However I’ve also talked to a number of translators who I really respect, who are not in the high volume-low margin market and who are enthusiastic Trados users. I’ve never been a big fan of the Trados concept: high price, lackluster support unless you buy a separate support contract, expensive upgrades, and so on. For the majority of my work I do not use TM tools, both because a lot of my work is PDFs and because I feel that TM tools squeeze the flow out of my writing style, but I do have a few large recurring projects that require TM.
HOW DO I CLOSE A SEGMENT IN WORDFAST CLASSIC UPGRADE
In general I’ve been happy with both of these tools I love open source software in general so OmegaT has always had a special place in my heart, and I’ve always enjoyed Wordfast’s ergonomic features, excellent support and no-hassle upgrade system. With Trados, the translator does not have to be translated sentence or the point where the translated text to be inserted, looking, since they are both in the same part of the screen are labeled with two different colors and both the same character as the have same size.For as long as I’ve been using translation memory tools (about 9 years), I’ve been using Wordfast and OmegaT. It must be every time anew the last translated sentence on the sheet and constantly adjust the eyes of each font size and type. If you do not have the opportunity (OCR – further proof of how much the technology has facilitated the work of the translator ) to text using optical character recognition systems to be transmitted in an electronic format, one is constantly forced to look up from the blade and the to focus eyes on the computer. The situation becomes even worse if you get written on paper the translation. This process is not only annoying, but also often results in careless and increases the risk of omitting a sentence or a word. Otherwise, one is forced to work with two documents side by side, or the original text on the screen again and then return to the already translated text. Anyone who has attempted to translate a text in an electronic format, you know how difficult it is to edit the same right as you have to delete again the already translated part every time. In this context it should be mentioned that the first advantage is that it is immediately clear which parts of the text to be translated, the concentration on the essential.
The machine to be invented should not automatically translate, but also facilitate the work of the human translator. And in this time, between the late 60s and early 70s, a new approach was suggested.
Despite the initial enthusiasm and conviction, translators could be replaced by machines in the near future, the results did not meet expectations, and the financing was set. Air Force to understand the general meaning of dispatches and documents written in Russian. The American researcher Toma is the inventor of this system, which was used by the U.S. Systran (acronym for System Translation) was in those years and is still used today in the European Commission. The same expression, Machine Translation (MT ), was coined in 1947 by Warren Weaver who, in his famous memoranda, the development of an automatic translation program possible. The first experiments with the automatic translation were performed in specialized centers and particularly financed by the U.S. There was a need, the information received from the intelligence service to quickly translate, considerable sums have been invested in the application of technology in translation for the first time. The history of CAT tools actually begins in the years of the Cold War.
0 kommentar(er)
