The Ultimate Comparative Screwjob Calculator for translation rates

Some years ago I put out a number of little spreadsheet tools to help independent translators and some friends with small agencies to sort out the new concepts of "discount" created by the poisonous and unethical marketing tactics of Trados GmbH in the 1990s and adopted by many others since then. One of these was the Target Price Defense Tool (which I also released in German).

The basic idea behind that spreadsheet was the rate to charge on what looked to be a one-off job with a new client who came out of nowhere proposing some silly scale of rate reductions based on (often bogus and unusable) matches. So, for example, if your usual rate was USD 0.28 per word and that's what you wanted to make after all the "discounts" were applied, you could plug in the figures from the match analysis and determine that the rate to quote should be USD 0.35, for example.

Click on the graphic to view and download the Excel spreadsheet

Fast forward 11 years. Most of the sensible small agencies run by translators who understand the qualities needed for good text translation are gone, their owners retired, dead or hiding somewhere after their businesses were bought up and/or destroyed by unscrupulous and largely incompetent bulk market bog "leaders" with their Walmart-like tactics. Good at sales to C-level folk, with perhaps a few entertaining "inducements" on the side, but good at delivering the promised value? Not so much in cases I hear. And many of the good translators who haven't simply walked away from the bullshit have agreed to some sort of rate scale based on matching (despite the fact that there is no standard whatsoever on how different tools calculate these "matches" and now with various kinds of new and nonsensical "stealth" matches being sneaked in with little or no discussion).

So now, it's not so much whether a translator will deal with a given rate scale for a one-off job, but more often what the response should be to a new and usually more abusive rate scale proposed by some cost- and throat-cutting bogster who really cares enough to shave every cent that an independent translator can be intimidated to yield, thus destroying whatever remaining incentive there might be to go the extra mile in solving the inevitable unexpected problems one might find in many a text to translate.

And this, in fact, was the question I woke up to this morning. I told the friend who asked to go look for my ancient Target Price Defense Tool, but I was told that it wasn't helpful for the case at hand. (It actually was, but because of the different perspective that wasn't immediately obvious.)

Click on the graphic to view and download the Excel spreadsheet

So I built a new calculation tool quickly before breakfast which did the same calculations but in a little different layout with a somewhat different perspective: the Comparative Screwjob Calculator (screenshot above), because really, the point of these match scales is to screw somebody.

Shortly after that, I was asked to include the calculations of "internal matches" from SDL Trados (which are referred to as "homogeneity" in the memoQ world, stuff that is not in the translation memory but where portions of text in the document or collection of documents have some similarity based on their character strings - NOT their linguistic sense). And of course there are other creatively imagined matches in some calculation grids - for subsegments in larger sentences (expect to get screwed if an author writes "for example" a lot) or based on some sort of loser's machine pseudo-translation algorithms that some monolingual algorithm developer has decided without evidence might save the translator a little effort - cut that rate to the bone!). So I expanded the spreadsheet to allow for additional nonsense match rate types ("internal/other") and to compare a third grid which can be used, for example, to develop a counterproposal if you are currently billing based on an agreed rate scale and a new one is proposed (all the time keeping in view how much you are losing versus the full rate which might very well be getting charged to the end customer anyway).

Click on the graphic to view and download the Excel spreadsheet

The result was the Ultimate Comparative Screwjob Calculator (screenshot above). Now that's probably too optimistic a name for it, because surely those who think only of translators as providers of bulk material to be ground up for linguistic sausage have other ways to take their kilos of flesh for the delivery mix.

If this all sounds a bit ludicrous, that's because it is. I am a big fan of well-managed processes myself; I began my career as a research chemist with a knowledge of multivariate statistical optimization of industrial processes and used this knowledge to save - and make - countless millions for my employers or client companies and save hundreds of jobs for ordinary people. I get it that cost can be a variable in the equation, because starting some 34 years ago I began plugging it in to my equations along with resin mix components and whatnot.

But the objective I never lost sight of was to deliver real value. And that included minimizing defects (applying the Taguchi method or some other modeling technique or just bloody common sense). And ensuring that expectations are met, with all stakeholders (don't you hate that word? it reminds me of a Dracula movie in my dreams where I hold the bit of holly wood in my hand as we open the coffin of thebigword's CEO) protected. That is something too few slick salesfolk in the bulk market bog understand. They talk a lot of nonsense about quality (Vashinatto: "doesn't matter"; Bog Diddley: "no complaints from my clients who don't understand the target language", etc.). But they are unwilling to admit the unsustainable nature of their business models and the abusive toll it takes on so many linguistic service providers.

So use these spreadsheets I made - one and all - if you like. But think about the processes with which you are involved and the rates you need to provide the kind of service you can put your name to. The kind where you won't have to say desperately and mendaciously "It wasn't me!" because economic and time pressures meant that you were unable to deliver your best work. That goes as much for respectable translation companies (there are some left) as well as for independent service professionals who want to commit to helping all their clientele receive what they need and deserve for the long run.

Compatibility workflows with the memoQ Translator Pro edition (Part 1)

Yesterday I had the privilege to present the first of a series of workshops intended to convey my ideas for small-scale outsourcing management with the version of memoQ typically purchased by freelance translators. The participants were project managers at a translation agency that has begun to test the waters for using memoQ to overcome long-term compatibility issues between Trados versions in their accustomed workflows. I have been supporting them occasionally as a consultant over the past two years to deal with sticky issues of text encoding and translators who can't follow directions while working with a disturbing range of tools they often haven't mastered. It's been fun, and I've learned a lot from the infinite human capacity to instinctively ferret out the weaknesses of software and processes.

So I decided to put together a personal overview of the compatibility interfaces for the memoQ Translator Pro edition and my own thoughts on best practice and share it with my colleagues. I wanted to avoid burying everyone in technical detail but instead present the material in a way that most anyone can understand and apply. I don't believe in silly notions such as expecting the average intelligent user to learn and remember the use of regular expressions and other arcana that I, despite four decades of IT experience, continue to struggle with myself too often.

The presentation

• referred to memoQ version 5 Translator Pro edition
• focused on facilitating project workflows with different platforms rather than actual translation
• was intended for anyone outsourcing on a small scale for a single target language in a project (multiple target languages require the memoQ Project Manager or server editions)

It was delivered in two parts in a three hour period, with a long break for coffee, chat, snacks and checking e-mail or testing ideas learned in the first part. Participants were provided with screenshots of the main application screens and did not sit in front of computers but engaged in the discussion. The actual project experience and understanding of the participants was polled at appropriate intervals to make sure that the delivery was relevant and the information was understood and able to be applied.

The goal was to achieve an understanding of memoQ as a central platform for

• translation project input - files, translation memories, terminology and reference material
• format conversion to facilitate work with different translation environment techniques and tools
• translation
• editing and quality assurance
• creation of deliverable target files and other resources such as term lists, special review formats and commentaries

memoQ is "compatible" with

• SDL Trados in all versions (though it is important to choose the right compatibility workflow!)
• Star Transit
• quite a number of other commercial and Open Source translation environment tools
• various content management systems (CMS)
• translators who decline to use any tool other than a word processor
• and of course memoQ!

so except in the case of projects requiring live, direct work on a third-party translation server platform (such as one from SDL), some reasonable workflow can be found to collaborate with almost anyone using other tools.

memoQ is sort of like the Swiss Army knife of translation environment tools when it comes to compatibility. Only better. Some say it's more compatible with Trados than Trados. And in many cases they're right.

Output formats for translators
memoQ can prepare content for translation in

• optimized formats for memoQ users
• Trados-compatible bilingual DOC files
• XLIFF, a standard used by many environments
• RTF tables for those without special translation tools or for others to review, comment and answer questions using only a word processor

TM & terminology data
memoQ reads translation memory data in TMX and delimited text formats and outputs it to TMX. Term data is read in the same formats as TM data but output only to delimited text formats and a particular SDL Trados MultiTerm XML format.

memoQ can also integrate with external termbases, TM sources and machine translation engines.

I sometimes think of memoQ as the hub of a wheel with translators, reviewers and customers working with many different environments as the "spokes".

Basic project management steps with memoQ

These typically involve:

1. Reading in the data after it is properly prepared

• files to translate in whatever source format
• translation memory data or reference corpora
• terminology data
• special segmentation rules (SRX files and segmentation exceptions) or other configuration data for optimized workflows

In this step it is important to choose the best method´s of data import and the appropriate filter or combination of filters. In memoQ, filters can be cascaded to convert and protect sensitive data as tags. Thus HTML and placeholder tokens contained in cells of an Excel file might be protected by "chaining" an HTML filter and a custom filter using regular expressions after the usual filter for Microsoft's Excel format.

2. Analyzing the data

Many options are available here, including the weighting of tags to compensate the extra effort involved with complex formats and determining internal similarities in a text (aka "homogeneity" or "fuzzy repetitions") to facilitate better project planning.

3. Extracting terminology (particularly useful for large projects for one or more translators)

4. Preparing and exporting files for translators

Projects can also be sent to translators using memoQ as handoff packages or complete backups with all attached TMs, termbases and corpora.

5. Receiving and re-importing translated content

6. Review, QA and feedback workflows

7. Generating target files and other information for delivery, final statistics

Recommendations for best practices in choosing formats for translators, reviewers and others using a variety of tools will be covered in the second part of this summary. Those interested in a live presentation or relevant materials are welcome to contact me privately.

Homogeneity: another "secret" competitive weapon with memoQ

Earlier today I received an e-mail with the following question:

At the moment we are wrestling with an analysis issue that should be solvable but we don't know how to. As I always see your posts about all kinds of TM issues, I was hoping you might be able to provide some advice.


The case is as follows:
From one of our clients we have received what is basically a list of tools in Excel for translation (NL-FR). My colleague made an initial quotation for the project based on the Trados analysis, which revealed 23% repetitions in the file. However, the client received a much lower quote from a different provider. The reason for this, according to him, is that there are a lot of high fuzzy matches in the file which the other provider has counted but Trados doesn't (for example, "... metaalzaagbeugel 12 inch zwaar model met D-greep" and "... metaalzaagbeugel 12 inch zwaar model met rechte greep".)


Do you know whether there is a way (or tool other than Trados) that does count these fuzziess when performing an analysis?

To me, this sounds an awful lot like my PM acquaintance has been blind-sided by Kilgray's homogeneity analysis, which has been a feature of memoQ for a very long time. It's a feature about which I personally have mixed feelings. Used in the wrong way by unscrupulous agencies or ignorant persons, it can be yet another club with which to clobber translators and their rates to the ground and bring about the Hobbesian state of being so many fear is in our future, if not our present. But I approach it as a valuable information tool for helping me estimate how much time a rush project might actually take. Or in the case of my correspondent's competitor, it can be used judiciously to calculate a competitive rate that might not land you in the poorhouse.

Classic Trados and most other CAT tools calculate fuzzy matches based on the content of a translation memory. If these sentences:

The cat is black and white.
The dog is black and white.
The rabbit is black and white.

do not have something similar in a TM used for analysis, they will all be counted as "No Match" segments. However, with a good tool like Atril's Déjà Vu X and it's functional "assembly" technology, similar sentences like these are handled almost like 100% matches from a TM. But DVX still won't tell you about the time you might save.

Kilgray's memoQ analyzes a text for internal redundancies and "fuzzy redundancies", the latter being referred to as having a degree of "homogeneity". But as anyone who works with CAT software knows, even high fuzzy matches can be utterly useless and cost more time than content with no statistical similarities. Translation is about meaning, not statistics, and the price assassins at Trados and other tool pimps of the past sold everyone a lousy bill of goods with nonsense marketing lies like "You'll never have to translate the same sentence again." Well, guess what? If you do successive versions of an information brochure or technical manual and don't start to update your language after a while, your text will soon sound like it was written for an age long past and might not communicate as clearly as it should. Those who can read German should have a look at the various editions of the classic cookbook Die Süddeutsche Küche by Katharina Prato, which was popular from the mid-19th century until the 1930s for truly dramatic examples of the changes in a language. (These are available online via Google Books and various libraries online. They are also a good source of offal recipes - people ate all manner of interesting things back then.) But this happens on a much shorter time scale as well: my eight-to-ten-year-old texts for the AOK social insurance brochure and various IT manuals sound rather awful and dated, though they were quite acceptable at the time they were written.

Used as a planning tool, however, the homogeneity function in memoQ can give you valuable information and help you compete more effectively in difficult times and markets.