Wrong translations and meaningless terminology course time and again through the jungle of printed pages. Most of these originate no doubt from machine translation systems, and from companies located at the other end of the world. But even many German companies could still improve on the quality of their translations. And this additional quality would hardly cost anything extra.
According to the study conducted by tekom “State of technical communication and outlook”, German business houses have in the past spent an average of about three billion Euro per year for services related to technical documentation. A third of this, and the largest single item, was invested in translation.
Hence, quality management of translations not only aims at correct translation output but it should also have the desirable effect of helping the company in spending its resources judiciously.
Members of the tekom came together a few years ago and formed the working group called “Quality Management in Translation”, similar to the working group on text quality (AG Textqualität or WG Text Quality), which we introduced in the previous issue. And this working group, too, has developed a catalogue of criteria that is meant to help its users in dealing more efficiently with translations and in checking them.
What marks the quality of a translation? The working group “Quality management in translation”, or “WG Translation” for short, certainly works on the basis of pre-requisites and assumptions that are different from those of the WG Text Quality: here, the text that needs to be translated has already been written. This means that there exists a basis that serves as an orientation point for assessing the quality.
A translation is considered to be of high quality if it satisfies the following criteria:
The contents of the source text have been rendered completely and correctly in the target language.
The translation is comprehensible, free from orthographic and grammatical errors, formulated without ambiguity and is correct and consistent with respect to terminology.
The contents have been adapted to suit the linguistic, cultural and statutory conditions, meaning, they have been localized. A user reading through a manual does not notice that he/she is reading a translated text.
There is consistency with respect to earlier or parallel translation projects.
The translation is delivered on time.
The layout of the translation meets the same requirements that had to be met by the source text: adequate place in the layout and in the screens, correct coding of character sets, formatting retained as it is.
This already points to a few aspects that go beyond a mere one-to-one comparison of the source and output texts. The translator might have delivered a perfect translation in linguistic terms, but a lot of work might still be needed on the translated text. For instance, if the translator was not aware that he should not overwrite certain control characters or formatting. Moreover, the translator is responsible for only that work which was agreed upon as his or her task. If this did not include a layout check, he cannot be held responsible for it.
Members of the working group, from left to right: Peter Oehmig, Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG, Luis R. Cerna, Barbara Kratzer Ohlow, CAS Software AG, Angelika Ottmann, EXACT! Sprachenservice und Informationsmanagement GmbH, Rosemarie Stindl. Not in the picture: Dr. François Massion, Dokumentation ohne Grenzen GmbH, Uwe Muegge, Medtronic/Monterey Institute of International Studies (USA).
Why quality management? At the first meeting of the WG for Translation, the initial focus was on quality checking and control. Very soon it was found that checking a translation alone will not improve its quality. Often, defects cause a lot of anger for both customer and translator, with mutual accusations or rupture of business relations as the consequence.
Even when the delivered translation meets all requirements fully, its good quality has probably been the result of mere chance. Hence, the “translation” process was looked at more closely.
Besides actual translation, the translation process also includes localization, terminology work, data export and import, and typographic preparation of the text. This process can be divided into three phases:
preparation for work
translation, meaning the migration from the source language to the target language, with post-processing/checking of the information in the target language
quality assurance measures
Both the quality of the source text as well as each phase of the translation process have an impact on the quality of the end product. Each phase is itself prone to errors. The greater the care taken in the individual phases of quality, the better the end product.
The quality management also includes the preparation of the work, with all the qualitative goals and project post-processing, in addition to the quality checks, where one is looks for optimisation potential in the translation process.
Quality management is a task that needs to be executed in partnership by both the client and the translator. This partnership is also reflected in the composition of the WG: technical writers, freelance translators, interpreters and proprietors of translation agencies were all present at the meeting.
Setting up a catalogue of criteria To begin with, every member of the working group put together what in his or her opinion good quality management means, and presented these for discussion. This resulted in two evening lectures for the regional group, where the collected ideas were presented and put up for discussion. Next, an attempt was made to identify existing quality criteria and process descriptions, and various members of the regional groups were asked about the quality management in their companies. Thus, over a period of three years, a catalogue of criteria as it exists today came into being.
The catalogue, like the WG Text Quality, has four levels of organization: category, sub-category, criteria and orientation. Category and sub-category are useful in determining the area that is to be examined, the weightage and its delimitation. The criteria are formulated as open questions. Here, the tester will have to decide how he wants to asses a given aspect. The orientation questions are formulated as closed questions, which need to be answered with yes or no.
The three categories of the catalogue of criteria are
Preparation of work or pre-processing,
Executing the translation,
Quality assurance measures.
Preparation of work or pre-processing Is the translator really responsible if a translation turns out to be unusable? The answer obtained from actual practice is “no”. The task of producing a good translation is not the exclusive responsibility of the translator. But this does not mean that the translator is absolved of all responsibility. Proper pre-processing, or correct preparations of the work, which also includes the choice of a suitable translator, is the basis for achieving satisfactory translation output. According to EN 15038, the responsibility for preparing the work lies with the translation service provider [1].
The catalogue of criteria for preparing the work helps you to think of all the essentials. Moreover, the work preparations function best if the author and translator work together in partnership and pool their expertise.
The scope of the category “Pre-processing or Preparation of Work” is huge. Do not let it scare you, because you will probably only need parts of it for your special requirements. The following sub-categories are included:
Choice of the translator
Contents of the work order
Localization
Terminological and language related specifications
Other working aids for the translator
Executing the translation The catalogue of criteria for executing the translation is relatively short, but is adequate for practice. If the work preparation is good, the contractual agreement between the client and the translator unequivocal, and the schedule planning sets realistic goals, generating the actual translation should not be a problem.
But one thing is very important: the translator needs a direct line of contact to the author. This is the only way of ensuring that the meaning intended by the author is actually conveyed in the target language. The category “Executing the translation” consists of the following sub-categories:
support during the work, meaning preparation of reference material such as translation memories, terminology databases, authoring guidelines and style guides, and naming a contact person for questions pertaining to the content.
post-processing of the translation order, such as technical organization and planning for uploading the translation to an authoring system, layout generation and testing wherever software needs to be compiled afresh.
Quality assurance measures Quality assurance is more than just quality checking. That is why this category is divided into two sub-categories:
quality checking and control
root cause analysis in the case of errors or discrepancies
In some cases the quality check is only done at the user’s end. The translation is simply incorporated as the translator delivers it and published without any further checking. But the economic feasibility of this method becomes questionable, if it ever comes to damage cases and product recalls that can be traced back to defective instructions. Even if it is “only” the brand image that suffers here, the damages are long lasting.
What quality checks are appropriate? Ideally, a 100 per cent check would be in order: this is done by getting the translation translated back into the original language by another translator. Then the original text is compared with the re-translation. If the texts are identical in terms of content, though not in the choice of words, you can go ahead and celebrate. You have on hand two translators who understand their trade, the source text was translatable and your translation processes are basically sound.
But this process is fraught with serious disadvantages: the cost and time become double. Also, you would need two translation channels that function well. The alternative: conduct this same quality check using a subset of the text – two to three pages would suffice. This not only helps you in uncovering errors, you will also realize the problems that arise if a translation is executed using a “relay language”. For instance, if a German source text is translated into English and this English text is then used as the basis for translation into other languages.
A negative counter example is seen in the case of the “ostrich policy”: the technical writer uploads the translation and thereby unleashes the information product on the user. Unfortunately, some writers have no other option but this, as they have neither the time nor adequate resources for a quality check.
Use what is available The members of the WG looked for quality control procedures that are already in existence, and which strike the middle path between the extremes of the “100 percent check” and the “0 per cent check”. EN 15038 makes it binding for the translation service provider to use the 4-eyes principle for proof reading, and to use a documented quality management system. More details on quality checks are available in SAE J2450 [2], including a quality metric, where the errors are classified into defect categories. Further, this also envisages the option of assigning variable weightages to the errors. The sub-criterion “Quality check” is more exhaustive in the catalogue of criteria, as compared to the SAE J2450. Quality checks for the text alone are not adequate in some cases. For instance, a software might have to be compiled afresh in some cases, and then tested to see if it works without errors. In the catalogue of criteria, you can select aspects of testing that are important for you, and accord appropriate weightages to them. Thus, you will soon strike a balance between what your resources and time constraints permit you to do, and what needs to be checked without fail, in order to minimize the risk of errors.
Root cause analysis in the event of errors and discrepancies Quality management also means learning from mistakes. If the quality check shows that the result is defective, you should sit and discuss these defects with the translator in a friendly dialog and ward them off. The courage to say things openly and the capacity for (self) criticism will be rewarded with improved quality in the next translation assignment.
Take time for hindsight after big projects come to an end: what went well and where there is room for improvement? Record the results of this introspection and the measures taken to address them and make this project documentation available to all those involved in the translation process. This will set in motion a process of continuous improvement, which will benefit the company in future.
Have we achieved our goal? The aim of the WG Translation Quality was to draw up a catalogue of criteria that can be used pragmatically and which addresses as many aspects as possible in the translation of technical documentation. The catalogue of criteria is therefore quite exhaustive. Some time will be needed to get used to working with it.
You do not need any knowledge of the target language. The translator has these skills, and you might have to communicate more intensely with him than you have been accustomed hitherto. We will have achieved our goal if you can achieve the following goals:
Avoid misunderstandings by more extensive preparation for the work, and contract design.
Effective cooperation among all those involved in the translation process.
Better quality of translation, with due adherence to the economic and time constraints.
Some aids and further material The finished catalogue of criteria will be available soon with the new tekom-application called “Quali-Assistent”. Additional help can be obtained from the material listed in our literature references. We have listed a few standards [1] [2], publications and links pertaining to Pre-processing or Preparation of Work [3], Designing of Contracts [4], Translation-Memory-Systems [5] [6] and Terminology [7].
Links and literature [1] DIN EN 15038 (2006): Übersetzungs-Dienstleistungen – Dienstleistungsanforderungen. [2] SAE J2450 (2005): Translation Quality Metric. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). [3] Folien der RG-Veranstaltungen: www.tekom.de/webforum/organisations/tekom/uploads/uploaded_file2.zip www.tekom.de/webforum/organisations/tekom/uploads/uploaded_file64.pdf [4] Muegge, U. (2005): Translation Contract – A Standards-Based Model Solution. AuthorHouse. [5] Massion, F. (2005): Translation Memory Systeme im Vergleich. doculine Verlags GmbH. [6] Ottmann, A. (2004): Translation-Memory-Systeme – Nutzen, Risiken, erfolgreiche Anwendung. GFT Verlag. [7] Arntz, Reiner; Picht, H.; Mayer, F. (2004): Einführung in die Terminologiearbeit. Olms.
Peter Oehmig is a technical writer in the field of mechanical engineering. He has been creating user manuals and instructions for printing machines and printing software since 15 years. For the past ten years he has been actively heading the Regional Group RG Baden.
Zum Tagungsportal 
