Yet another question: In German, one can put a comma in front of “und” (= and) if it combines two main clauses. The comma is not mandatory, so it is no mistake if it is left out, but I would think we should be consistent throughout the game and either leave it out or put it in. In the file, both variations appear.
Should I set a comma where it is missing or delete the ones that are set, or should I ignore the issue for the time being?
Kristof
———————-
Oh, and one note I forgot to paste from my notepad:
Terms to review against source, because they are context dependent and the replaced word was often correct:
K$$raftschlag (Impact, replaced Einfluss)
A$$usfall (replaced Einsatz)
G$$lücksbringer (Charm, replaced Zauber, but sometimes Zauber seems to be correct/was there for another reason)
I expect that these would need to be changed back in most cases, at least for A$$usfall. At least the final proofreaders should watch out for those and similar ones and check them carefully.
———————-
did you get my ticket 1 week ago — and could you give me a quick update about the payment? Not meaning to nag you, it’s just that these items were unresolved for so long and I’m hoping they will be finally resolved…
———————-
Yes, I havereceived you message. Sorry didn’t reply at once. Karel is just preparing to the next round of payments. Can I ask you to form your report on unresolved issues from JD a little more transparent..the way you did it for BOI. Something like Hours – File/Task. Sorry, can’t get what your red crossed lines mean :).
———————-
okay, here’s the list. I did my best to include the client’s comments and all the other stuff. I separated those terms that need no spotting after insertion into a seperate sheet. The other sheet includes all terms for a first and, if we still have time, we may try a second pass. Any comments or additions, hints are appreciated, but I’m a bit exhausted, so it’ll have to wait until tomorrow.
———————-
Yes, there’s a way to automatically insert the $$, so you don’t have to do it manually.
1. Do not bother translating the parts marked with u. For that matter, even if it’s not marked with u (e.g., Christina missed marking it) but it’s untranslated, I do not want you to translate it either. Untranslated parts are left untranslated because they do not actually exist in the actual text. Translating them will just unnecessarily add to the S&R list.
2. OK.
3. OK. Will keep that in mind.
4. Minion vs. Slave must use different terms. There’s no avoiding this. Currently there are monsters that ended up having the same German name despite being two different types in the English.
5. We’ll work on that. Do you have a list? Right now I have Battlefield-Killing Ground, Minion-Slave, and Present-Gift. If the list is short, we can probably do a manual check and not bother with running a script.
———————-
Unfortunately, the other spellcheckers did not bring this up, which probably means they have left them as is.
Leave them as is. Even if you strive for consistency, we won’t be able to get it in this case unless we redo the other files, which we can not do due to the deadline. So we may as well save the time by leaving them as is.
———————-
I’m answering the previous three posts all at once.
– Yes. I can run this S&R list against the July 18th glossary. But that glossary consists of multiple columns. Should I run into on the data in Column C? After that, who’s going to proof it afterward? Or are you saying no need to proofread it?
Anyway, while there were no new additions at the time you made that post, by now there’s another batch to add to the S&R list. The file is attached.
– I’m not understanding your post about the de-hyphenated terms. One possible read is that Gerald has been flagging some terms as “These could have the hyphens removed” but didn’t actually remove it and now you want someone to actually remove them. Is that the case? Sounds highly unusual for Gerald. For the proofreading of that list, what do you want the proofreader to look for and correct?
I suspect that some key words were missing from that post. Please try to rephrase it and maybe give me some examples.
– Do you want me to run this list on everything right now or do you want me to run this through the glossary first and let you scan it first? If it’s the second please make yourself available early because while we can wait a few hours for your go-ahead, we can’t wait another 24 hours.
———————-
The following is what Sebastian posted together with the sandr_glosssary_2.rar. It’s reposted here to keep you updated.
———————————————————
1. Did you want all the untranslated (u) translated? I started translating them yesterday in items, but stopped at one point because I wasn’t sure whether they’re needed at all. If they are, I can go through everything again and look for the “U”s. It shouldn’t affect the files anyway, so no S&R needed for those?
2. Duplicated letters at the ends of words (e.g. Wassermannn) are not a big issue, actually: you can always make another rule to make it one letter shorter. So “Wasserman -> Wassermann” and “Wassermannn -> Wassermann” makes everything have 2 ns if it is run in the right order. I added such rules to fix issues, as you might have seen already.
3. Monsters, Row 159: Problem: “Schlachtfeld” exists for “Battlefield” and “Killing Ground”. But we can’t simply change this via S&R. Either leave it so (and live with two different “Schlachtfeld”) or change it while checking against source case by case.
4. Minion -> Sklave; Christina says: -> Lakai. I had this already in items, and didn’t change it nor did I add a rule for S&R. However, she has a point. But we cant use S&R because there are “Sklave” that are English “Slave”. I guess we could live with Minion = Sklave, so I didn’t change anything; if we use Lakai, we need to check against the source.
5. There are more cases like Minion -> Sklave; Slave -> Sklave; i.e., different source words translated to the same German word which then we cannot S&R. But here’s an idea how the checking against a source term could be automated with a bit of programming (should be possible as a macro in Excel or something). A late idea, unfortunately, but maybe we can still use it – or use it next time:
We would need a list with the “search” term, e.g. “Sklave”; the “replace” term, e.g. “Lakai”; and a control word, “Minion” respectively. A script could then look into the corresponding SOURCE cell, and ONLY IF the control word occurs, replace the term.
With words that do not occur very frequently (so the control term is in the cell by chance), this could be quite reliable, I think.
I don’t know much about the excel scripting language, but the logic is quite simple, so maybe this could be used for some of the S&R problems (to fix S&R mess-ups as well as avoiding new ones). I guess there’s somebody in the team who could do it; I could give it a try (but I’d have to do some basic research first.
Oh, and one note I forgot to paste from my notepad:
Terms to review against source, because they are context dependent and the replaced word was often correct:
K$$raftschlag (Impact, replaced Einfluss)
A$$usfall (replaced Einsatz)
G$$lücksbringer (Charm, replaced Zauber, but sometimes Zauber seems to be correct/was there for another reason)
I expect that these would need to be changed back in most cases, at least for A$$usfall. At least the final proofreaders should watch out for those and similar ones and check them carefully.
———————-
ok, this mistake is not too bad, anyway.
Something different: What to do if translators inserted quotation marks in proper nouns such as Medium Pet General Potion? My guess is to delete them all, as they appear in all variations in German: Medium ‘Pet General Potion’, ‘Medium Pet General Potion’…
Kristof
———————-
Hi
no, I don’t have a real list, but here’s what I have from the notes I took and what I remember (some of these are context dependent!). I also mentioned some of these below.
Einfluss was changed to K$$raftschlag; Engl. Impact. When the skill is meant, this is correct, but in other contexts it should remain translated as Einfluss (I guess this is a case for proofreading)
Einsatz was changed to A$$usfall. However, it should only be Ausfall for English Sortie (which is actually french – a type of attack).
Zauber was changed to G$$lücksbringer, should only happen for English Charm, but NOT Charming, and also not for Spell and other German words that could be translated as Zauber.
Engl. “Charming” is “Glücksbringer” in the glossary, but needs to be translated as “Charmant”.
Ware was changed to Warenauftrag. (Waren became Warenauftragn). Actually, most cases need to be “Ware”/”Waren”, Warenauftrag is only used when the type of quest is referred to (an Auftrag to get Waren), english “Consignment” (but some consignments are better of as Waren — a complicated case which really needs case by case checking.)
A$$tlantis-Teleporter -> A$$tlantis-Teleporterin produces Atlantis-Teleporterinin -> I don’t remember if I suggested a rule to shorten it back, because it occured when I first checked 121-150.
Maybe there are not that many cases and we should really review them manually case by case, as some depend on context.
—
Also, you should know Christina pointed out some conflicts that I didn’t find critical, eg. Gorge – Schlucht and Canyon – Schlucht. I said such can be ignored because we only have Kings Gorge and Undead Canyon – so Königs-Schlucht and Untoten-Schlucht is not a real conflict. The same is true for fighter, combatant, etc. distinctions: Seahorse Combatant is Seepferdchen-Kämpfer (Christina suggests: Seepferdchen-Soldat); Tribe Fighter is Stammes-Kämpfer — again, no two monsters with the same name when we translate both as Kämpfer.
Just mentioning this to make sure you know what strategy I followed and to discuss whether you agree — when there was danger that two things are really the same name, I did mention it in my comments.
Another thing I forgot: I left a comment REVIEW DESCRIPTION with some skills which I forgot to resolve. Here, how they are named depends on what they do and I remember some files that had their descriptions, so I wanted to go back to them and check. I can do that later and tell you, it’s only 5 terms or so. Sorry about that.
I’ll get back to you later about this, now I have an appointment and need to get going…
———————-
Another question: Some sentences are missing their period, but they end on programmer signs, like : “…gelangt#}”
Ok to insert the period after these signs (like: “…gelangt#}.”