Forum: Wordfast support
Topic: Déja Vu compatibility with Wordfast Pro
Poster: Dominique Pivard
Post title: The outcome depends on your bargaining power
[quote]fourth wrote:
The listing is on one half of the document with space on the other for entering the translation. Word.
[/quote]
OK, it sounds like an "external view". Not the ideal representation of the original document to be translated, especially if it's loaded with tags, as is often the case in Déjà Vu. Not ideal with Wordfast Pro.
[quote]fourth wrote:
I am using the latest updated version of Wordfast Pro
[/quote]
You may want to ask them to send you an XLIFF file instead of the Word file. They should be able to get one of those, if they have the Workgroup edition (as is probably the case if it's an agency).
You'd have to do a round-trip test with Wordfast Pro on a sample file, to be on the safe side.
[quote]fourth wrote:
Do you think that there should be reluctance by the agency to provide an original document, Dominique, given that an awful amount of information comes from viewing documents as a whole and adds greatly to context? And of course this format completely ignores translators' working methods. Personally I believe that anything getting in the way of quality translation is a bad idea.
[/quote]
I'm with you here, but I'm not the one facing an opportunity loss of €1500 per month with a single client. I'm merely suggesting ways to avoid that loss, even though they are not ideal.
I personally like to think my clients hire me because of my perceived talents as a translator, my knowledge of the subject matter etc., not because I happen to be proficient in tool X or Y.
[quote]fourth wrote:
Review would surely not be by machine, Dominique? I specialize in legal work and most agencies accept that they would be wasting their time checking legal aspects...they generally put on their spell checks and that's it.
[/quote]
Of course, it depends on many factors. It is not uncommon for in-house human reviewers to go through bilingual documents, in which case it's more convenient for them to have said documents in the format used by their tool. But based on what you said, it looks like you'd have some bargaining power with them and they would be willing to accommodate your preferences as a translator.
[quote]fourth wrote:
I am NOT a process/systems person, D and I certainly won't be buying Trados, Déja Vu, MemoQ and the half dozen other products....the shortest distance from original doc to end product is what interests me.[/quote]
I understand your point. Many, if not most, translators want to translate rather than deal with lots of technical issues, conversions etc.
Topic: Déja Vu compatibility with Wordfast Pro
Poster: Dominique Pivard
Post title: The outcome depends on your bargaining power
[quote]fourth wrote:
The listing is on one half of the document with space on the other for entering the translation. Word.
[/quote]
OK, it sounds like an "external view". Not the ideal representation of the original document to be translated, especially if it's loaded with tags, as is often the case in Déjà Vu. Not ideal with Wordfast Pro.
[quote]fourth wrote:
I am using the latest updated version of Wordfast Pro
[/quote]
You may want to ask them to send you an XLIFF file instead of the Word file. They should be able to get one of those, if they have the Workgroup edition (as is probably the case if it's an agency).
You'd have to do a round-trip test with Wordfast Pro on a sample file, to be on the safe side.
[quote]fourth wrote:
Do you think that there should be reluctance by the agency to provide an original document, Dominique, given that an awful amount of information comes from viewing documents as a whole and adds greatly to context? And of course this format completely ignores translators' working methods. Personally I believe that anything getting in the way of quality translation is a bad idea.
[/quote]
I'm with you here, but I'm not the one facing an opportunity loss of €1500 per month with a single client. I'm merely suggesting ways to avoid that loss, even though they are not ideal.
I personally like to think my clients hire me because of my perceived talents as a translator, my knowledge of the subject matter etc., not because I happen to be proficient in tool X or Y.
[quote]fourth wrote:
Review would surely not be by machine, Dominique? I specialize in legal work and most agencies accept that they would be wasting their time checking legal aspects...they generally put on their spell checks and that's it.
[/quote]
Of course, it depends on many factors. It is not uncommon for in-house human reviewers to go through bilingual documents, in which case it's more convenient for them to have said documents in the format used by their tool. But based on what you said, it looks like you'd have some bargaining power with them and they would be willing to accommodate your preferences as a translator.
[quote]fourth wrote:
I am NOT a process/systems person, D and I certainly won't be buying Trados, Déja Vu, MemoQ and the half dozen other products....the shortest distance from original doc to end product is what interests me.[/quote]
I understand your point. Many, if not most, translators want to translate rather than deal with lots of technical issues, conversions etc.