| Stranica u temi: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | Entering 'See comment...' in answer box Postavljač teme: Tony M
|
|---|
Tony M
Francuska
Local time: 09:52
francuski na engleski
+ ...
POKRETAČ TEME LOKALIZATOR PORTALA | Question of priority | May 12, 2005 |
two2tango wrote:
A lot of the above postings point to exceptional situations where the asker finds it difficult to offer a translation in the box provided to that effect. Yet the above posting seems to imply that you do this rather often, not so exceptionally.
I was playing "Devil's advocate" a bit there, to silence in advance the barrage of sanctimonious criticism that would have flooded in if I hadn't first admitted a degree of guilt here. In fact, I probably do it more often than certain people, for the simple reason that I am not one of those who rush in with a straightforward answer in the hope of grabbing the points; at least until I recently got my broadband, I was usually quite a late answerer, and when all the straightforward questions have been answered, I can only 'agree' or 'disagree' with the many excellent suggestions put forward by those birds earlier than I. So I tend to make something of a speciality of the trickier, explanation-demanding questions, thus putting myself in the front line for any flak that's going.
Sorry but I don't see the relationship between other areas to be improved in KudoZ and following a rule in particular.
The only relationship is insofar as a lot more importance seems to be attached to the application of one rather dubious rule, whilst other far more troublesome questions are not sanctioned, or are not even addressed by rules or guidelines. So I was merely mentioning other problems in order to put the current topic into some kind of wider perspective.
[Edited at 2005-05-12 06:36]
| | | | Tony M
Francuska
Local time: 09:52
francuski na engleski
+ ...
POKRETAČ TEME LOKALIZATOR PORTALA | Thank you, Lesley! | May 12, 2005 |
I simply couldn't let your kind compliment pass without a thank you.
Your support is much appreciated, and I'm so pleased that I have been of some help to you in the past.
I suspect all those who are so ready to jump in and criticise my way of answering have never actually had occasion to refer to any of my answers, or I feel sure they'd understand.
| | | | | Troublesome questions | May 12, 2005 |
Dusty wrote:
The only relationship is insofar as a lot more importance seems to be attached to the application of one rather dubious rule, whilst other far more troublesome questions are not sanctioned, or are not even addressed by rules or guidelines. So I was merely mentioning other problems in order to put the current topic into some kind of wider perspective.
[Edited at 2005-05-12 06:36]
It may look like other problems are not being addressed, but they are. All of the "see below", "help with sentence please"
that are entered as questions or in the glossary are painstakingly being reviewed and edited and mods are constantly writing reminders to members about rules, about adding context, about checking all available ressources before asking etc. But it takes time, and it involves real people who have their points of view, their feelings, their priorities, expectations. This is not about slapping wrists or reprimanding, this is about following simple guidelines.
It reminds me of trying to choose a title for a song, poem, or story. The title may not be the best, but it becomes clearer after reading the rest of the work. And sometimes the reader might even find a better one in the body of the work (explanation).
I suppose this is my teacher side coming out. Rules are guidelines to help us through easy and hard times. If the rule is too rigid, or even too relaxed, then of course discussing the rule is a good thing, as we are doing here. Things can be changed.
Gayle
I just saw your last post Dusty in reply to Lesley. I also enjoy reading your answers and appreciate the help that you provide for technical translations, especially.
[Edited at 2005-05-12 07:20]
[Edited at 2005-05-12 07:21]
| | | | Tony M
Francuska
Local time: 09:52
francuski na engleski
+ ...
POKRETAČ TEME LOKALIZATOR PORTALA | Thanks, Gayle --- its good to know what's going on! | May 12, 2005 |
Gayle Wallimann wrote:
This is not about slapping wrists or reprimanding, this is about following simple guidelines.
...
Rules are guidelines to help us through easy and hard times. If the rule is too rigid, or even too relaxed, then of course discussing the rule is a good thing, as we are doing here. Things can be changed.
Thanks a lot Gayle! Although I never doubted that a lot of behind-the-scenes work was going on, it's good to learn a bit more about it.
Your reasoned, thoughtful input is so appreciated (as ever) --- here, and elsewhere, of course!
I guess I'm just feeling pretty 'attacked', especially since I modified my style of answering specifically in response to criticism from Mats and others, who accused me of arrogance and being too dogmatic in my answers. So I tried to find a softer way of making suggestions, presenting a more diffident, humble, balanced view. Seems I just can't get it right
| | |
|
|
|
Mats Wiman 
Švedska
Local time: 09:52
Član (2000)
njemački na švedski
+ ...
U sjećanje | Not being chosen is neither "irksome" nor "irritating" | May 12, 2005 |
Dusty wrote:
Can was objecting to the all-too-common (and irritating) discourtesy of other answerers 'disagreeing' with your header words, but then offering one of the other words proposed in your explanation as their own answer. Whilst they may well have chosen the right word as Asker's context turns out, it is irksome in the extreme...
It is not irksome not to be chosen. We all suggest (in the Answer box) THE alternative WE deem the very best in the context wherever from we might have found it (even in the explanation box above).
The asker chooses, which has been practised since 1999.
Irksome indeed!
Mats
| | | | Endre Both
Njemačka
Local time: 09:52
engleski na njemački
| Re-use of your suggestions by answerers who have disagreed with you | May 12, 2005 |
Mats wrote:
It is not irksome not to be chosen.
Mats, not being chosen has nothing to do with what Dusty, and, originally, Can complained about. Just read Dusty's words (the very lines you quoted) and maybe Can's original posting again.
Endre
| | | | Tony M
Francuska
Local time: 09:52
francuski na engleski
+ ...
POKRETAČ TEME LOKALIZATOR PORTALA | Misinterpreted | May 12, 2005 |
Endre Both wrote:
Mats, not being chosen has nothing to do with what Dusty, and, originally, Can complained about. Just read Dusty's words (the very lines you quoted) and maybe Can's original posting again.
Endre
Thanks, Endre! My point exactly --- it has nothing whatever to do with 'being chosen' or not, we all accept that's part of the deal; what IS irksome is the (occasional) behaviour of (some) other Answerers in this respect.
| | | | Mats Wiman
Švedska
Local time: 09:52
Član (2000)
njemački na švedski
+ ...
U sjećanje | Why is it then irritating? | May 12, 2005 |
if it weren't for the fact that somebody else is chosen because s/he chose a word that happened not to be chosen by you (and therefore was placed in the explanation box).
The answer chosen is most often (not always) the one in the Answer box, which from 1999 is intended to be the place where answers should be placed.
Mats
[Edited at 2005-05-12 10:07]
| | |
|
|
|
| guidelines = rules | May 12, 2005 |
Hi Dusty,
I took a quick look at the your Kudoz history, in particular, the questions you answered in bilingual pairs. Here's a common example of your transgression:
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/1024837
I understand the need for the lengthy commentary but what trouble would it have caused you to simply enter where applicable in the answer field? There is... See more Hi Dusty,
I took a quick look at the your Kudoz history, in particular, the questions you answered in bilingual pairs. Here's a common example of your transgression:
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/1024837
I understand the need for the lengthy commentary but what trouble would it have caused you to simply enter where applicable in the answer field? There is a 1:1 ratio between question and answer in this case. Many of the Fr>En questions you've answered can also be reduced to terms and phrases that could easily fit the answer field. It would've taken practically the same number of keyboard strokes to type the actual answer as your beloved see below.
Another argument against your preferred practice is this: the answer field was specifically created as a means of instantly displaying the answer to the asker and potential peergraders. The answer summary box just below the question box, in turn, displays an overview of all answers given.
Now if all the answer fields were filled with "see belows", then this would defeat its very purpose. No overview, no instantaneous display.
You say that you can't be blamed for askers who negligently enter "see below", etc. in the glossary. This problem would be eliminated altogether if there were no "see below" answers in the first place.
The guidelines that Gayle describes above have been deliberately couched in non-peremptory language. In most cases, one should read a prescriptive connotation behind them. This particular rule has a very specific purpose. Openly defying it would only create more work for moderators who constantly have to fix errant glossary entries now numbering in the thousands.
Lastly, and with respect: the fact that you (and a couple of others) are the leaders in Fr>En Kudoz is something that should not be interpreted as license to flout rules.
Respectfully,
Marcus ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tony M
Francuska
Local time: 09:52
francuski na engleski
+ ...
POKRETAČ TEME LOKALIZATOR PORTALA | Good points, Marcus | May 12, 2005 |
Thanks, Marcus, for your well-reasoned explanation, which is very helpful.
Just to reply to 2 of your points:
Marcus Malabad wrote:
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/1024837
I understand the need for the lengthy commentary but what trouble would it have caused you to simply enter where applicable in the answer field? There is a 1:1 ratio between question and answer in this case.
The whole point was my lack of confidence, and not wanting to be too dogmatic with my 'informed guess'; in the past, when I've stuck my neck out (and even, occasionally, when I've not been wrong), I've been shot down in flames by certain of my more vitriolic peers.
...the fact that you (and a couple of others) are the leaders in Fr>En Kudoz is something that should not be interpreted as license to flout rules.
Most certainly not! I was merely using it to illustrate the fact that apparently Askers find my style of answering helpful, and I thought it was they whom we were all trying to serve; as has been explained before in this thread, the glossary issue is only (and surely must remain?) a secondary one, however exasperating that is for our kind and long-suffering moderators --- whose side, naturally, I expect you to take! 
[Edited at 2005-05-12 11:06]
| | | | Kim Metzger
Meksiko
Local time: 01:52
njemački na engleski
| Entering 'see comment' | May 12, 2005 |
The effort to maintain searchable glossaries is extremely important, of course. And we need rules/guidelines that encourage good lexicographic practices for this reason. In the majority of cases, entering a translation in the answer box is the best way to go and it should be the rule rather than the exception.
But I also feel very strongly about the need to do something to slow down the KudoZ process a bit. As it stands now, the perception that getting in an answer before anyone el... See more The effort to maintain searchable glossaries is extremely important, of course. And we need rules/guidelines that encourage good lexicographic practices for this reason. In the majority of cases, entering a translation in the answer box is the best way to go and it should be the rule rather than the exception.
But I also feel very strongly about the need to do something to slow down the KudoZ process a bit. As it stands now, the perception that getting in an answer before anyone else has a chance to is positively harmful. So we have an answer that meets the criteria for entry in the answer box, but it's a godawful translation that will need to be changed just as "see comment" will have to be changed. The glossaries are full of these kinds of answers.
I applaud any effort to slow things down, and that's why I have appreciated Dusty's answers provided hours after the heat of the battle. In the English monolingual group, he has contributed immensely, by way of example, to showing members that carefully considered answers with explanations and reliable references are far preferable to rushed answers that don't take the whole issue presented by the asker into consideration. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Irene N
Sjedinjene Američke Države
Local time: 02:52
engleski na ruski
+ ...
| Interesting explanation | May 12, 2005 |
Marcus Malabad wrote:
Another argument against your preferred practice is this: the answer field was specifically created as a means of instantly displaying the answer to the asker and potential peergraders.
Thank you, Marcus, I was really puzzled with that checkmark sitting there by default. Now you explained the intended purpose.
However, a good deal of answers given in short and in the appropriate field would still be valid in context only, even technical terms. Just check Multitran for English-Russian for "bar" (aside of the pub, that is) - at least 50 renditions, half of them in mechanics, plenty in computers. Boy, it's often a killer to translate it into Russian without any sketches, or seeing the whole piece of equipment, or the display... So far I'm not convinced about the justification of such instantenious teleportation of the term into the glossary. I could be wrong.
Regards,
Irina
| | |
|
|
|
Kirill Semenov
Ukrajina
Local time: 10:52
Član (2004)
engleski na ruski
+ ...
| Going technical: about the answer field format | May 12, 2005 |
Today I tried to do my best and typed quite a long sentence in the answer field (I mean the heading).
My impressions:
1) The line is shorter than the number of chars it allows to input. Thus, the line scrolls, and this is rather annoying -- I would certainly prefer to see all the long line, not just a part of it. Not mentioning that editing of a scrolled line is not very convenient. Why not to make the field larger or wider (by size, not by the number of chars) or as a ... See more Today I tried to do my best and typed quite a long sentence in the answer field (I mean the heading).
My impressions:
1) The line is shorter than the number of chars it allows to input. Thus, the line scrolls, and this is rather annoying -- I would certainly prefer to see all the long line, not just a part of it. Not mentioning that editing of a scrolled line is not very convenient. Why not to make the field larger or wider (by size, not by the number of chars) or as a two-/three- line field?
2) The indicator showing the number of available chars left: from one hand, it's very useful; from another hand, it's a great distractor, psychologically. While typing the sentence I caught myself constantly guessing if it would fit the field or not. These thoughts distracted me from the question itself.
I remember than before there were cases when I had to edit my answer several times to find not the better but the shorter (!) option (the same applies sometimes to peer comment string).
I don't what to do with the indicator, though. It is useful, but it often distracts. Also, I understand, that the answer field's length should not be very long. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tony M
Francuska
Local time: 09:52
francuski na engleski
+ ...
POKRETAČ TEME LOKALIZATOR PORTALA | Kim, thanks for the kind words -- and the helpful insights | May 12, 2005 |
I was quite distressed to hear that you think there is a 'race for points' --- call me naïve, but I really had no idea this happened! When I hurry to answer, it is purely to help the Asker, in case it's urgent; and as Kim has generously pointed out, I quite often add extra comments hours later, or even post-grading; it seems to me that way any information I have to contribute goes into the 'knowledge bank', for better or for worse.
In terms of encouraging good 'lexicographic practi... See more I was quite distressed to hear that you think there is a 'race for points' --- call me naïve, but I really had no idea this happened! When I hurry to answer, it is purely to help the Asker, in case it's urgent; and as Kim has generously pointed out, I quite often add extra comments hours later, or even post-grading; it seems to me that way any information I have to contribute goes into the 'knowledge bank', for better or for worse.
In terms of encouraging good 'lexicographic practice', I would suggest:
a) targetting Askers as much as answerers, since we are all in Askers' hands on this one (inasmuch as Answerers cannot make unilateral glossary entries, nor modify them, other than their own accepted answers...)
b) making the whole process a little more user-friendly, it is quite a nightmare at the moment to figure out how it works, and I'm sure this alone gives rise to many problems (as others have pointed out...)
c) making it possible to create 'cold' glossary entries, or to split one question into 2 entries; there are often times when I would like to manually add something in, or to make a second entry (for example: for an antonym)
d) add a search option that includes the explanation text field (caveat searcher, but it would be so useful)
I'd like to end my post by once again thanking Kim for his thoughtful appreciation of the little that I am able to contribute to the KudoZ community ▲ Collapse
| | | | Jaroslaw Michalak
Poljska
Local time: 09:52
Član (2004)
engleski na poljski
LOKALIZATOR PORTALA | Practical solutions... | May 12, 2005 |
It is good to see practical solutions to what some people see as a problem. Theoretical discussions rarely lead to a compromise - helpful suggestions quite often do.
Dusty wrote:
c) making it possible to create 'cold' glossary entries, or to split one question into 2 entries; there are often times when I would like to manually add something in, or to make a second entry (for example: for an antonym)
I am afraid that glossary requires a separate discusssion, as many people call for significant changes. I was going to suggest adding a "dictionary" feature, that would supplement the existing glossary rather than replace it. Your idea certainly would fit there. As I have a pleasure to know several lexicographers and observe the techniques they use, I am going to post more details when I research the matter more and give it more thought.
Dusty wrote:
d) add a search option that includes the explanation text field (caveat searcher, but it would be so useful)
It happens so that I have made this suggestion just before you posted this As it would be not practical for the general searches, I propose it to be used as a subsearch (along with another feature). Read here for more details:
http://www.proz.com/topic/32289
[Edited at 2005-05-12 17:25]
| | | | | Stranica u temi: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Entering 'See comment...' in answer box | Trados Business Manager Lite |
|---|
Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | Wordfast Pro |
|---|
Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
