Cloud-based translation tools

Although the majority of translators still mostly use desktop solutions, the so-called cloud-based solutions have also been around for the last few years and are therefore worth mentioning. Several of the above listed developers already offer such a solution, such as Wordfast Anywhere (http://www.freetm.com) or memoQ WebTrans (https://www.memoq.com/memoq-webtrans-browser-based-translation).

In the case of cloud-based translation tools, everything previously stored on our computer (such as the software itself, our translation memories, terminology databases, texts, etc.) are now stored on a  remote server available through a browser or a small client (Muegge 2012).

Its main advantage is that translators do not need to fiddle around with installing and updating the program or creating resources for translation, because all these are available up-to-date on the server to which we can connect through our browser (and usually after signing-up for the service). Cloud-based translation tools offer a more cost-efficient solution compared to desktop versions, as they can often be used on a monthly subscription basis (and there are many free versions), and we can use them even with mobile devices. If translators participate in a larger project, each text to be translated and all reference materials are available in an instant, thus facilitating a more efficient collaboration (Muegge 2012).

The so-called Google Translator Toolkit (translate.google.com/toolkit) is an important example here, as cloud-based solutions have started to become known following its launch. Originally, it was designed with the aim of improving the automatic translations of Google Translate (Muegge 2012). We can use the Toolkit for uploading, organising, and translating our documents, we can also build a translation memory and a terminology database, and we can share them with others. Its special feature is that, by default, it fills all segments with automatic matches (coming from Google Translate). This function can be disabled.

Compared to other cloud-based solutions, the Toolkit is a rather ‘isolated’ one, as most of these services are designed to serve very large projects on which many translators are working in a wide range of languages, and where texts are updated frequently and have to become available in many languages at the same time (especially in the case of localisation of, for example, software, documentations, websites, etc.).

A good example is Transifex (http://www.transifex.com/) that is free to use after registration. It is especially worth a mention as it places great emphasis on the so-called ‘community translation’. After logging in, we can choose from a number of different projects, and we can practise and test our knowledge in various topics.

In addition, our work is usually reviewed.

There are also paid services, such as XTM Cloud (http://www.xtmintl.com) that offers a 30-day free trial after registration. After the trial period, we may choose a one, three, or 12-month subscription. A similar solution is Memsource Cloud (www.memsource.com) that offers a limited but free Personal Edition after registration and a so-called 1+ Freelance Edition with a 30-day trial period. Both of

them consist of all the main components and their use may be learned in no time, if one has knowledge of any desktop translation solutions.

Of course, there are drawbacks in this case, too. First, we have to be constantly online. This may not be too much of a problem today, but it is possible that the connection is suddenly lost or the server slows down, and we may be unable to work for a while. Or worse, we may also need to translate the last few sentences again. Furthermore, many think that translations created with the use of cloud-based solutions become public property, and thus translators no longer ‘own’

their collections in the traditional sense. However, as Muegge (2012) points out, the majority of service providers encrypt all the data, therefore, translating ‘in the cloud’ does not mean that each of our sentences stored there is immediately available to anyone on the internet. This aspect is particularly important, as many translation agencies specifically prohibit the use of such solutions, though they may provide a great alternative to desktop versions.

8. Conclusion

After defining the basic expressions, I introduced the text types ‘recommended’

for use in translation environment tools, and I also tried to point out that these tools may even help in not that ‘ideal’ cases. Furthermore, I discussed the main advantages and drawbacks of these tools that require a careful approach. It must be emphasised that the use of translation environment tools is obligatory today, but, as translators, we are only able to see their beneficial effects, and they only help our work if we learn to use them properly and we are aware of their limitations. It is therefore of great importance, especially during the learning phase, to constantly practise, and not to lose heart if we feel our work is slower at first, as the above mentioned benefits appear only later, after working with them for a while.

In addition, I presented some of the most common programs and also some noteworthy ones, and I briefly touched upon the new solutions as well. This is particularly important, as tools for translators are constantly changing, improving, expanding, and translators must be aware of these changes if they would like to continue working with them in an efficient way.

References

Alcina, A. 2008. Translation technologies. Scope, tools and resources. Target 20(1):

79–102.

Biau-Gil, J. R., Pym, A. 2002. Technology and translation (a pedagogical overview).

In: Pym, A., Perestrenko, A. & Starink, B. (eds) Translation and its Teaching.

Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group, Universitat Rovira i Virgili. 5–19.

Bowker, L. 2002. Computer-Aided Translation Technology: A Practical Introduction.

Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.

Bowker, L. 2005. Productivity vs Quality? A pilot study on the impact of translation memory systems [online]. Localisation Focus – The International Journal of Localisation 4(1): 13–20.

Bowker, L., Fisher, D. 2010. Computer-aided translation. In: Gambier, Y., van Doorslaer, L. (eds) Handbook of Translation Studies. Volume 1. Amsterdam/

Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 60–65.

Craciunescu, O., Gerding-Salas, C. & Stringer-O’Keeffe, S. 2004. Machine Translation and Computer-Assisted Translation: a New Way of Translating?

Translation Journal [online]. http://translationjournal.net/journal/29computers.

htm, last accessed on 19 October 2015.

Feder, M. 2002. A Tentative Proposal for Machine Assisted Human Translation (MAHT) – Tool-Specific General Text Typology. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series–Themes in Translation Studies 36(1): 365–374.

Gambier, Y. et al. (EMT Expert Group). 2009. Competences for professional translators, experts in multilingual and multimedia communication. http://

ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/programmes/emt/key_documents/emt_

competences_translators_en.pdf, last accessed on 19 October 2015.

Lagoudaki, E. 2006. Translation Memories Survey 2006: Users’ perceptions around TM use. Proceedings of the International Conference Translating and the Computer 28. http://mt-archive.info/Aslib-2006-Lagoudaki.pdf, last accessed on 19 October 2015.

Muegge, U. 2012. The silent revolution: Cloud-based translation management systems. tcworld July 2012, 17–21.

O’Brien, S. 1998. Practical Experience of Computer-Aided Translation Tools in the Software Localization Industry. In: Bowker, L., Cronin, M., Kenny, D.

& Pearson, E. (eds) Unity in Diversity? Recent Trends in Translation Studies.

Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. 115–122.

O’Hagan, M., O’Brien, S. & Flanagan, M. 2010. Keeping an eye on the UI design of Translation Memory: how do translators use the “Concordance” feature.

ECCE’10 Proceedings of the 28th Annual European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics. http://www.academia.edu/3696712/Keeping_an_eye_on_

the_UI_design_of_Translation_Memory_how_do_translators_use_the_

Concordance_feature, last accessed on 19 October 2015.

Webb, L. E. 2000. Advantages and Disadvantages of Translation Memory: A Cost/

Benefit Analysis (MA Thesis). Monterey: Monterey Institute of International Studies.

Zetzsche, J. 2008. The Translator’s Tool Box: A Computer Primer for Translators.

Winchester Bay: International Writers’ Group, LLC.

in Interpreting and Machine Interpretation

Ildikó Horváth

E-mail: horvath.ildiko@btk.elte.hu

1. Introduction

The use of new technologies is a  relatively new phenomenon in the history of interpretation since technical devices for interpreting emerged after the appearance of simultaneous interpretation in the second half of the 20th century.

Prior to this, interpreters had used pens and notepads as work tools. Another great technological advance was brought about by remote interpreting, first used at the end of the 1970s, beginning of the 1980s.

Technological advances, however, have not come to an end and nowadays fully-automated machine interpretation is an increasingly common theme in the interpreting profession, even though machine interpretation is still lagging behind machine translation in this respect. One reason for this lies in the fact that there is more demand for automatically generated written translations. Another reason might be that the automation of interpretation must take into account a number of real-time variables too, which do not arise during translation.

Automated interpretation has become a common topic at technological and scientific conferences and is also a frequently discussed theme for interpreters. Moreover, it has become more visible in the press as well (BBC, Der Spiegel, L’Express, technologyreview.

com, The Economist). In what follows, first we will discuss the history of machine translation. Subsequently, new information and communication technologies (ICT) and computer-assisted interpretation (CAI) used during interpreting assignments will be examined. Finally, we will analyse how machine interpretation functions, presenting a few consecutive and simultaneous interpreting solutions and devices.

1 An earlier version of this article was published as Horváth, I. 2014. Machine Interpretation.

Revue Internationale d’Études en Langues Modernes Appliquées. Supplément au numéro 7/2014

« Comment peut-on être traducteur/interprète? » Cluj-Napoca, le 11 Octobre 2013, 19–26.

2. The use of new information and communication