DOCSLIB.ORG

What Translators Do to Terminology: Prescriptions Vs. Performance

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
What Translators Do to Terminology: Prescriptions Vs. Performance View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Siberian Federal University Digital Repository Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences 2 (2014 7) 210-221 ~ ~ ~ УДК 81’373.46 What Translators Do to Terminology: Prescriptions vs. Performance Andrei V. Achkasov* St. Petersburg State University 7/9 Universistetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia Received 02.11.2013, received in revised form 10.11.2013, accepted 18.12.2013 The article brings into focus variability of designation in bilingual terminology transfer. Onomasiological view of terminology equivalence presumes decontextualized coordination of concepts and linguistic labels and thus infers “one-to-one” inter-language terminology relation. This guiding principle is rarely applied in actual LSP translation process resulting in term forms variation. The gap between prescriptions and performance is traditionally accounted for as the arbitrary treatment of terminology by translators. Patterns of term variation in the reality of LSP translation depend on systemic, semantic and formal characteristics of terminology and, as a result, bear on terminology translation as a problematic concept. Keywords: terminology, equivalence, LSP translation, terminology translation, variability of terms, transfer prescriptions, performance. When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less. Humpty Dumpty Terminology affects translation. The issue multilingual terminology transfer should be has been more or less explicitly considered based on prescriptive rules: the only proper way to in research on both LSP translation and ‘translate terminology’ is to ‘identify equivalent terminology work. One of the key points often concepts’, i.e. to relate concepts as system-bound. brought to attention is that particular LSP Performative aspects of LSP translation contradict texts cover segments of terminology systems, prescriptions, and, in turn, translators in many while specialized concepts, being by nature ways affect terminology. They often seem to be decontextualized entities, retain their systemic unaware and unconcerned about such rules and relations. The ‘terminology stock’ of a particular focus more on labels (‘words’) than concepts, text builds up its ‘information model’ embedded use contextual and multiple designations or in the terminology system of a related field, which descriptive ways of concept representations is presented as a set of superordinate, subordinate within target texts, which confronts the nature on and coordinate concepts. Thus bilingual or terminology. The latter issue has been the point © Siberian Federal University. All rights reserved * Corresponding author E-mail address: [email protected] – 210 – Andrei V. Achkasov. What Translators Do to Terminology: Prescriptions vs. Performance of attention as well, predominantly as a matter- out as a case study of a particular LSP and is of-course though undesirable and non-systemic said to be equally concerned with the so called byproduct of terminology use. ‘practical recommendations’. Theoretical output Prescriptions and performance in LSP of this linguistic-centered research to a great translation relate to the concepts of ‘terminology degree overlaps with onomasiological view on translation’ and ‘translation equivalence’ within terminology equivalence and at the same time the frameworks of translation theory and overviews its practical applications that draw terminology studies. As a starting point I will only on terminology harmonization, multilingual briefly refer to the key competing approaches. information retrieval and automated LSP processing in general, including machine Terminology vs. translation translation. The onomasiological approach draws The study of the problematic practice of on terminology equivalence in non-translation ‘terminology translation’ traditionally operates terms. In ISO 1087-1. 2000, equivalence is under general semasiological assumptions, defined as “relation between designations in bearing on terminology as а subtype of lexical different languages representing the same stock. The greater part of this research sets off concept” (ISO 1087-1. 2000: 9), lexical items with the highlights on performative aspects of or ‘linguistic labels’ being only one kind of translation in terms of inter-lingual and trans- designations. Thus, the concepts are treated as systemic transformational ‘manipulations’ system-bound and language-independent, or, with terminology. The nomenclatures of such in other words, equivalent terms represent ‘the ‘manipulations’ vary due to the underlying same concepts’, though have different ‘linguistic theoretical assumptions concerning concept- labels’. Of course, concepts may overlap partially designation dualism and particular LSPs. or have one-to-many relations, which again may They include equivalent selection, concept be described in non-translation terms, such as, identification, semantic and structural calquing, for example, ‘inter-language synonymy’ or ‘inter- loan translation, decompositional and descriptive language quasi-synonymy, with a difference’. As translation, borrowing, transliteration, quasi- follows, onomasiology is in fact little concerned defining etc. The other set of generalizations in with performative aspects of translation. To give such research regards terminology equivalence it а translation perspective, we might say that both in terms of the ‘degrees of equivalence’ this approach treats terminology as placeables, and terminological equivalence as a subtype providing theoretical and operational basis for of a vaguer and more general concept of achieving pre-translation equivalence. Taking this translation equivalence. Terminological as a theoretical assumption it would be proper to equivalence is defined as semantic, notional, categorize transformational operations discussed systemic, prototypical, conceptual, cognitive in translation studies as either manipulations or decontextualized types of equivalence as with linguistic labels or identifying degrees of opposed to functional, explanatory or contextual inter-language synonymy. This allows to strip equivalence (Adamska-Sałaciak, 2010). down the overall logic of conceptualizing about Such conceptualization is the foremost terminology translation by ‘transformational and, presumably, the desirable outcome of operations’. semasiological insights into terminology Related speculation on ‘translation translation, no matter that it is often carried equivalence’ has been intense and many, if not – 211 – Andrei V. Achkasov. What Translators Do to Terminology: Prescriptions vs. Performance all, reasonable interpretations have been given. In represent decontextualized schemata. Prescriptive his tentative glossary A. Pym sums up the output recommendations of this kind are typical: of this speculation: In specialised-language translation, the Equivalence: A widespread term for translator has to structure terms of a given text a relation that many believe in and no one by reference to a conceptual system. Therefore, can prove beyond the level of terminology. it is highly important to identify the conceptual We should accept that equivalence has no system a term is embedded in, independent ontological foundation, since translation from both the source language and the target problems allow for more than one viable language. (Edelmann, 2012: 2) solution. This means that, in the field of translation problems thus defined, equivalence LSP translators are well aware that practical is always “belief in the translation as equivalent application of this guiding principle is hindered of an ST”. Recommendation: Always make by inconsistences and current developments in it clear that equivalence means equivalence- terminology systems, trans-systemic differences belief, and indicate who is supposed to be (as in law or education terminology), lack of holding that belief. (Pym, 2011: 81) relevant sources, ambiguity of related concepts, time pressure etc. In fact, this principle is Following this definition, the vagueness rarely, if at all, applied in actual translation. of the concept seems not to be the case with Nevertheless, some LSP researchers make even ‘terminology translation’ or ‘terminology more uncompromising claims, that are not equivalence’, because terminology is (or is uncommon either: presumed to be) systemic and monosemic. Thus, we come up with a very plain concept There is one essential requirement for terminology translation, which is, in fact, successfully transmitting a complex body of not translation by nature, but a process of knowledge from one language community substituting concept-coordinated linguistic to another: There must be a target-language labels. Translation and terminology, therefore, terminology that exactly mirrors the source- turn out to be contradictory concepts: language terminology and that is precisely pegged to the source-language terminology Terminology vs. translation: If a so that it can be consistently applied by all distinction must be made, let us propose the translators and universally understood by all following: translation involves the obligation readers (Wiseman, 2002: 1). to select between more than one viable solution to a problem, whereas terminology This is fair. In theory. If terminology seeks situations where there is only one viable translation cannot be carried out as solution. (Pym, 2011: 93) decontextualized coordination of concepts and linguistic labels,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Linguistic Dimension of Terminology
    1st Athens International Conference on Translation and Interpretation Translation: Between Art and Social Science, 13 -14 October 2006 THE LINGUISTIC DIMENSION OF TERMINOLOGY: PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF TERM FORMATION Kostas Valeontis Elena Mantzari Physicist-Electronic Engineer, President of ΕLΕΤΟ1, Linguist-Researcher, Deputy Secretary General of ΕLΕΤΟ Abstract Terminology has a twofold meaning: 1. it is the discipline concerned with the principles and methods governing the study of concepts and their designations (terms, names, symbols) in any subject field, and the job of collecting, processing, and managing relevant data, and 2. the set of terms belonging to the special language of an individual subject field. In its study of concepts and their representations in special languages, terminology is multidisciplinary, since it borrows its fundamental tools and concepts from a number of disciplines (e.g. logic, ontology, linguistics, information science and other specific fields) and adapts them appropriately in order to cover particularities in its own area. The interdisciplinarity of terminology results from the multifaceted character of terminological units, as linguistic items (linguistics), as conceptual elements (logic, ontology, cognitive sciences) and as vehicles of communication in both scientific and generic language contexts. Accordingly, the theory of terminology can be identified as having three different dimensions: the cognitive, the linguistic, and the communicative dimension (Sager: 1990). The linguistic dimension of the theory of terminology can be detected mainly in the linguistic mechanisms that set the patterns for term formation and term forms. In this paper, we will focus on the presentation of general linguistic principles concerning term formation, during primary naming of an original concept in a source language and secondary term formation in a target language.
    [Show full text]
  • File: Terminology.Pdf
    Lowe I 2009, www.scientificlanguage.com/esp/terminology.pdf 1 A question of terminology ______________________________________________________________ This essay is copyright under the creative commons Attribution - Noncommercial - Share Alike 3.0 Unported licence. You are encouraged to share and copy this essay free of charge. See for details: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ A question of terminology Updated 24 November 2009 24 November 2009 A framework for analysing sub/semi-technical words is presented which reconciles the two senses of these terms. Additional practical ideas for teaching them are provided. 0. Introduction The terminology for describing the language of science is in a state of confusion. There are several words, with differing definitions. There is even confusion over exactly what should be defined and labelled. In other words, there is a problem of classification. This paper attempts to sort out some of the confusion. 1. Differing understandings of what is meant by “general” English and “specialised” English (see also www.scientificlanguage.com/esp/audience.pdf ) Table to show the different senses of ‘general’ and ‘specialised’ Popular senses Technical senses 1. a wide range of general 2. Basic English, of all interest topics of general kinds, from pronunciation, “general” English knowledge, such as sport, through vocabulary, to hobbies etc discourse patterns such as Suggested term: those used in a newspaper. general topics English Suggested terms: foundational English basic English 3. a wide range of topics 4. Advanced English, the within the speciality of the fine points, and the “specialised” English student. vocabulary and discourse Suggested term: patterns specific to the specialised topics English discipline.
    [Show full text]
  • Facilitating Terminology Translation with Target Lemma Annotations
    Facilitating Terminology Translation with Target Lemma Annotations Toms Bergmanisyz and Marcis¯ Pinnisyz yTilde / Vien¯ıbas gatve 75A, Riga, Latvia zFaculty of Computing, University of Latvia / Rain¸a bulv. 19, Riga, Latvia [email protected] Abstract has assumed that the correct morphological forms are apriori known (Hokamp and Liu, 2017; Post Most of the recent work on terminology in- and Vilar, 2018; Hasler et al., 2018; Dinu et al., tegration in machine translation has assumed 2019; Song et al., 2020; Susanto et al., 2020; Dou- that terminology translations are given already gal and Lonsdale, 2020). Thus previous work has inflected in forms that are suitable for the tar- get language sentence. In day-to-day work of approached terminology translation predominantly professional translators, however, it is seldom as a problem of making sure that the decoder’s the case as translators work with bilingual glos- output contains lexically and morphologically pre- saries where terms are given in their dictionary specified target language terms. While useful in forms; finding the right target language form some cases and some languages, such approaches is part of the translation process. We argue come short of addressing terminology translation that the requirement for apriori specified tar- into morphologically complex languages where get language forms is unrealistic and impedes the practical applicability of previous work. In each word can have many morphological surface this work, we propose to train machine trans- forms. lation systems using a source-side data aug- For terminology translation to be viable for trans- mentation method1 that annotates randomly se- lation into morphologically complex languages, lected source language words with their tar- terminology constraints have to be soft.
    [Show full text]
  • Terminology, Phraseology, and Lexicography 1. Introduction Sinclair
    Terminology, Phraseology, and Lexicography1 Patrick Hanks Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics, Charles University in Prague This paper explores two aspects of word use and word meaning in terms of Sinclair's (1991, 1998) distinction between the open-choice principle (or terminological tendency) and the idiom principle (or phraseological tendency). Technical terms such as strobilation are rare, highly domain-specific, and of little phraseological interest, although the texts in which such word occur do tend to contain interesting clusters of domain-specific terminology. At the other extreme, it is impossible to know the meaning of ordinary common words such as the verb blow without knowing the phraseological context in which the word is used. Many words have both a terminological tendency and a phraseological tendency. In some cases the two tendencies are in harmony; in other cases there is tension between them. The relationship between these two tendencies is investigated, using examples from the British National Corpus. 1. Introduction Sinclair (1991) makes a distinction between two aspects of meaning in texts, which he calls the open-choice principle and the idiom principle. In this paper, I will try to show why it is of great importance, not only for understanding meaning in text, but also for lexicography, to try to take account of both principles even-handedly and assess the balance between them when analyzing the meaning and use of a word. The open-choice principle (alternatively called the terminological tendency) is: a way of seeing language as the result of a very large number of complex choices. At each point where a unit is complete (a word or a phrase or a clause), a large range of choices opens up and the only restraint is grammaticalness.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lexeme in Descriptive and Theoretical Morphology, 3–18
    Chapter 1 Marc Aronoff Stony Brook University Lexicographers agree with Saussure that the basic units of language are not mor- phemes but words, or more precisely lexemes. Here I describe my early journey from the former to the latter, driven by a love of words, a belief that every word has its own properties, and a lack of enthusiasm for either phonology or syntax, the only areas available to me as a student. The greatest influences on this devel- opment were Chomsky’s Remarks on Nominalization, in which it was shown that not all morphologically complex words are compositional, and research on English word formation that grew out of the European philological tradition, especially the work of Hans Marchand. The combination leads to a panchronic analysis of word formation that remains incompatible with modern linguistic theories. Since the end of the nineteenth century, most academic linguistic theories have described the internal structure of words in terms of the concept of the mor- pheme, a term first coined and defined by Baudouin de Courtenay (1895/1972, p. 153): Morphology and words: A memoir “ that part of a word which is endowed with psychological autonomy and is for the very same reason not further divisible. It consequently subsumes such concepts as the root (radix), all possible affixes, (suffixes, prefixes), endings which are exponents of syntactic relationships, and the like.” This is not the traditional view of lexicographers or lexicologists or, surprising to many, Saussure, as Anderson (2015) has reminded us. Since people have writ- ten down lexicons, these lexicons have been lists of words.
    [Show full text]
  • The Interaction Between Terminology and Translation Or Where Terminology and Translation Meet
    trans-kom ISSN 1867-4844 http://www.trans-kom.eu trans-kom ist eine wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift für Translation und Fachkommunikation. trans-kom 8 [2] (2015): 347-381 Seite 347 Marcel Thelen The Interaction between Terminology and Translation Or Where Terminology and Translation Meet Abstract In this article Terminology and Translation are compared to one another on a number of points of comparison. On the basis of the results, the cooperation/interaction between Terminology and Translation are discussed. The contribution of Terminology to Translation is obvious, but that of Translation to Terminology is less evident, yet it does exist. This article is based on a paper that I gave at the 2013 EST congress.1 1 Introduction Initially, Terminology claimed to be an independent discipline (cf. Traditional Terminology: Felber 1984: 31). This claim was later disputed by e.g. Sager (1990: 1), Temmerman (2000: 2). In fact, Terminology has gradually become rather an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary discipline. It has been linked to a range of (sub)disciplines, from Lexicology, Semantics, Cognitive Linguistics, Sociolinguistics, Communication, to Philo- sophy and Language Planning. The basis for the above claims is the comparison of Terminology with the various disciplines in search for similarities supporting and/or dissimilarities rejecting the claim of Terminology that it is an independent discipline. In this article, I will compare Terminology with Translation, not in order to draw any conclusions about the status of Terminology, viz. whether it is a discipline and whether it is an independent discipline, but in order to find where and how Terminology and Translation cooperate and interact in the actual practice of a professional translator.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Terminology Work in Current Translation Practice
    The Role of Terminology Work in Current Translation Practice Universitat Heidelberg M. Albl, S. Braun, K. Kohn, H. Mikasa Marz 1993 European Strategic Programme for Research and Development in Information Technology ESPRIT Project No. 2315: TWB II Translator's Workbench The Role of Terminology Work in Current Translation Practice Workpackage 5.3, Tl "User Orientation" Universitat Heidelberg lnstitut fiir Dbersetzen und Dolmetschen Michaela Albl, Sabine Braun, Kurt Kohn, Hans Mikasa March 1993 Table of Contents Preface.............................................................................................................................................. 1 1 Introduction to the working environments of translators ............................................... 3 1.1 Freelance translators ................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Agency translators ....................................................................................................... .4 1.3 In-house translators in industry .................................................................................. 5 1.4 In-house translators in supranational institutions ................................................... 6 2 General description of translation practice ...................................................................... 8 2.1 Organization .................................................................................................................. 8 2.1.1 Personnel structures ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Terminology Management in a Nutshell
    Terminology Management in a Nutshell Trisha Kovacic-Young Nicoleta Klimek Young Translations LLC What we will discuss • Why bother with termbases? • Term extraction vs. manual labor and quantity vs. quality • How to store all those great terms you found • How to involve your client in the process • How to leverage your terms • How to grow your termbase on the fly, add “forbidden terms” and use QA checks to spot inconsistent translation. Why bother with termbases? • Inconsistencies confuse the reader and can make your translation look “sloppy” • Save time – translate faster! • It shows your client you are reliable and precise, and that you care about his text Tip for Attach the termbases to your memoQ server, maybe your PMs: translators will add to them! Teach them how to do it. A good writer… Term extraction vs. manual labor – Automatic term extraction in memoQ Example of irrelevant term Final steps Term extraction vs. manual labor – The old fashioned way also has its merits – What are good terms? • Words that have many different possible meanings but we choose one for our client and should stick with it. • Words you had to research. • Words that are hard to type. Tip for PMs: • ANYTHING your client has mentioned to you. Choosing good terms Prof. Dr. Carsten Agert ist Leiter des EWE-Forschungszentrums Prof. Carsten Agert is the Director of the EWE Research Centre NEXT ENERGY. Das Institut wird seit dem Jahr 2008 unter dem NEXT ENERGY. The institute has operated under the auspices of Dach des gemeinnützigen Vereins „EWE-Forschungszentrum für the non-profit association “EWE Forschungszentrum für Energietechnologie e.
    [Show full text]
  • Glossary of Lean Terminology
    Glossary of Lean Terminology Lean Term Definition Use 6S: Used for improving organization of the Create a safe and workplace, the name comes from the six organized work area steps required to implement and the words (each starting with S) used to describe each step: sort, set in order, scrub, safety, standardize, and sustain. A3 thinking: Forces consensus building; unifies culture TPOC, VSA, RIE, around a simple, systematic problem solving methodology; also becomes a communication tool that follows a logical narrative and builds over years as organization learning; A3 = metric nomenclature for a paper size equal to 11”x17” Affinity A process to organize disparate language Problem solving, Diagram: info by placing it on cards and grouping brainstorming the cards that go together in a creative way. “header” cards are then used to summarize each group of cards Andon: A device that calls attention to defects, Visual management tool equipment abnormalities, other problems, or reports the status and needs of a system typically by means of lights – red light for failure mode, amber light to show marginal performance, and a green light for normal operation mode. Annual In Policy Deployment, those current year Strategic focus Objectives: objectives that will allow you to reach your 3-5 year breakthrough objectives Autonomation: Described as "intelligent automation" or On-demand, defect free "automation with a human touch.” If an abnormal situation arises the machine stops and the worker will stop the production line. Prevents the production of defective products, eliminates overproduction and focuses attention on understanding the problem and ensuring that it never recurs.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontology for Information Systems (O4IS) Design Methodology Conceptualizing, Designing and Representing Domain Ontologies
    Ontology for Information Systems (O4IS) Design Methodology Conceptualizing, Designing and Representing Domain Ontologies Vandana Kabilan October 2007. A Dissertation submitted to The Royal Institute of Technology in partial fullfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Technology . The Royal Institute of Technology School of Information and Communication Technology Department of Computer and Systems Sciences IV DSV Report Series No. 07–013 ISBN 978–91–7178–752–1 ISSN 1101–8526 ISRN SU–KTH/DSV/R– –07/13– –SE V All knowledge that the world has ever received comes from the mind; the infinite library of the universe is in our own mind. – Swami Vivekananda. (1863 – 1902) Indian spiritual philosopher. The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking. – Albert Einstein (1879 – 1955) German-Swiss-U.S. scientist. Science is a mechanism, a way of trying to improve your knowledge of na- ture. It’s a system for testing your thoughts against the universe, and seeing whether they match. – Isaac Asimov. (1920 – 1992) Russian-U.S. science-fiction author. VII Dedicated to the three KAs of my life: Kabilan, Rithika and Kavin. IX Abstract. Globalization has opened new frontiers for business enterprises and human com- munication. There is an information explosion that necessitates huge amounts of informa- tion to be speedily processed and acted upon. Information Systems aim to facilitate human decision-making by retrieving context-sensitive information, making implicit knowledge ex- plicit and to reuse the knowledge that has already been discovered. A possible answer to meet these goals is the use of Ontology.
    [Show full text]
  • Onlit: an Ontology for Linguistic Terminology
    OnLiT: An Ontology for Linguistic Terminology Bettina Klimek1, John P. McCrae2, Christian Lehmann3, Christian Chiarcos4, and Sebastian Hellmann1 1 InfAI, University of Leipzig, klimek,[email protected], WWW home page: aksw.org/Groups/KILT 2 Insight Centre for Data Analytics, National University of Ireland Galway, [email protected], WWW home page: https://www.insight-centre.org 3 [email protected], WWW home page: http://www.christianlehmann.eu 4 Applied Computational Linguistics, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Germany, [email protected], WWW home page: http://acoli.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de Abstract. Understanding the differences underlying the scope, usage and content of language data requires the provision of a clarifying termi- nological basis which is integrated in the metadata describing a partic- ular language resource. While terminological resources such as the SIL Glossary of Linguistic Terms, ISOcat or the GOLD ontology provide a considerable amount of linguistic terms, their practical usage is limited to a look up of a defined term whose relation to other terms is unspecified or insufficient. Therefore, in this paper we propose an ontology for linguistic terminology, called OnLiT. It is a data model which can be used to rep- resent linguistic terms and concepts in a semantically interrelated data structure and, thus, overcomes prevalent isolating definition-based term descriptions. OnLiT is based on the LiDo Glossary of Linguistic Terms and enables the creation of RDF datasets, that represent linguistic terms and their meanings within the whole or a subdomain of linguistics. Keywords: linguistic terminology, linguistic linked data, LiDo database 1 Introduction The research field of language data has evolved to encompass a multitude of inter- disciplinary scientific areas that are all more or less closely bound to the central studies of linguistics.
    [Show full text]
  • Cross-Lingual Terminology Extraction for Translation Quality Estimation⋆
    Cross-lingual Terminology Extraction for Translation Quality Estimation? Yu Yuany ∗, Yuze Gaoz, Yue Zhangz, Serge Sharoff∗ y School of Languages & Cultures, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, 210044, China z Information Systems Technology and Design, Singapore University of Technology and Design, 487372 ∗ Centre for Translation Studies, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, United Kingdom [email protected], fyuze gao, yue [email protected] [email protected] Abstract We explore ways of identifying terms from monolingual texts and integrate them into investigating the contribution of terminology to translation quality.The researchers proposed a supervised learning method using common statistical measures for termhood and unithood as features to train classifiers for identifying terms in cross-domain and cross-language settings. On its basis, sequences of words from source texts (STs) and target texts (TTs) are aligned naively through a fuzzy matching mechanism for identifying the correctly translated term equivalents in student translations. Correlation analyses further show that normalized term occurrences in translations have weak linear relationship with translation quality in term of usefulness/transfer, terminology/style, idiomatic writing and target mechanics and near- and above-strong relationship with the overall translation quality. This method has demonstrated some reliability in automatically identifying terms in human translations. However, drawbacks in handling low frequency terms and term variations shall be dealt in the future. Keywords: Bilingual terminology, translation quality, supervised learning, correlation analysis 1. Introduction enue. Therefore, speed and quality is what localization ser- Terminology helps translators organize their domain vices users are looking for (Warburton, 2013).They would knowledge, and provides them means (usually terms in var- expect that all the terms are translated correctly and consis- ious lexical units) to express subject knowledge adequately.
    [Show full text]