Another central notion is that of terminological database, or termbase:
Termbase: Short form of Terminology database. A termbase is the collection of information on a term or concept in a structured, electronically readable way combined with a terminology management system. It is mostly used synonymously with termbank, though some terminologists distinguish them. If they are distinguished, terminology databases do not include the organizational environment but termbanks do.' (Trippel 1999) (cf. Galinski 1998). In this thesis the terms termbank and termbase will be used interchangeably.
Terminology management tools are part of a larger group of software tools referred to as computer-assisted translation (CAT) tools. CAT is defined as `direct translation by humans with the help of a computer interface which makes translational expertise accessible through "translation-intelligent" software'. (Neubert 1991:56). In other words, CAT applications are a group of software tools assisting translators, where the human knowledge and linguistic competence are the key factors, and it is the human translator who plays the dominant role and makes the final decisions concerning terminology and phraseology choices. Modern CAT tools, referred to as workbenches, consist of a number of modules or components, terminology management systems being part of them. The module which is considered the central one though, is the translation memory module.
`There are different TM programs currently available on the market, but they share similar features, albeit with some differences in speed and data management. Normally, the core of TM is the memory, a complex database where source text sentences are aligned side by side with the corresponding target text sentences. The ways in which the memory can be accessed and managed vary from one TM program to the other, but the philosophy behind the tool is basically the same: reusing previous work.'(Rico Pe'rez 2001). In a nutshell, TM tools play the role of a perfect memory that can be accessed anytime during the translation process. It is a memory that never fails to retrieve the requested information and prevents the translator from struggling with the same translation problem twice. The fact that translation memory stores aligned sentence pairs in source language (SL) and target language (TL) makes the tool extremely useful in translating repetitive texts e.g. technical manuals. When a new document is being translated in a workbench environment, the program automatically searches the translation memory for identical or similar segments, and whenever a match is returned (exact or fuzzy) it will be displayed in a special pane or grid or directly in the space where the target segment should be entered.
There are, however, technical texts that are very dense in terms of specialist terminology, but do not contain as much as two identical sentences. In this case the terminology management component of a workbench comes in as the right solution (Benis 1998). Thanks to terminology management modules even in the case of non-repetitive texts we can still benefit from the workbench packages in terms of speed and quality of translation, even though translation memory is not applicable.
Other components which are normally part of workbench applications are alignment tools (applications used for building translation memories from the corresponding SL and TL documents), analysis modules performing word frequency and repeatability calculations, sometimes also database and project maintenance modules.
At this stage it is necessary to draw the distinction between two terms which are frequently confused, i.e. computer-assisted translation (CAT), also referred to as machineassisted human translation (MAHT), and machine translation (MT). While it clearly transpires from the very term that MAHT is the type of translation where the human translator plays the crucial role (cf. Feder 2001:51, Neubert 1991:57) it should be noted that `MT aims at assembling all the information necessary for translation in one program so that a text can be translated without human intervention' (Craciunescu et al. 2004). The difference between MAHT and MT applications is also in the output quality. In the case of MAHT tools, the translations are usually of publishing quality. The up-to-date MT systems, on the other hand, deliver translations of unacceptable quality or requiring much postediting. However, the advent of new MT systems applying neural networks and artificial intelligence technology is only a matter of time and we may expect the quality of their output to improve (Champollion: 2001).
- O nas
- Tłumaczenia pisemne
- Tłumaczenia ustne
- Tłumaczenia audiowizualne
- Edycja tekstów
- Usługi wydawnicze i drukarskie