphoric and cataphoric references to gain as much leverage from the TM as possible. While this makes the text work better with the TM and can make translations stored in the memory more reusable, he found that it can damage the cohesiveness and sometimes the coherence of the text. Having said that, there are studies that show that TMs can improve the quality of the texts (I think I've made points to this effect on a few occasions) but it's important to realise that it's not all good news when it comes to TM tools. The reference for that Merkel article is: Merkel, Magnus (1998) "Consistency and Variation in Technical Translations: A Study of Translators’ Attitudes". In Bowker, Lynne, Michael Cronin, Dorothy Kenny and Jennifer Pearson (eds.) <em>Unity in Diversity? Current Trends in Translation Studies</em>, Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, pp.137-149. Hi Ailish,
Thanks for the comment… I remember you from DCU alright. The article I mentioned was by Magnus Merkel and he found that many translators either consciously or unconsciously modify their translations to suit TMs by eliminating things like anaphoric and cataphoric references to gain as much leverage from the TM as possible. While this makes the text work better with the TM and can make translations stored in the memory more reusable, he found that it can damage the cohesiveness and sometimes the coherence of the text.

Having said that, there are studies that show that TMs can improve the quality of the texts (I think I’ve made points to this effect on a few occasions) but it’s important to realise that it’s not all good news when it comes to TM tools.

The reference for that Merkel article is:
Merkel, Magnus (1998) “Consistency and Variation in Technical Translations: A Study of Translators’ Attitudes”. In Bowker, Lynne, Michael Cronin, Dorothy Kenny and Jennifer Pearson (eds.) Unity in Diversity? Current Trends in Translation Studies, Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, pp.137-149.

]]> By: Ailish http://www.jodybyrne.com/1343/comment-page-1#comment-319 Ailish Sat, 08 Aug 2009 21:36:27 +0000 http://www.jodybyrne.com/?p=1343#comment-319 Hi Jody, great blog:-) We met years ago in DCU, but I was one of the minions and you were somehow attached to the department, so you won't remember. You said: "there is at least one study that I know of which shows that TM tools can actually damage the quality of texts". Do you happen to have any reference? Thanks:-) Hi Jody, great blog:-) We met years ago in DCU, but I was one of the minions and you were somehow attached to the department, so you won’t remember. You said: “there is at least one study that I know of which shows that TM tools can actually damage the quality of texts”. Do you happen to have any reference? Thanks:-)

]]>