This post compares the terminology management functionalities of SDL Trados Studio 2011 (hereafter referred to as Trados) and MemoQ Translator Pro Edition (hereafter referred to as MemoQ). It might be useful for beginner-intermediate users of CAT tools.
N.B. SDL have released an updated version of Trados (SDL Trados Studio 2014), which I have not experimented with. I apologise if any of the comments I make for 2011 are no longer relevant to the new program.
Trados
Terminology functionality in Trados is achieved through the additional standalone program, MultiTerm Desktop. At first glance, this interface appears neat, well-organised and reasonably user-friendly. However, one soon realises that MultiTerm, like Trados, is a complex program. Once the user learns to manoeuvre such complexities, this may be considered as a virtue, but for the beginner or non-IT expert, it can be quite confusing.
An example of this is Step 5 of 5 of the Termbase Wizard, which asks the user to create an Entry Structure. Whilst this provides a rich amount of detail and personalisation to a TB, it is certainly not something the user can pick up and start using quickly. Indeed, if one makes a mistake in designing the TB Definition File, it is difficult to rectify later on, and components such as languages and descriptive fields cannot be deleted easily after creation.
In the main MultiTerm interface window, it is fairly easy to add, edit and save terms using the shortcut keys F3, F2 and F12 respectively. Adding information to other descriptive fields is carried out by clicking on the small arrows, although it could be argued that this system is not particularly intuitive, as highlighted in Fig. 1 below. A table structure might have been clearer, as is the case of MemoQ.
Trados
Terminology functionality in Trados is achieved through the additional standalone program, MultiTerm Desktop. At first glance, this interface appears neat, well-organised and reasonably user-friendly. However, one soon realises that MultiTerm, like Trados, is a complex program. Once the user learns to manoeuvre such complexities, this may be considered as a virtue, but for the beginner or non-IT expert, it can be quite confusing.
An example of this is Step 5 of 5 of the Termbase Wizard, which asks the user to create an Entry Structure. Whilst this provides a rich amount of detail and personalisation to a TB, it is certainly not something the user can pick up and start using quickly. Indeed, if one makes a mistake in designing the TB Definition File, it is difficult to rectify later on, and components such as languages and descriptive fields cannot be deleted easily after creation.
In the main MultiTerm interface window, it is fairly easy to add, edit and save terms using the shortcut keys F3, F2 and F12 respectively. Adding information to other descriptive fields is carried out by clicking on the small arrows, although it could be argued that this system is not particularly intuitive, as highlighted in Fig. 1 below. A table structure might have been clearer, as is the case of MemoQ.
Fig. 1: Screenshot of a term being edited in MultiTerm
It is worth mentioning that, depending on the SDL package, there are a number of additional extras which may aid the process of entering terms. The MultiTerm Widget, for example, allows quick searching of terms by connecting with such websites as Google, Wikipedia and Linguee. However, it is debatable how much time this actually saves, as the widget is not linked directly to MultiTerm or Trados. Indeed, one might contend that the same result could be achieved by merely opening an internet browser.
Fig. 2: Screenshot of MultiTerm Widget linking to Wikipedia
Still, MultiTerm Desktop has a wide variety of functions at its disposal. It has three search types including a Fuzzy Search (a notable omission from MemoQ), three search Modes (Hierarchal, Parallel and Sequential) and five layout styles, among other options. However, for all these additional details, SDL might well have opted to focus more attention on the usability of the interface itself. For example, if one accidently closes the Hitlist, it is not immediately obvious how to retrieve it, despite it being arguably one of the most important aspects of the program from the translator’s point of view.
Away from MultiTerm and into the main translation editor, terms can be added to the TB by double clicking on them and pressing CTRL+F2. There is a second or two lag when saving terms but in general, this system of adding to the TB is fairly easy to use. However, there are a few areas in which one might expect more from one of the market leaders in CAT tools. Firstly, the system is not particularly intuitive with regards to case-sensitivity. For example, the Spanish word “despúes” (“after”) has been entered into the TB. However, as “Después” starts with a capital letter, typing an “A” does not lead to the quick auto-insert prompt. The same applies when a word is added into the dictionary with a capital letter. This is shown in Fig. 3 below with the entry “Perspectives”, as typing the letter “p” in lower case does not prompt the auto-insert suggestion.
Another example is the lack of recognition of lemmatised forms. For example, the Spanish verb “incluyeron” is a 3rd person plural conjugation of the verb “incluir” (“include” in English). Unfortunately, despite both base forms appearing as an entry in the TB, auto-insertion suggestion does not appear for “incluyeron” in the translation editor. Whilst these issues may only prove to be relatively minor complications, they are worth mentioning as they could potentially add up to significant amounts of time in the long run.
Away from MultiTerm and into the main translation editor, terms can be added to the TB by double clicking on them and pressing CTRL+F2. There is a second or two lag when saving terms but in general, this system of adding to the TB is fairly easy to use. However, there are a few areas in which one might expect more from one of the market leaders in CAT tools. Firstly, the system is not particularly intuitive with regards to case-sensitivity. For example, the Spanish word “despúes” (“after”) has been entered into the TB. However, as “Después” starts with a capital letter, typing an “A” does not lead to the quick auto-insert prompt. The same applies when a word is added into the dictionary with a capital letter. This is shown in Fig. 3 below with the entry “Perspectives”, as typing the letter “p” in lower case does not prompt the auto-insert suggestion.
Another example is the lack of recognition of lemmatised forms. For example, the Spanish verb “incluyeron” is a 3rd person plural conjugation of the verb “incluir” (“include” in English). Unfortunately, despite both base forms appearing as an entry in the TB, auto-insertion suggestion does not appear for “incluyeron” in the translation editor. Whilst these issues may only prove to be relatively minor complications, they are worth mentioning as they could potentially add up to significant amounts of time in the long run.
Fig. 3: Screenshot showing case-sensitivity and lemmatisation issues in Trados
It is also disappointing that, although multiple TBs can be selected for viewing in Trados, the system only suggests terms from the TB which is selected as default, as displayed in Fig. 4 below.
Fig. 4: Screenshot showing a TB, not selected as the default, failing to suggest terms for auto-insertion in Trados
It is sublanguages, however, that has been my biggest concern when using Trados. This issue becomes immediately apparent while creating a project. Whilst in MultiTerm, the user is able to select languages in their general form (for example, “Spanish” as opposed to “Spanish (Spain)” or “Spanish (Mexico)”), this option is not available when choosing project languages in Trados. Unfortunately, this means that TBs for general languages will not function for sublanguages even if the general language is the same.
At this stage, MultiTerm can, of course, be opened, and new sublanguages can be added to the TB. However, old terms must be copied from the general language to the sublanguage in order for them to be accessible in Trados; a time-consuming and tedious task. Also, new terms entered from within the Trados interface will only be available in the sublanguages of the project. Back in MultiTerm, they will not appear on the Hitlist, given that these sublanguages were not part of the initial languages stipulated in the Definition File. Understandably, this is extremely frustrating.
It should not be underestimated how important this limitation is, and it may well be considered as a key reason not to choose Trados. A translator working in Latin America, for example, might receive Spanish TBs in general Spanish, Argentinean, Chilean and Mexican, but unless the source file shares that specific sublanguage, he/she will not be able to use them easily.
At this stage, MultiTerm can, of course, be opened, and new sublanguages can be added to the TB. However, old terms must be copied from the general language to the sublanguage in order for them to be accessible in Trados; a time-consuming and tedious task. Also, new terms entered from within the Trados interface will only be available in the sublanguages of the project. Back in MultiTerm, they will not appear on the Hitlist, given that these sublanguages were not part of the initial languages stipulated in the Definition File. Understandably, this is extremely frustrating.
It should not be underestimated how important this limitation is, and it may well be considered as a key reason not to choose Trados. A translator working in Latin America, for example, might receive Spanish TBs in general Spanish, Argentinean, Chilean and Mexican, but unless the source file shares that specific sublanguage, he/she will not be able to use them easily.
Fig. 5: Screenshot showing there is no “general Spanish” option when starting a project in Trados
Fig. 6: Screenshot showing that terms from a “general Spanish” TB do not appear in Trados
On the positive side, Trados contains features such as checks to verify whether potential terms from TB have been inserted. Moreover, the Studio package has a greater deal of flexibility than MemoQ with regards to the variety of files that it can import and export. This is enhanced by its additional program MultiTerm Convert, which helps change a diverse number of file types into those readable by MultiTerm, although this can be frustratingly time-consuming. Indeed, another example of user-friendliness being compromised while importing and exporting is the compulsory creation of log and exclusion files, which can be complicated and confusing for the non-expert user.
Fig. 7: Screenshot showing TB verification settings in Trados
MemoQ
MemoQ immediately comes across as more simple and user-friendly in comparison to Trados, reflecting Kilgray’s desire to develop a tool to suit the needs of translators. Indeed, MemoQ’s terminology management system is integrated into its main application, which is extremely helpful for the user as it allows quick and easy switching between the translation editor and TBs (incidentally, MemoQ also works faster than Trados, requires less CPU usage, and takes up less hard disk space). Whilst at first glance it may appear quite simple, most of the same operations can still be carried out in MemoQ. An example of this is the interface for adding and editing TBs, a table structure which translators may find clearer to use than Trados.
Fig. 8: Screenshot showing pictures being added to a TB
Within its main translation editor, MemoQ is not radically different to Trados regarding the insertion of terms from a TB. However, it does manage slight improvements in a few important areas. For example, entering terms into a TB from within the translation window is simpler and faster than in Trados as there is a “Quick Add Term” function, which adds and saves two selected terms automatically by pressing CTRL+Q. This means that new terms can be added in about 5 seconds as opposed to approximately 15-20 seconds in Trados.
MemoQ also offers improvements to the previously mentioned case-sensitivity issues in Trados. Furthermore, and significantly, it allows users to insert lemmatised versions of words, and suggests them for auto-insertion, even though their forms might not be identical. Therefore, as in the previously mentioned example, “include” appears as a TB suggestion for the Spanish conjugated form “incluyeron”, which did not occur in Trados. This is certainly a bonus for the translator and may acquire especial importance for those translating highly inflected languages such as Spanish.
MemoQ also offers improvements to the previously mentioned case-sensitivity issues in Trados. Furthermore, and significantly, it allows users to insert lemmatised versions of words, and suggests them for auto-insertion, even though their forms might not be identical. Therefore, as in the previously mentioned example, “include” appears as a TB suggestion for the Spanish conjugated form “incluyeron”, which did not occur in Trados. This is certainly a bonus for the translator and may acquire especial importance for those translating highly inflected languages such as Spanish.
Figs. 9+10: Screenshots showing case-sensitivity and lemmatisation functions in MemoQ
As well as TBs, MemoQ has the potential to enable add-ins such as the EuroTermBank plugin, which offers suggestions for words that may not be in the TB. Whilst the EuroTermBank is fairly simple and the translator will probably know all of the words already, it does hint at a great deal of potential. Indeed, a possible next step for Kilgray could be to establish connections with popular online dictionaries such as Linguee and WordReference, directly linking such vast arrays of resources to the MemoQ translation editor.
Fig. 11: Screenshot showing relatively easy terms found in MemoQ’s EuroTermBank plugin
However, where MemoQ truly excels in comparison to Trados is the fact that its works across sublanguages. Regarding terminology management, terms in a “general Spanish” TB will therefore function in a “Spanish (Spain)” project and terms in a “Spanish (Mexico)” TB will function in a “Spanish (Spain)” project. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier as one of the limitations of Trados, multiple TBs can work simultaneously in MemoQ, meaning less inconvenience for the translator when selecting more than one TB.
Another aspect worth mentioning is terminology extraction. MemoQ benefits from a rather useful extraction tool, which enables the user to locate and add potential terms before translating a text. Admittedly, Trados does offer a separate program, MultiTerm Extract, which essentially performs the same function. However, this comes at a quite hefty price indeed: $500.
Another aspect worth mentioning is terminology extraction. MemoQ benefits from a rather useful extraction tool, which enables the user to locate and add potential terms before translating a text. Admittedly, Trados does offer a separate program, MultiTerm Extract, which essentially performs the same function. However, this comes at a quite hefty price indeed: $500.
Fig. 12: Screenshot of MemoQ’s Terminology Extraction tool
Fig. 13: Screenshot of SDL’s MultiTerm Extract
Conclusion
Both SDL Trados Studio 2011 and MemoQ Translator Pro Edition are useful translation systems, and terminology management functionalities constitute fundamental aspects of such tools. However, MemoQ most definitely offers greater value for money than Trados. Indeed, although Trados may be regarded as the industry leader, it is difficult to find significant objective reasons to choose it over MemoQ, other than if it were to be required by a certain company or task. MemoQ is considerably easier to use, whilst at the same time managing to carry out the vast majority of the same tasks as Trados to the same or better degree. Most significantly, in the context of terminology management, MemoQ’s TBs do what Trados’s do not: they work across sublanguages, an aspect which SDL might want to think about addressing in future versions.
RSS Feed
