![]() There I must really give kudos to the OmegaT developer: loading the TM was even faster than with Trados Workbench, which for me has always been a benchmark of speed to aspire to. I hope the new version is better in that respect. While its performance with large TMs has always been good (my personal "Big Mama" is about 330,000 TUs), import and export of such data volumes are painfully slow. I do have a license for the older version of DVX, but I didn't attempt any stress testing. The initial scan produces only fairly close matches, while the "power scan" is more like the usual concordance with the term embedded in a larger body of text (the non-matching parts being crossed out) Once again, Victor Dewsbery was kind enough to provide me with screenshots of the two "scan" options for searching the translation memory. The Déjá Vu X concordance hasn't changed significantly in appearance in the latest version (DVX2). Wordfast Pro - format not bad, but the test was limited due to the demo license SDL Trados 2009 - perhaps the easiest to read, but slower than molasses The concordance in SDL Trados 2007 - hits limited compared to OmegaT (see above) Other concordance views looked like this: My personal TM with about 10 years of my work in it is nearly as long as my German/English EU legal test database, but concordance searches in it using memoQ are not unduly slow. (Update: Kilgray's develops are actively working to remove this restriction.) Of all the tools I was able to test with a large concordance, memoQ was the only one to fail this way. So it looks like some development attention may need to be directed here. MemoQ error message from too many concordance hits (This would have been obvious had I paid enough attention to read the dialog title in the first place.) Further testing revealed that this error was due to the very large number of hits. Unfortunately, my favorite working environment, memoQ, performed worst with the same big data set: it simply gave an error message. I vacuumed my entire apartment and fed the dog while I waited for the result, and I wasn't even told how many hits were found. ![]() Concordance searches with SDL Trados Studio 2009, on the other hand, really sucked with a big TM (EU data, about 400,000 TUs). ![]() Searching a huge TM gave results in a flash. In terms of overall performance, the best results were obtained with OmegaT and "Trados Classic" (2007). I took a look at the TWB translation memories in SDL Trados 2007, concordancing in SDL Trados Studio 2009, Wordfast Pro (very limited test due to a demo license and my inability to load my TMX test data), memoQ and OmegaT. I was not very happy with some of what I discovered, especially with some of today's leading commercial tools. This inspired me to have a look at how various other tools display concordance results. The differences in layout and the lack of highlighting of the key term (which was aligned in the center of the memoQ concordance window in the ancient KWIC display tradition) were unexpected and confusing to the new user. So what was the problem? For years she had looked at this concordance view: Looks like the term ("Inverkehrbringen") was found. I was somewhat puzzled by that, and when I looked at her screen with the memoQ concordance dialog, I saw something like this: The user, who was quite experienced with OmegaT, kept telling me that memoQ could not find examples of a term's use in the TM and she had to do all her searches in OmegaT. A recent experience when tutoring a new memoQ user started me thinking about the way concordance searches work in various translation environment tools and how the results are displayed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |