Andrew Joscelyne at Blogos reported recently that the European Patent Office is thinking of using machine translation to cut costs. Apparently it costs a lot more to file a patent with the EPO than elsewhere in the world, because patents have to be filed in English, French and German.

I must say the mind boggles somewhat. Why not computer-assisted translation? Repeated headings could be automatically translated but long sentences would be left for human translators (or as the Germans say, Humanübersetzer).

LeaseFacts ist ein Blog des Leasing- und Factoringrechts, von Bernd Helming (via Law-Blog).

LeaseFacts is a weblog on German leasing (in the sense of financial leasing) and factoring law, by Bernd Helming.

A very nice feature is the introduction of terms that are then collected alphabetically (a feature I’ve thought of introducing myself but not got around to). I’ll quote one in full (September 9th entry), but I won’t translate it at this time of night.

bq. Fungibilität
Die Fungibilität hat mit Pilzen oder Pizza nichts zu tun. Vielmehr geht es dabei um die Verwendbarkeit des Leasingobjektes durch Dritte, sei es im Fall der vorzeitigen Kündigung des Leasingvertrages oder nach Ablauf der regulären Vertragsdauer. Die Drittverwendbarkeit ist Voraussetzung dafür, dass das Leasingobjekt im wirtschaftlichen und rechtlichen Eigentum des Leasinggebers bleibt und dem Leasinggeber steuerrechtlich zugeordnet werden kann; ist das Leasingobjekt ausschließlich für die Belange des Leasingnehmers verwendbar, spricht man auch von Spezial-Leasing.

On Sonja Tomašković’s Translator’s Blog, there is an interesting entry on quality assurance for translators.

In Germany, we usually associate that with the DIN norm for translators, DIN 2345. (There are two Austrian norms too). It’s possible not only to buy the norm – there’s an English translation too – but even to register and put little stickers on your work to say it’s DIN certified. This just defines process. I don’t seem to have mentioned it before – perhaps because it’s one of those religious war topics for translators, like Word versus WordPerfect, Trados versus Déjà Vu, or whether you should translate into a language that isn’t your mother tongue. Some translators believe that the very existence of quality control norms has a detrimental effect, but I’ve forgotten the argument.

Anyway, what is much more interesting is how we check our own and others’ work, which has as much to do with content as with process. DIN 2345 lists six points the translator is to check before delivering, stating that the extent to which each of these points is checked will depend on the purpose of the translation as agreed with the client. I find the DIN norm quite intresting to read.

The entry discusses an article in the ATA Chronicle, which unfortunately I haven’t seen (would anyone like my fax number?), referring to SAE standards:

bq. The article is by Don Sirena who works as a language translation manager for General Motors, and who has implemented the SAE J2450 quality assurance process for the translation department of GM.

bq. He points out that proofreading as we know it, i.e. simply going through a translation to observe errors, omissions or parts that we would do “differently” can lead to extremely high costs. Furthermore, the old picture of QA is that either you sacrifice quality for the sake of turnaround time and cost, or you have to live with higher costs when attaching importance to comprehensive QA processes.

The article apparently defines seven types of errors that can be checked for, each of which can be major or minor. This is reminiscent of the discussion of grading translation tests. Apparently time can be saved by doing this, since the final ‘proofreading’ is no longer necessary. (Proofreading and editing are often misused words, not necessarily here, but it’s necessary to be careful how they are used).

Not having read the article, I can’t see how this would save time.

I’ve recently changed my own self-revision process after reading Brian Mossop’s Editing and Revision for Translators. I’ve already mentioned the series Translation Practices Explained from St. Jerome Publishing. It’s a long treatment and very down-to-earth, and I took the author’s advice on what to read first for a self-revision workshop. Chapter 10, The Revision Parameters, sets out the types of error, in four classes and twelve subclasses. What is interesting is the later discussion, in Chapter 11, on how far to check these twelve matters, since there will scarcely be time to go through the text twelve times. Chapter 12, Revision Procedures, deals with the sequence of checking, and this helped me. It suggests that many translators check completeness and accuracy as they go along. In my case, I usually work in STAR Transit, and it’s easy for me to check every few sentences. The next step is now reading the translation alone, for which Mossop presents good arguments.

I’ve started using this procedure with longer texts. Previously I went through the whole in Transit, then did a comparative check either in Transit (onscreen or printed out) or Word, and this was lethally boring – the more boring a process is, the more slapdash I probably am. The reading through the whole translation in English is not the last stage, but it’s more fruitful than it used to be. I think my results have become more readable and probably more accurate. That may be just the novelty factor!

Brian Mossop has worked as a translator, reviser and trainer for the Canadian Government for 27 years and has taught translation at Toronto University for 22 years, and the book shows his experience.

Die Süddeutsche Zeitung bietet “Das Spiel zum Oktoberfest“. Bekannte Figuren können niedergestreckt werden.

The Süddeutsche Zeitung has a game where you shoot down moving figures – the game extends on both sides of the stage too. Hit the figures, the bears/beer steins/ hearts only when they blink, and you can get on the list of high scores if you hit enough (with the mouse cursor).

According to the Süddeutsche Zeitung, via Alexander Hartmann’s jurabilis, there are plans of merging the Ludwig-Maximilian Universität München and the Technische Universität München and calling the result the University of Munich. Not, you understand, die Universität München.

Deutsche Welle hat ab 13. September als 31. Sprache Klingonisch hinzugefügt. Hier die Startseite. Es gibt einige weitere Links zum Erlernen der Sprache und auch ein Quiz.

Deutsche Welle’s Klingon pages have links to German and ‘English’ versions (‘How do the Klingons call themselves?’)

If you highlight a word in the text, Mr Klingon will translate it into English or German for you. It’s difficult to decide which word to click on, as they’re all unfamiliar. A guide to Germany for Klingons:

bq. Germany is a country located in sector 001 of the planet Earth. Its traditions, stunning landscape and international flair make it an attractive holiday destination for Klingons and other extraterrestrial life forms.

bq. About 82 million people live in the country that calls itself the land of the “poets and philosophers.” [US punctuation. Btw, who do they mean – Biermann and Sloterdyk?] The natives speak German, but with more than 7 million people from other countries living in the Federal Republic of Germany, a variety of other languages are also spoken.

Incidentally, Deutsche Welle is holding a weblog competition at the moment, or possibly from September 17th: in seven languages and eleven categories, a worldwide competition.

Thanks to Trevor, who got it from Ananova. I didn’t manage to find the audio clips Ananova referred to. And Ananova talks about DW ‘broadcasting’ in Klingon, says the ‘show’ is popular, but that seems to be a misconception – these are just webpages in Klingon.