I say do mine first on the basis that your question need to be passed back to the client and waiting for their answer will take a while.
While you are waiting, you might as well do the analysis first. Any insight you get can be applied to the S&R list anyway.
As I am not part of the proofreading team and haven’t heard from any PM either, I was just wondering when (or if) I can be of help again.
I know that my recent work did not reach the high quality level by a long shot, which I usually delivered during the JD stage. The last month was quite difficult for me, which in the end also affected my work to some extent. Everything is in good order now and I am motivated + 100% concentrated.
I would really be grateful to be part of your team again anytime soon.
Sorry to hear about your personal problems.
As for your question, unfortunately we don’t know the answer yourself. We like to believe that we did better on BOI than in JD and as such need very few people for the polishing stage. We should be done by next week too.
Unfortunately, I don’t know when the next project will be, and of what nature.
” So, what’s the plan? I need to know so I can prepare for it. How’s the analysis?
the client has sent some (however obscure) instructions that need to be integrated and in my opinion it wouldn’t make much sense to seperately deal with that and your task since the list will definitely become a lot longer/will have to be adjusted. So I’m working on everything combined and hope to be able to give you something by tonight.
I don’t mean to be whining, but do you see any way to speed up the process in which I am? Possibly Sebastian or Holger could take over some of this? I feel a bit like having built a cardhouse based on the clients instructions and now have to exchange the three bottom cards within the next two minutes. Again, this is not whining, but I don’t want to be the person blamed if we don’t meet the deadline, at least not the only person. Is there a clear advantage (or can there be faster process) if I first check the files that have already been S&R -ed? Can you do something with that even knowing that I will deliver a second S&R-list soon? Also, I’m celebrating my 30th birthday this weekend and don’t know how much I can do before Monday. Any comments would be appreciated.
The client asked us to “fill in” his own glossary with the German translation. I’ve examined that glossary and it’s outdated. Many terms do not even exist. A few I know exist in the source text under different name, but tracking those down will take time we don’t have.
But anyway, I imported the client’s glossary into Transit, used the entire library of translated BOI files as Reference Material, and after many hours, got the entire glossary translated. I then passed this glossary to Christina for double-checking.
The result is here:
For about 90% of the terms, this is the same as our glossary because the translation are taken from those. However, it may be useful to read up on the 10% that aren’t the same. Please read the correction Christina made and her comments. They may be useful for the S&R list. You can probably sort them by column D and/or column E to discover which terms need attention.
Oh, any untranslated terms are untranslated because they do not exist in the source text. I spent hours doing text searches on the original Excel files to confirm this. And yes, I checked on common variations too. Terms that actually exist in the source text but didn’t get found automatically by Transit were searched for manually and copy-pasted in.
This glossary will go to the customer too. They like the having the Items in one sheet, and NPCs in another, and so on. By the way, the Items list may enable us to figure out how to deal with Item of Frost and Frost Item cases.
I wrote the above post pretty much at the same time you wrote yours.
I don’t know how useful Sebastian will be, since he apparently already found a different project to work on and can only work a few hours a week. I haven’t contacted Holger, but if you can describe what is it that you want him to do, I’ll contact him? Are you sure about him though? While I don’t hear any criticism of him, I didn’t hear any praises either. Christina’s free too. Would she be of help? She wasn’t involved with BOI at all though, being busy with a different project up until last week or so.
Christina’s file I just linked above might be useful as it should tell you potential troublespots right away. It will not cover all the troublespots, but it covers some.
I also think that analysis should have been done first. (In fact, it could’ve been done yesterday.) My logic is that someone will have to analyze the files after the S&R is done sooner or later. If you do it now before you come up with a second S&R list, then if anything comes up, you can just add it to the second S&R list. Us ourselves will only need to run the script once more and the proofreaders check it once more. If you do the analysis later, and it comes out that there’s something you missed, then you will need to come up with a 3rd S&R list. Val and I will have to run the script again, and proofreaders double-check the changed terms again.
And happy birthday. 🙂
” By the way, you should have Christina’s email. You can contact her and ask her to help. If you want to ask others, there’s the CS.
I will check the glossary Christina proofread. Looking over it I noticed some mistakes and also some terms that we have already decided on and she suggests to change but I disagree. Some of her corrections are valid. I’ll try to utilize it for the S&R list, but am I also supposed to supply the dictionary with updates back to the client? Because that would take me a LOT of time, since some terms aren’t in my glossary and vice versa. Especially the division by themes is kind of a pain.
I don’t know if Christina can really help me. It’s really unfortunate that Sebastian is not available, since many others have turned in mixed-quality work to a degree, or so I seem to remember.
Anyway, I think I should first check the files you’ve given me, then perhaps Christina’s stuff and then the clients comments, but as I stated before, I didn’t really expect this much work, especially the very late client’s comments. I’ll try my but can’t work tomorrow or Sunday. Maybe I’ll ask Gerald. Or something…
1. Christina’s glossary is mostly created from our files. Christina’s corrections and suggestions are in Column D. If you agree with it, add it to the S&R list and flag it. Basically, let me know which terms are changed, either because of a correction or because Christina’s suggestion is better. Stuff you disagree with you can just leave alone. We will do the scutwork. What I want from you is, “Out of Christina’s corrections and comments, which ones should we use?” You give me that information somehow and I will do the rest.
2. Parts that are not created from our files are not in the source text. Yes, the client gave us a glossary that we are supposed to use and that glossary has terms that aren’t in the game. Go figure. I fully intend to leave those terms untranslated. Do not translate those. You will be wasting your time.
3. I am annoyed right now because you keep asking for help but you do not actually act like you want one. Go contact people. Provide specifics that we can act on. You want Sebastian? Go contact him via CS. Gerald? Sure. Ask. BUT ACT! The deadline does not wait for you. You want to take Saturday and Sunday off? Fine, but delegate the things that need to get done to someone else. That way things will keep moving along while you’re taking a break.
4. And for goodness sake tell us exactly how we can help you. And by we I don’t mean just me. You want a translator to do stuff for you? Then let us do the contacting and so on, but tell us exactly what it is that you want this translator to do so when he asks about it we will be able to answer him rather than wait for you again. Right now NO ONE but you knows what is it that needs to be done. Is there any reason why you have to keep this a secret?
as much as it pains me to do so, I have to be ready for the possibility of failing to deliver.
Would you be available to take over in case the worst happen?
I ran the current S&R list on files 121-150 and then forwarded the result to Sebastian to double-check. This is his comments:
=> I suggested in the final translation phase to use “Waren-Auftrag” when a quest is meant. But it is context sensitive, so it can only be added by a person on a case by case basis. I didn’t change it yet because it isn’t in the last dictionary.
=> changed all to female (the majority is already female), and added article “die” where appropriate.
E$$inheit der Expedition
=> shouldn’t this be E$$xpeditions-Verband? (not changed)
batch 136-150: 20 mins.
mean the same in 136-150 (a quest title). Grammar allows both.
Battle of Immortals = S$$chlacht der Unsterblichen – I thought it was meant to remain in English?
Dark Metal Blazing Knight – D$$unkles Metall-GlÃ¼hender Ritter
=> I think this sounds strange, but did not edit it.
Of particular note is the translation of Battle of Immortals. Your new S&R list should not try to translate it. In fact, any translation should be reverted back to the original English title. This is a marketing issue, not a linguistic one. They chose to retain the English title, that’s all.
EDIT: I’m not sure I understand what you are trying to do with the current S&R terms file. It doesn’t seem to actually change anything. It just adds $$. It will bring the attention of a proofreader, of course, but how is it going to, say, update an old glossary term to the current one? Having them look each term on the glossary would be very inefficient.
I somehow understand that you’re annoyed, but I’m really a bit overworked and I have the feeling that whatever I assign to other people, I need to check on anyway, so the logic is why not do it myself. Of course, it’s too much for me alone, so I’m in a dilemma.
Here’s what needs to be done:
The latest glossary needs to be checked for terms that do not need hyphenation. I started on this and am attaching the Excel file. The format is:
English : German old : German without hyphens : Additional German without hyphens.
I’m just using my feeling for the language. Afterwards I wanted to filter the third column(German without hyphens) for terms that have been altered compared to the second column and add the resulting list to the S&R plus the additions in the 4th column. Or we’ll have to replace those terms in the current S&R list against the altered ones.
I have checked through the files that have been done (S&R-ed) and beside some translation-related issues there isn’t much to add to the S&R. Because translators have not really added much to the glossary there are some terms untranslated/badly translated or inconsistently translated, but since I never got to see those terms it’s too late to do much about them now. If anyone (like Sebastian) wants to work on this, they can check the second half of the second file for terms that should be added to the S&R.
The file checked by Christina:
Maybe she can go through her comments again using the latest glossary.
Is there a way to run the S&R on the glossary Christina checked? Relikt is still in there, not Reliquie, so I’m guessing there’s more like this.
Also, it seems that Sebastian is working with an old dictionary. I’m attaching my latest version (it’s in the file S&R_checkhyphens). Since you were telling me that I should concentrate on creating the list, I didn’t send you updates to the glossary. I should have sent you that before Christina or anyone was working on any glossary.
Schlacht der Unsterblichen IS replaced by Battle of the Immortals in my last S&R, so I don’t understand why Sebastian says it’s still in there.
It’s really damn hard to do any glossary work with the client wanting to have changed so much in the latest stages of the project.
I marked the line in the file to check for hyphens, which also contains the latest glossary in yellow where I left off.
Tell me if you need more.