A computer newsletter for translation professionals

When I try to cast my mind back to what I wrote about two, three, or four years ago in this newsletter, I can't help but retroactively feel a little sorry for myself. Translation technology was moving so slowly back then: I have no idea how I came up with new topics every other week.

Things now couldn't be more different, and there's certainly no shortage of things to write about: data is moving in and out of the cloud; machine translation technology is actually beginning to be helpful in some cases; the competition for market share among the different translation environment tool vendors is vigorous, leading to ever faster and more interesting developments; and the many language-related tools by the likes of Google, Microsoft, and many others are a lot of fun to write about (and to use).

This all means good times for the translation technology pundit (I've always hated that word!), but I don't envy newbies to our industry who have to navigate through the many different options and the increasingly divergent philosophies behind them. I'm thankful to play a role in making sense of that foggy tangle of options. (I was so carried away by emotion that I almost added an emoticon -- so pooh-poohed by some of you. By the way, did you know that Unicode covers more than 60 emoticons?! My favorite has to be the guy with the facemask.)

We just celebrated Thanksgiving in the US this week, and after hearing some of the family drama experienced by various friends of ours, I am very thankful for my family here . . . and for many other blessings as well. Jeromobot, our patron saint, also gave multi-faceted thanks, both for the somewhat grossworldly and the more spiritual. 

(A slightly different version of this article will appear in an upcoming issue of the ATA Chronicle. As a side note: It continues to amaze me how much more seriously we still consider printed matter. I receive many more comments on my Chronicle columns than on articles in this newsletter. I'm not complaining, but my feeling is that it has a lot more to do with the medium than the content.)

An article in Forbes magazine (Cloud Computing's Vendor Lock-In Problem: Why the Industry Is Taking a Step Backward) sort of shook me up last week.

Here are some excerpts:

For more than a decade, IT managers and advocates have been working tirelessly to enable solutions based on common standards and protocols that can be built, supported, swapped out and replaced, regardless of vendor. And they almost succeeded - until lately.

Cloud computing may be erasing the gains we've made in terms of vendor dependence lock-in. Going with a cloud solution means buying into the specific protocols, standards and tools of the cloud vendor, making future migration costly and difficult. How is this so? Because standards are still being formed, and cloud computing is still too immature to reach the point where customers are demanding vendor independence.

No, this is not talking about language technology, but I still feel vindicated.

For several years now I've been trying to communicate that the most important problem we face with translation technology is the new capture mechanism that most tool vendors are participating in: While we have data exchange standards that are more or less well supported (TMX for translation memories, TBX for termbases, XLIFF for the translation data, and the upcoming Linport for translation packages), there are no mechanisms that enable tool A to enter into the server- or cloud-based workflow of tool B. So, if your client sends your project not as data but as a login that you can use within a tool to access an online-based project or -- even more simply -- to actually log into an online-based tool that automatically gives you access to online-based data, all the hard-fought-for advances in widely accepted data exchange standards are nullified. Ironically, the data you access might even be in one of those standards -- translation data especially could be in XLIFF format -- but that does not help you much if no other tool can get to it.

You may be getting tired of all the rallying cries surrounding exchange standards, but this is what I think: We have reached a certain level of independence with our translation environment tools by being able to use almost any tool when we receive a translation project as an email attachment or downloaded from an FTP server. However, now that many tool vendors are moving toward online-based workflows, this independence will soon vanish. I believe that we should join forces and voices to stand against this unless we want to lose the freedom to choose our work environment. To quote the much more eloquent author of the Forbes article:

Only one thing will eliminate or reduce the risk of vendor lock-in in the long run: if end-user customers start demanding standardization and interoperability, just as they have in the past with on-premises applications. Once it dawns among organizations that use third-party clouds that they need to demand this from cloud providers, then the cloud providers will fall in line.

Transit NXT Freelance Pro Christmas Sale

STAR Servicios Lingüísticos is selling 20 Transit NXT Freelance Pro + 1 optional filter for 649 Euro each (list price: 2245 Euro). The offer is valid till 30-12-2011 or till stock is cleared.

The sale is on now!! 20 to go and counting backwards!!! Get information or buy here. 

In the introduction to this newsletter I mentioned the much faster pace of development in many translation environment tools.

For instance, in the past I've talked about Fluency and its lightning speed of development due to the very architecture of the tool. I've often mentioned memoQ and the reliable and steady pace with which its development team is adding new features. And even Trados is adding more interesting features than ever before partly because it has opened those features' development to third parties through its OpenExchange app store.

One tool, however, that many of us had looked at with a certain sense of despair was Déjà Vu. Translation technology veterans still remembered Déjà Vu's early days when its development tempo was almost too quick to follow, but this seemed to virtually stop after the release of Déjà Vu X in 2003.

I can't tell you how happy I am to report that things seem to be back to "normal." Only a few weeks ago I reported on the latest major version of Déjà Vu X2, and I sort of assumed that it would be awhile before I would write again about the tool, most certainly not in 2011. Well, the development team just released two new versions within the last month or so. And though the version of Déjà Vu X2 that was released this week "only" follows some of its competitors in implementing the new version of the payable Google Translate API (the free module expired today -- for an instruction video on how to set that API up, see the last newsletter), the version before this (version number 8.0.505) had some changes that were possibly much more interesting, though at first not quite as visible.

I don't know how many times I've written about the problem of codes of a secondary format that are embedded in the primary format. Typically I've talked about the very frequent XML files that contain HTML codes. Or just as often many of you encounter Excel or Word files that contain HTML codes. It has taken tool developers years to come up with solutions that allow us to easily and seamlessly work with these files, and Déjà Vu now offers its own elegant solution that even goes a step farther than some of its competitors.

If you import an XML file or any Microsoft Office 2007/2010 file, you now have the option to Process Embedded HTML, which automatically processes and excludes any HTML code from your translation view. Though it's possible that you might have to do some manual post-processing on some very complex files -- for instance, there is no option for dealing with text within HTML tags -- the preparation and actual processing of the files couldn't be easier.

Déjà Vu also allows any non-translatable code that is not processed with the HTML option (such as scripting code) to be excluded by entering customized regular expressions, as long as it follows some kind of logic (for instructions on how to enter regular expressions, you can find an instructional video right here). Again, this option is available for any Office 2007/2010 or XML file.

Some of you who work mostly with "regular" Microsoft Office files are already rolling your eyes (if you even made it this far): "I never work with XML files; I don't even know what they're good for!"

How about this then: you will agree that processing a Microsoft Office file with another embedded Office file has always been a nuisance. Sure, there were ways to open the embedded file, save it as a separate file, translate it, and re-embed it back into the original file, but as I said, it was a nuisance. With the latest version of Déjà Vu,it is now possible to process any Word, PowerPoint, or Excel 2007/2010 file that has another embedded Word, PowerPoint, or Excel 2007/2010 file as if they were one file. Simply make sure that the option Ignore Embedded Objects within Déjà Vu is unchecked as you import the file, and double check that the embedded file is indeed a 2007 or 2010 file. To make sure of that, you can use the Convert All Objects to Office 2007/2010 command in the newly and automatically installed Déjà Vu X2 ribbon in Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Now verify the version of the embedded files (you will find the appropriate command for that on the ribbon as well) and then press the conversion button.

I've tested this feature on a number of files. Although I did have problems with one particular Word document with an embedded Excel file (and I was not able to figure out what the problem was), I was able to process five or six other files very seamlessly. Even in one text that had a PowerPoint file with an embedded Word file that contained an embedded Excel file, all of the text was presented flawlessly.

Finally, one more option in the latest version of Déjà Vu is the addition of a third-party tool that I've discussed a number of times in this newsletter: CodeZapper. CodeZapper is a set of word macros designed to remove unnecessary hidden codes from Word files that become annoying and useless embedded codes within Déjà Vu. Especially with the later versions of Microsoft Office, this has become an increasing problem in Déjà Vu, and many users have spent quite a bit of time and effort pre-processing files to avoid these rogue codes. Now it's simply an option within the import parameters for Office 2007/2010 within the latest version of Déjà Vu X2.

Oh, and did I mention that I'm glad things are moving at Atril? 

It was a lot of fun last year, and it should be great this year as well:

If you're a freelance translator, ask yourself this question: Wouldn't it be great if your favorite language service provider that you've worked for all year sent you a year's subscription to the Premium edition of the Tool Kit newsletter instead of the same old boring Christmas card? Why don't you make that suggestion to your project manager?

As an LSP representative, ask yourself: Wouldn't it be great to give a much appreciated gift to your freelancers as well as one that you will actually benefit from (because your translators will become more technology-savvy)? Send me a note and I'll even be able to offer you a special price for each of the subscriptions.

Sounds like a good deal any way you slice it! I'm looking forward to hearing from you.

Fortis Revolution is the computer-assisted translation tool that will direct how you purchase and interact with translation software in the future.

Before Fortis Revolution, businesses had to piece together frustrating translation tools with confusing and hard-to-navigate product packages. Times have changed.

Fortis Revolution offers the simplicity of one product, one distribution and service channel, and one price, in an easy-to-use, yet effective tool to meet your individual translation needs.

One product, one place, one price -- the revolution has begun!

This Thanksgiving I had an awkward conversation with one of my wife's cousins who is reasonably smart and well-educated but was utterly and completely unaware of the existence of voice recognition and its ready availability for many languages. I was never able to completely figure out whether he had me at hello the whole time or whether he had really missed out on this technology. So, hoping that the latter was the case, and on the off-chance that some of you might also not be completely up-to-date on the latest developments in that field, here are some excerpts from my book on voice recognition:

There are a lot of complaints that speech recognition -- the ability to dictate to your computer -- is geeky technology. But I think the very opposite is true. How geeky is it to hack on a keyboard to make your computer understand what you are trying to say? Really: think about it. It makes so much sense to be able to speak to your computer, dictate text, and navigate through programs. And the only geeky part about it is that we're not used to it and that it works -- kind of.

Though I like speech recognition, I am not a "purist." I use it only when I think I need to speed things up a little, when I have a text that is well suited, or when my fingers just don't work the way I want them to (which unfortunately happens more often than I care to admit). But even when I use it, I don't unplug my keyboard or simply refuse to use it. Some things are just more practical to do on the keyboard, and this is particularly true if you need to switch between languages, which obviously is quite common for translators. . . . (The program that I use -- Dragon NaturallySpeaking -- supports at least the native language and English in the Dutch, German, Spanish, Italian, French, and Japanese editions; however, unloading one language and re-loading the other takes at least a couple of minutes.)

So, which texts are well suited -- or better, which texts are not well suited -- for speech recognition? The answer to this depends partly on your particular translation subject. In mine it is mostly texts with a lot of proper names and/or loan words. This does not mean that you can't teach the program to recognize the proper names and loan words, but it's one of those judgment things: If you want to use speech recognition (or anything else for that matter) to become more effective, you'd better make sure that you truly are. If you have to spend an hour to train it to recognize a bunch of new terms before translating for an hour and a half on a job that would otherwise have taken you only two hours, that seems like wasted time to me. Plus, while I enjoy translating, I can think of better things to do than training speech recognition. On the other hand, if I can expect that these proper names and loan words will also occur in future projects, I may just as well spend the time to train.

My first rule for success with speech recognition software will probably have the "purists" shaking their heads in agony. After having used the software for some time, I know some of the weak spots of my speech engine (or my pronunciation). Rather than using the "correct" function again and again, I prefer to type those problem terms even while dictating the rest.

My next rule: Take some time to get used to not "thinking with your fingers." Instead, try to preformulate longer segments and then speak them coherently for better results.

This goes right along with the next kind of texts that are not well suited for speech recognition because it's hard to say them naturally: texts with a lot of formatting. Depending on what kind of translation environment tool you're working with and how formatting is handled by the tool, it may be easier to use the keyboard shortcuts for those that you are used to. If there is really a LOT of formatting, it may be easier to just type the whole thing.

Now, technically, there is no formatting function or other fancy maneuver that your speech recognition can't do. That is, if you have the right version. When it comes to Dragon NaturallySpeaking, the Preferred version comes with all basic formatting in environments like MS Word or its own editor, DragonPad. When you use a translation environment tool that makes you work in an interface other than Word, you will have a hard time doing everything with voice commands unless you have the Professional edition, in which you can easily write macros with virtually unlimited possibilities.

The problem is that while the Preferred version has a relatively modest price tag, the Professional version does not. Once you have the Professional version, you can either stay there and pay premium prices for upgrades because you are interested in the slightly better recognition that typically comes with each new version, or you can go the cheap route, downgrading at some point but then losing all your macros. That's the problem that I am stuck in with Dragon, so I'm not running the latest version.

Windows 7 also contains an internal voice recognition program for Chinese, Japanese, German, French, Spanish, and English.

This feature has suffered some very public criticism, but I was rather impressed with its accuracy and user-friendliness in a couple of unscientific tests that I ran. I dictated the same paragraphs in both programs and had only a slightly worse recognition in Windows than in Dragon (96% vs. 98%).

So, unless you are an awesome typist and refuse to change that geeky habit of exclusively using your fingers to enter text, speech recognition is a great alternative way to "type," even before carpal tunnel syndrome hits. 

Discover the industry's most user-friendly and cost-effective translation memory tools designed to fit any workflow and budget.

• Wordfast Classic - The #1 MS Word-based TM tool.
• Wordfast Pro - The next-generation standalone TM tool for any platform
• Wordfast Anywhere - The leading FREE and confidential web-based TM tool
• Wordfast Server - The most powerful and affordable TM server solution for real-time collaboration

To find the solution that's right for you, visit www.wordfast.com. 

I've mentioned before that Twitter has become an excellent resource for delivering news and information about the industry right into my inbox. Now I've discovered that Twitter can also be a great tool for venting frustration. Like when I read the most recent issue of the magazine for a large translators' association. The issue was devoted to "translation memory systems," but imagine my disappointment when I realized that they were using that particular term to refer to CAT or translation environment tools. I really thought we had moved beyond that incomplete and oversimplified designation. In response, from now on every time somebody uses "translation memory systems" to refer to "translation environment tools," I will use "spellchecking system" when talking about Microsoft Word. It is the exact equivalent: using a single feature to define an entire tool.

Anyway . . .

Here are some helpful discoveries that I've made recently:

Browsershots is a site that enables you to test any webpage in any thinkable combination of browser and operating system. Simply enter the URL of your page, and you will be shown screenshots of that page in every browser you request and every operating system. It's a little slow for my taste, but then maybe I got a little greedy with the many display configurations. It certainly beats manual testing, and best of all, it's free.

Shapecatcher is one of those tools that can easily suck up an hour or two of your time, but that may not be the worst occupation on a dreary December afternoon in the northern hemisphere. It provides a "drawbox" in which you can draw any character (of any Unicode language except Chinese, Japanese, or Korean) and then hit the Recognize button. The tool will analyze your work of art and make suggestions for what this character might be. It's great fun to see how many different characters and languages are actually similar to each other, and it's very helpful when you actually need to decipher a character that you can't make any sense out of otherwise.

Just as Google did a few months ago, Microsoft has released a web-based input method editor for several languages, including Arabic, Chinese, Greek, Japanese, and Russian. The idea is that you can type text phonetically in Latin characters and the tool will then convert that into the writing system of the various languages. Again, just like Google, there's also a bookmarklet available that can be installed in Internet Explorer, Firefox, or Google Chrome so you can use the input methods for those languages in any web environment. It works really well. You might stumble on two unexpected languages in the Microsoft tool: English and French. For these languages it works as a sort of AutoCorrect tool, which would be helpful if the response time were not quite so slow.

And lastly, for those of you who are interested in free and open-source machine translation software -- a.k.a. "software for the tinkerers" -- this website summarizing the available resources will be a welcome starting point. You just might be surprised to see how much "stuff" is out there.

I cannot in good conscience say that I think these characters are graceful. But are they striking? Do they rattle your brain when you look at them? Absolutely!

Hold your cursor over the characters for a definition. 

As a subscriber to the Premium version of this newsletter you have access to an archive of Premium newsletters going back to May 2008.

You can access the archive right here. This month the user name is toolbox and the password is cinquecento.

New user names and passwords will be announced in future newsletters.

If you would like to promote this newsletter by placing a link on your website, I will in turn mention your website in a future edition of the Tool Box newsletter. Just paste the code you find here into the HTML code of your webpage, and the little icon that is displayed on that page with a link to my website will be displayed.

Here is a webpage that added the Tool Box link last month:

www.kutitrading.com

wordbeeblog.wordpress.com

www.ncata.org

www.goldsmithtranslations.com

 © 2011 International Writers' Group