COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MODERN QA TOOLS FOR WRITTEN TRANSLATION
DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2022-4-51-61
Introduction. Special tools for assessing the quality of written translation – QA-tools (in English Quality Assessment) find common types of errors in the target text according to pre-programmed formal signs. The initial condition for these tools is the availability of the source and target texts. The program compares the corresponding sections of texts (paragraphs, sentences or segments) and marks all sections with suspected errors, forming a special report. The goal is to compare QA modules integrated into automated translation programs and independent QA tools. Material and methods. Methods used in the research on QA modules integrated into automated translation programs and independent QA tools include general scientific methods (logic methods: analysis, synthesis, generalization); specific scientific (linguistic) methods: descriptive, comparative. Results and discussion. The advantage of QA modules integrated into the automated translation programs such as SDL Trados, SmartCAT, Déjà Vu, MemoQ and Wordfast is the ability to monitor the quality of translation without using additional software and time resources. The translator is already familiar with the interface of the program in which he works, and can edit the text in it immediately after checking. QA modules integrated into automated translation programs can be used to assess written translations of different themes, however, the functions of the SDL Trados program are the most optimal for working with stylistically colored texts. The main advantage of independent QA tools for assessing the quality of translations such as Xbench, QA Distiller, Verifika, ErrorSpy and Linguistic Toolbox is the absence of the need to install complex and resource-consuming CAT programs for proofreaders, editors and managers of translation projects. Conclusion. QA tools have their advantages and disadvantages. The main advantages of modern QA-tools are: optimization of routine quality checks of the target text at different stages of its readiness; the ability to customize individual quality criteria for each project; reduction of the total duration of the translation project; ensuring uniformity of the target text, minimizing errors, etc. The disadvantages of QA tools are: the need to spend additional resources (additional time and hard disk space in case of installation on a user’s computer); the high cost of programs and a limited set of functions in case of using free or demo versions; the need to study the interface and configure the program for different projects; detection of a large number of potential errors, not all of which are real errors.
Keywords: translation, quality assessment, specialized quality assessment tools
References:
1. House J. Chapter 13. Translation Quality Assessment: Past and Present. In: Translation: A Multidisciplinary Approach London: Macmillan Publishers Limited, 2014. Pp. 241–264.
2. Al’bukova O. V. Obzor sushchestvuyushchikh podkhodov k probleme otsenki kachestva perevoda [Review of existing approaches to the problem of evaluating the translation quality]. Filologicheskiye nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki – Philology. Theory and Practice, 2016, no. 4(58), no. 2, pр. 65–59 (in Russian).
3. Williams M. The Assessment of Professional Translation Quality: Creating Credibility out of Chaos. TTR: traduction, terminologie, redaction, 1989, vol. 2(2), pp. 13–33.
4. Barkhudarov L. C. Yazyk i perevod: Voprosy obshchey i chastnoy teorii perevoda [Language and translation: Issues of general and specific theory of translation]. Moscow, URSS Publ., 2019. 240 p. (in Russian).
5. Polyakova N. V. Osnovnye podkhody k otsenke kachestva pis’mennogo perevoda [The main approaches to assessing the quality of written translation]. In: Yazyk. Obshchestvo. Obrazovaniye: sbornik nauchnykh trudov II Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii [Language. Society. Education. Proceedings of the II International Scientific and Practical Conference]. Edited by Yu. V. Kobenko. Tomsk, Izd-vo National Research Tomsk Polytechnic University Publ., 2021. Pp. 126–131.
6. Moiseyenko G. Prakticheskiy spravochnik perevodchika i redaktora [Practical guide for a translator and editor]. Moscow, 2016. 124 p. (in Russian).
7. Pis’mennyy perevod: Rekomendatsii perevodchiku i zakazchiku [Written translation: Recommendations to a translator and customer]. Comp. N. Duplensky. The Union of Translators of Russia. Moscow, 2004. 24 p., 13 appendixes (in Russian). URL: http:// www.translators-union.ru (accessed 20 April 2022).
8. Gilmullina E. A. Otsenka kachestva perevoda: kvantitativno-sistemnyy podkhod. Dis. kand. filol. nauk [Evaluation of translation quality: quantitative and systematic approach. Diss. cand. philol. sci.]. Saint Petersburg, 2016. 383 p. (in Russian).
9. Khromenkov P. N. Analiz i otsenka effektivnosti sovremennykh sistem mashinnogo perevoda. Dis. kand. filol. nauk [Analysis and assessment of the effectiveness of modern systems of computer-based translation. Diss. cand. philol. sci.]. Moscow, 2000. 265 p. (in Russian).
10. Nenakhova A. A. Sovremennye instrumenty otsenki kachestva pis’mennykh perevodov [Modern tools for assessing the quality of written translations]. In: Vserossiyskiy festival’ nauki NAUKA 0+. XXIII Mezhdunarodnaya konferentsiya studentov, aspirantov i molodykh uchenykh “Nauka i obrazovaniye” (g. Tomsk, 22–26 aprelya 2019 g.): v 5 tomakh. Tom II: Filologiya. Chast’ 3: Aktual’nye problemy lingvistiki i metodiki prepodavaniya inostrannykh yazykov [All-Russian Science Festival NAUKA 0+. XXIII International Conference of Students, Postgraduates and Young Scientists “Science and Education” (Tomsk, April 22–26, 2019): In 5 v. Vol. II: Philology. P. 3: Actual problems of linguistics and methods of teaching foreign languages]. Tomsk, TSPU Publ., 2020. P. 93–98 (in Russian).
11. Ovchinnikova I. G. Ispol’zovaniye komp’yuternykh perevodcheskikh instrumentov: novye vozmozhnosti, novye oshibki [Working on Сomputer-Assisted Translation platforms: New advantages and new mistakes]. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Lingvistika – Russian Journal of Linguistics, vol. 23 (2), 544–561. doi: 10.22363/2312-9182-201923-2-544-561 (in Russian).
12. Weber E. A., Ruzhnikova M. L. Kriterii i protsedury otsenki kachestva pis’mennogo perevoda na oblachnykh CAT-platformakh [Criteria and procedures for assessing the quality of written translation on cloud CAT platforms]. In: Prostranstva kommunikatsii: yazyk, literatura, media: materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 100-letiyu Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Communication spaces: language, literature, media. Materials of the International Scientific Conference dedicated to the 100th anniversary of Irkutsk State University]. Irkutsk, 2018. Pp. 57–65 (in Russian).
( 787.22 kB ) 
( 771.23 kB )
Issue: 4, 2022
Series of issue: Issue 4
Rubric: THEORETICAL AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS
Pages: 51 — 61
Downloads: 1416