1887
Volume 64, Issue 5-6
  • ISSN 0521-9744
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9668
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper presents a comprehensive study on the use of translation memory software by translators of different backgrounds. We designed a questionnaire that was completed by a pool of 723 respondents including professional translators, translation students, and lecturers in translation studies and translation practice. We analyse the results of the survey providing important information concerning user requirements, the most important features of TM software, users’ perceived productivity, and market shares.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00062.sch
2019-01-23
2019-08-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alabau, Vicent
    2014 “CASMACAT: A Computer-assisted Translation Workbench”. InProceedings of EACL, 25–28. Gothenburg: Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bojar, Ondřej;
    2016 “Findings of the 2016 Conference on Machine Translation”. InProceedings of the First Conference on Machine Translation, vol.2, 131–198. Taberg: Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bowker, Lynne
    2005 “Productivity vs Quality? A Pilot Study on the Impact of Translation Memory Systems”. InLocalisation Reader: 133–140.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Cettolo, Mauro; Nicola Bertoldi; Marcello Federico; Holger Schwenk; Loïc Barrault; and Christophe Servan
    2014 “Translation Project Adaptation for MT-enhanced computer assisted translation”. Machine Translation28 (2): 127–150. 10.1007/s10590‑014‑9152‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-014-9152-1 [Google Scholar]
  5. Federico, Marcello;
    2014 “The Matecat Tool”. InProceedings of COLING (Demos), 129–132. Dublin: Dublin City University and Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Gupta, Rohit; Constantin Orăsan; Marcos Zampieri; Mihaela Vela; Josef van Genabith; and Ruslan Mitkov
    2016 “Improving Translation Memory Matching and Retrieval Using Paraphrases”. Machine Translation30 (1–2): 19–40. 10.1007/s10590‑016‑9180‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-016-9180-0 [Google Scholar]
  7. Iarossi, Guiseppe
    2006The Power of Survey Design. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. 10.1596/978‑0‑8213‑6392‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-6392-8 [Google Scholar]
  8. Krosnick, Jon A.; and Stanley Presser
    2010 “Question and Questionnaire Design”. Handbook of Survey Research2 (3): 263–314.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Lagoudaki, Elina
    2006Translation Memories Survey 2006 – Translation Memory Systems: Enlightening Users’ Perspective. isg.urv.es/library/papers/TM_Survey_2006.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  10. LeBlanc, Matthieu
    2013 “Translators on Translation Memory (TM): Results of an ethnographic study in three translations services and agencies”. InTranslation & Interpreting5 (12): 1–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Maguire, Martin; and Nigel Bevan
    2002 “User Requirements Analysis: A Review of Supporting Methods”. InProceedings of IFIP 17th World Computer Congress, 133–148. Deventer: Kluwer.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Pal, Santanu; Sudip Kumar Naskar; Marcos Zampieri; Tapas Nayak; and Josef van Genabith
    2016 “CATaLog Online: A Web-based CAT Tool for Distributed Translation with Data Capture for APE and Translation Process Research”. InProceedings of COLING (Demos), 98–102. Osaka: The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Payne, Stanley Le Baron
    1951The Art of Asking Questions: Studies in Public Opinionno.3. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Peterson, Robert A.
    2000Conducting Effective Questionnaires. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications. 10.4135/9781483349022
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483349022 [Google Scholar]
  15. Plitt, Mirko; and François Masselot
    2010 “A Productivity Test of Statistical Machine Translation Post-editing in a Typical Localisation Context”. InThe Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics93: 7–16. 10.2478/v10108‑010‑0010‑x
    https://doi.org/10.2478/v10108-010-0010-x [Google Scholar]
  16. Zampieri, Marcos; and Mihaela Vela
    2014 “Quantifying the Influence of MT Output in the Translators performance: A Case Study in Technical Translation”. InProceedings of the Workshop on Humans and Computer-assisted Translation (HaCat). Stroudsburg (PA): Associaton for Computational Linguistics. 10.3115/v1/W14‑0314
    https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/W14-0314 [Google Scholar]
  17. Zaretskaya, Anna
    2015D2.1: User Requirement Analysis. EXPERT: EXPloiting Empirical appRoaches to Translation. Technical Report.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Zaretskaya, Anna; Gloria Corpas Pastor; and Miriam Seghiri
    2015 “Translators’ Requirements for Translation Technologies: A User Survey”. In: New Horizons in Translation and Interpreting Studies. pp.133–134. Geneva: Tradulex.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00062.sch
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00062.sch
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error