My hands-, eyes- and ears-on experience with SmarTerp, including a short interview with the UI designer

Last December, I was among the lucky ones who could beta-test SmarTerp, a CAI (Computer-Aided Interpreting) tool in development that offers speech-to-text support to simultaneous interpreters in the booth.

For those who haven’t heard of SmarTerp before, this is what it is all about:

SmarTerp comprises two components:
1. An RSI (Remote Simultaneous Interpreting) platform, aiming to create the ideal conditions for a high-quality RSI service through (a) ISO-compliant audio and video quality, (b) communication options with all actors involved in the assignment (technician, operator, conference moderator, other booths—via chat—and the boothmate— via chat and a direct audio and video channel), (c) an RSI console allowing interpreters to perform all key actions required by this interpreting mode (change input and output channel, control their microphone, listen to their boothmate, pick up relay).
2. An ASR (Automatic Speech Recognition)- and AI-powered CAI tool, supporting interpreters in the interpretation of common ‘problem triggers’ (named entities, acronyms and specialised terms, and numbers). The Beta version of SmarTerp is the outcome of a close collaboration with practitioners, who have taken an active part in shaping all phases of the design and development of the solution.

So for the beta-testing, Andrea Wilming and I were assigned to staff the German booth, and we were told to prepare a glossary of about 70 to 100 entries about the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in the EU. So to do our reputation justice, we started this endeavour with meticulous preparation. We created a team glossary in Google Sheets and started to cram all sorts of vocab into it (like basically we were asked to do). But then halfway through the task, we started to wonder how to make our glossary really “SmarTerp-proof”.

Questions came up like: If I put LGBTIQ into my glossary, and someone says LGBT, will the system recognise it as a partial match? No it won’t. Susana Rodríguez explained to us that short entries increase the probability of them being recognized by the system (which is counter-intuitive to our tendency to have longer entries with a bit of context). So we ended up creating four alternative entries for the different variants, and found it reassuring that we would be able to read from the screen which of the acronyms was being used.

LGBT LGBT
LGBTQ LGBTQ
LGBTIG LGBTIG
LGBTIQ+ LGBTIQ+

Next question that came up during preparation: If there are two terms, e.g. Gleichbehandlung and Diskriminierungsverbot in German and only one equivalent – non-discrimination – in English, will SmarTerp show me both German terms when the English term is used by the speaker, so that I can choose the one I like best? Yes, it will. But again, if you want it to recognise both Gleichbehandlung and Diskriminierungsverbot in a German speech, you will need to create two different entries for synonyms of the same term.

Gleichbehandlung non-discrimination
Diskriminierungsverbot non-discrimination
nichtdiskriminierend non-discriminatory
diskriminierungsfrei non-discriminatory
inklusiv non-discriminatory

So my lesson learned number 1 is: Beware how you prepare! Building a glossary for yourself is different from building it for (a boothmate or) a machine.

But the best was still to come: After having completed a self-paced, very efficient and well-structured online training module, we were sent to the virtual booth along with our colleagues from the French, Spanish and Italian booths.

We were given enough time in advance to have a look around and play with the different functions of the user interface. My first impression: It was well organised in functional groups so that it was very easy to find our way around. I personally would have preferred white or a light colour for the background, which I find easier to read—or even to be able to assign different background colours to different functional areas for ease of orientation. But maybe the “dark mode” has its advantages in terms of visual perception? Indeed it has, as Icíar Villamayor (see interview below) explained to me. It is thought to cause less eye fatigue than having to look at a white/bright screen for hours,  which may even cause headache. It is also easier to highlight important elements on a dark background so that it is less distracting to search for them.

SmarTerp offers all sorts of different communication channels among interpreters: You can chat with your boothmate, the whole team, the technician or the operator (interestingly, many of us spontaneously missed emojis :-)), and there is a dedicated video and audio connection between boothmates. These are functions that had been widely asked for in the interpreting community. Now we had the whole range of options at our fingertips, we were all absolutely delighted, although some found the plethora of options rather overwhelming. But then the individual preferences as to which elements were crucial were far from homogenous either. I personally, for example, can do perfectly well without a booth video connection and handover function as long as there is a good chat function and I can listen to my boothmate working. Others, however, found the different chat options too many, or wanted to be able to monitor/see the different chat channels at the same time. It was also discussed whether the video window was too big or too small, if the support area should be rearranged, and if it might be possible at all for the different functional areas to be rearranged according to personal preferences … Which then made me wonder: who is the brain behind this thoughtfully designed user interface? Luckily I was introduced to Icíar Villamayor, front-end developer and graphic designer from Madrid, and I had the chance to ask her some questions.

Question: What did you find special about designing the user interface of SmarTerp?

Icíar: Everything was special! Until the project started I had never thought about simultaneous interpreting, I barely even knew what it was about and what the interpreter’s workflow was. You’d expect anything involving languages to be at least a bit intricate, especially on the interpreter’s side, but the amount of people that take part in the interpreting process’ “backstage” was something I never expected.
It was an ambitious project from the beginning. The main goal was to simulate an in-person interpreting setting and this was something that hadn’t already been done in any of the other simultaneous interpreting apps available.
For me, one of the most special parts of Smarterp was the challenge, in terms of information architecture, it presented. We had a lot of information on the screen — features, text, tiny icons and interactive buttons — and a very focused individual who couldn’t be distracted from their task. Being able to define some hierarchy in those items and organize them in blocks to ease the interpreter’s job was a challenge but also a learning experience.

Question: What did you find difficult to implement?

Icíar: The difficulty wasn’t in the implementation really. It is rather the kind of app that poses the challenge. Usually when you start to create a new platform, the first thing you do is defining the target population. Then you can check which other applications or platforms there are and find out about usability patterns and the ways the existing solutions solve the problems that we will most probably encounter ourselves in the course of the development process. For example, if we wanted to create an app to share videos, we would have a clear idea that our target users would be between 13 and 35 years old and would have some experience with social networks. We know that these users know that by double clicking on a post they can “like” it, that by swiping down they can scroll, etc. We could build on these usability patterns that our users know so well.
At Smarterp we are dealing with a population segment that is not divided by age. Thus we have a user group with a huge spectrum in terms of how they handle technology. Add to this the fact that the only real usability reference we have are “traditional” hardware consoles, and here you are with a rather challenging project.
It is true that we have taken references from videoconferencing applications for the video module, as well as references from instant messaging applications for the communication module, but our users are not like any other user. The level of concentration required by simultaneous interpreting forces us to rethink the use of every little feature we want to provide.

Question: Was there anything you – as a non-interpreter – liked/did not like about SmarTerp?

Icíar: I really liked the whole concept from the very beginning of the project. It’s interesting to discover new professions and be in direct contact with professionals who constantly give you feedback. I wouldn’t think of it in terms of liking or not liking but more of “We really thought this was perfect but it turns out it isn’t THAT usable?” That’s where we’re currently at with the communication module (the chat), which is also one of the most important features. From the beginning, it was difficult to establish who each user could write to via chat and how we could make the messages easier to manage for active interpreters and this is still a current issue. We’ve received some feedback from a user testing carried out by Francesca Maria Frittella and Susana Rodriguez and, even though we can’t follow word by word every interpreter’s suggestion, the results show we still got some work to do.

Do you think it will be possible to accommodate yet another section on the screen (provided it is a big one of, say, 34 inches) to display meeting documents and key terminology?

Icíar: Yeah! We’ve never ruled out adding more features to the interpreter’s interface. If there’s enough space it is definitely something that can be done. I guess we would need to interview interpreters to find out what the preferred feature would be. I can’t make any promises though.

My lesson number 2: Interpreters are hard to please. And big screens are a good idea.

The interpreting experience itself – the debate of an EP committee of about 90 minutes on LGBTIQ rights – was rather exhausting: Many speeches were read out at full speed and almost un-interpretable. But this was the whole point of the exercise, after all: to see if, under real-life worst-case maximum-cognitive-load conditions, we were able to make use of the almost-real time transcripts of numbers and named entities and the display of terminology.

And indeed, this AI-based live support, the innovative heart piece of SmarTerp, did really do its job! The numbers and names came just in time to be helpful, to my mind – I don’t think I would have been faster in scribbling them down or typing them into the chat for my colleague. There were several moments where I checked the support section for numbers and two or three named entities (like OLAF and SECA), mainly because I wasn’t sure I had heard them correctly. It feels absolutely reassuring to know that there is a permanent flow of potentially useful information coming in, just in case you might need it. On the other hand, of course, this avalanche of information can be overwhelming, as you are bound to need only a tiny fraction of it. But I think that I would be able to just ignore the constant flow of incoming words and numbers as long as I don’t need it, and just resort to it when in need, just like you ignore your human colleague scribbling away next to you in the booth as long as you don’t need their help (and your digital companion will not resent you for not even looking at it). One thing I am not sure about yet is the reliability of information offered by the AI. You can never be sure if the numbers and names are correct, and I noted the occasional mistranslation in the terms provided. A great plus is that SmarTerp marks reliable terms (i.e. those coming from the glossaries provided by the interpreters themselves) with a green symbol, so I suppose that it is a question of internalising it.

Lesson number 3: SmarTerp – think of it as an extremely helpful and untiring boothmate who is never ever offended if you don’t accept the support offered.

So what’s to come? I do of course have my personal wishlist to SmarTerp: I would love to have a section for sharing meeting documents and displaying them permanently along with some crucial information like key terminology and names. And at the end of a meeting, I would like to be able to download a sort of log file for follow-up purposes, e.g. extracting important terminology for future meetings on the same subject. I imagine this might also come in handy during the meeting in case I wanted to scroll back and check a term I had just noticed from the corner of my eye or hadn’t had the capacity to check while I was interpreting but wanted to do so once my boothmate had taken over. Here again, the cognitive load (writing down stuff for later reference) could be eased by the system.

Because this is what CAI is all about – reducing the cognitive load of simultaneous interpreting and leaving capacities to use our professional sense of judgment instead of scribbling numbers and searching terminology. On this note, I am rather optimistic that SmarTerp will help us rethink our role and work as interpreters for the better.


About the author

Anja Rütten is a freelance conference interpreter for German (A), Spanish (B), English (C), and French (C) based in Düsseldorf, Germany. She has specialised in knowledge management since the mid-1990s.

How to keep your glossaries as tidy as your kitchen drawer

Once again, the new semester is approaching, and another knowledge management course is about to start at TH Köln’s Master of Conference Interpreting. Now after 15 years of teaching, I find myself wondering what it is that I really really want my students to remember for the rest of their professional lives. Things have changed so much since I wrote my first seminar paper on terminology management back in 1995. But there certainly are some basic principles that apply no matter which tools and devices we use?

Interestingly, I happened to come across the answer this morning when I opened my kitchen drawer (or rather, I knew the answer all along, but I found it confirmed there): It is all about sorting and filtering. No matter if it’s about kitchen stuff or glossaries, what I really want my students to remember is how convenient (and sometimes life-saving, so to say) it is to have your stuff in the right place. The rules are simple:

  • Group by function: All the baking/salad etc. ingredients in one place, all the sweets together, all the loose stuff in a box
  • Group by type: All the Prinzenrollen next to each other (so you don’t buy the fifth one just because your kids keep telling you they are out of stock)
  • Sort by date: First in First out, for obvious reasons
  • Keep a shopping list and note down that you need to buy oil before you run out.
  • Keep the things you use every day on the counter, so you always have them ready. Put them back into the drawer if you don’t really use them regularly.

Terminology-wise, things may not be one hundred percent identical, but the underlying principles are fairly similar:

  • Categorise by customer and subject so that you get the right terms for your dermatology congress or the circulation pump manufacturer with just a few clicks.
  • Sort your terminology alphabetically from time to time to find similar or double entries. This can also be a very enlightening exercise as you sometimes find you translate the same term completely differently in different settings.
  • Sorting by date puts the relevance of your terminology into perspective and helps to avoid using obsolete expressions (especially when you are of a certain age).
  • Make sure you highlight missing terms and discuss them with your colleague or client before you switch on the microphone.
  • Assign priorities to the most crucial expressions and display them prominently so that you don’t have to look for them (rummage in the drawer) when in need.

I suppose there are even more similarities that I am not aware of. Suggestions – especially in terms of kitchen organisation – are more than welcome 🙂

About the author

Anja Rütten is a freelance conference interpreter for German (A), Spanish (B), English (C), and French (C) based in Düsseldorf, Germany. She has specialised in knowledge management since the mid-1990s.

How to Make CAI Tools Work for You – a Guest Article by Bianca Prandi

After conducting research and providing training on Computer-Assisted Interpreting (CAI) for the past 6 years, I feel quite confident in affirming that there are three indisputable truths about CAI tools: they can potentially provide a lot of advantages, do more harm than good if not used strategically, and most interpreters know very little about them.

The surveys conducted so far on interpreters’ terminological strategies[1] have shown that only a small percentage has integrated CAI tools in their workflow. Most interpreters still prefer “traditional” solutions such as Word or Excel tables to organize their terminology. There can be many reasons for this. Some may have already developed reliable systems and processes, and don’t see a point in reinventing the wheel. Others believe the cons outweigh the pros when it comes to these tools and are yet to find a truly convincing alternative to their current solutions. Others may simply never have heard about Flashterm, InterpretBank or Interpreter’s Help before.

Even though a lot still remains to be investigated empirically, the studies conducted so far have highlighted both advantages and disadvantages in the use of CAI tools.  On the positive side, CAI tools can provide effective preparation through automatic term extraction and in-built concordancers[2] (Xu 2015). They seem to contribute to higher terminological accuracy than paper glossaries[3] or even Excel tables[4] when used to look up terms in the booth. They help interpreters organize, reuse and share their resources, rationalize and speed up their preparation process, make the most of preparation documents, work efficiently on the go and go paperless if desired. On the negative side, they are often perceived as potentially distracting and less flexible than traditional solutions. When working with CAI tools, we might run the risk of relying too much on the tool, both during the preparation phase and interpretation proper[5].

I would argue that, if used strategically, the pros easily outweigh the cons. Just as with any tool and new technology, it all comes down to how you use them. Whether you are still sceptical, already CAI-curious, or a technology enthusiast, here are three tips on how to make CAI tools work for you.

  1. Take time to test your tools

Most tools offer a free demo to test out their functionalities. I know we are all busy, but you can use downtimes to work on improving your processes, just as you would (should!) do to work on your CPD and marketing strategy. I suggest you do the following:

  • Choose one of your recent assignments, something you had to do research on because the topic was unfamiliar to you.
  • Set aside 1-2 hours a day, or even just 30 minutes, to simulate preparing for the assignment again.
  • Set yourself a clear goal for each phase of your workflow (glossary creation, terminology extraction, memorization, debriefing).
  • Build your baseline: dedicate 1 session to assessing your current approach. Then, dedicate each of the following sessions to testing out a different tool, here is some key differences.
  • For a systematic comparison, keep track of the time needed for each activity, the pros and cons for each tool, your preferences and things that you found irritating.

You can conduct this analysis and selection process over a week or even a month if you are very busy. Once you have identified what might work for you, keep using those tools! Maybe test them out on a real assignment for a client you already know, where the risk of mishaps is lower.

  1. There is no perfect tool

Unless you can write code and develop your own tool, chances are there will always be something you don’t like about a tool, or that some functions you deem essential might be missing. But given the advantages that come from working with Wunder-Mold these solutions, it is definitely worth it to try and see whether you can find a tool that satisfies even just 50% of your interpreting needs. It may not seem much, but it’s already 50% of your workflow that you can optimize.

Once you get a feeling for what each tool can do for you, you might find out that there are some options you love that aren’t available in your tool of choice. My suggestion: mix and match. Most CAI tools are built modularly and allow users to only work with a specific function. For instance, I love Intragloss’ terminology extraction module, so I use that tool to work with documents, but I use InterpretBank for everything else. In a word: experiment and be creative!

  1. Tools can’t do the work for you

If you’re passionate about technology, you will agree that CAI tools are quite cool. However, we should never forget that they are a tool and, as such, they fulfil their function as long as we use them purposefully. Think before you use them, always make sure you follow a strategic course of action.

If you have the feeling you had never been as ill-prepared as when you worked with a CAI tool, here are some questions you can ask yourself:

  • Am I sure this is the right tool for me? Have I taken enough time to test it out?
  • Did I have a clear goal when I started preparing for my assignment? Or was I simply trying to cram together as many terms as possible?
  • Am I aware of my learning preferences? If I’m an auditory learner, does it make sense to use a flashcard method to study the terminology?
  • Did I include in my glossary just any term that came up in my documents? Or did I start from the relevant terminology I found to further explore the topic?

As for many things in life, reflection and a structured, strategic approach can really go a long way. For busy interpreters needing some guidance, Interpremy is preparing a course series that will help you effectively use CAI tools to optimize all phases of your workflow and avoid potential pitfalls. Get in touch at info@interpremy.com!


[1] See for instance: Zielinski, Daniel and Yamile Ramírez-Safar (2006). Onlineumfrage zu Terminologieextraktions- und Terminologieverwaltungstools. Wunsch und Wirklichkeit noch weit auseinander.” MDÜ. and Corpas Pastor, Gloria and Lily May Fern (2016). A Survey of Interpreters’ Needs and Practices Related to Language Technology.

[2] See Xu, Ran (2015). Terminology Preparation for Simultaneous Interpreters. University of Leeds.

[3] Biagini, Giulio (2015). Glossario cartaceo e glossario elettronico durante l’interpretazione simultanea: uno studio comparativo. Università degli studi di Trieste.

[4] Prandi, Bianca (2018). An exploratory study on CAI tools in simultaneous interpreting: Theoretical framework and stimulus validation. In Claudio Fantinuoli (ed.), Interpreting and technology, 29–59. Berlin: Language Science Press.

[5] Prandi, Bianca (2015). The Use of CAI Tools in Interpreters’ Training: A Pilot Study. 37th Conference Translating and the Computer, 48–57.


About the author:

Bianca Prandi

bianca@interpremy.com

  • Conference Interpreter IT-EN-DE, MA Interpreting (University of Bologna/Forlì), based in Mannheim (Germany), www.biancaprandi.com;
  • PhD candidate – University of Mainz/Germersheim. Research topic: impact of computer-assisted interpreting tools on terminological quality and cognitive processes in simultaneous interpreting;
  • CAI trainer and co-founder of InterpreMY – my interpreting academy: online academy for interpreters with goal-centered, research-based courses, www.interpremy.com (coming soon: July 2020).

Publications:

  • Prandi, B. (2015). L’uso di InterpretBank nella didattica dell’interpretazione: uno studio esplorativo. Università di Bologna/Forlì.
  • Prandi, B. (2015). The Use of CAI Tools in Interpreters’ Training: A Pilot Study. 37th Conference Translating and the Computer, 48–57. London.
  • Prandi, B. (2017). Designing a Multimethod Study on the Use of CAI Tools during Simultaneous Interpreting. 39th Conference Translating and the Computer, 76–88. London: AsLing.
  • Prandi, B. (2018). An exploratory study on CAI tools in Simultaneous Interpreting: theoretical framework and stimulus validation. In C. Fantinuoli (Ed.), Interpreting and technology, 28–59.
  • Fantinuoli, C., & Prandi, B. (2018). Teaching information and communication technologies: a proposal for the interpreting classroom. Trans-Kom, 11(2), 162–182.
  • Prandi, B. (forthcoming). CAI tools in interpreter training: where are we now and where do we go from here? InTRAlinea.

 

Great Piece of Research on Terminology Assistance for Conference Interpreters

https://slator.com/academia/terminology-assistance-coming-to-a-simultaneous-interpreter-near-you/

How to Build Your Self-Translating Glossary in Google Sheets

I am certainly not saying that Google can create your glossaries for you when preparing for a technical conference on African wildlife or nanotubes. But if you know your languages well enough to tell a bad translation from a good one, it may still be a time-saver. Especially for those words you don’t use every day, like Salpetersäure or grey crowned crane, and that you only put into your glossary to trigger your memory.

To integrate the automatic translation function in a glossary in Google Sheets, you can either enter the translation formula directly with the click over here now into the respective cells, or use the nice little add-on Translate My Sheet.

This is what the formula looks like:
=Googletranslate(A2,“en”,“es”)
A2
being the cell with the orginal text, en the source language and es the target language.

Here is a short demo video on how to use the GoogleTranslate formula in a glossary:

If you want to use Translate My Sheet, you first need to go to the Add-ons menu and add it to your add-ons (“get add-ons”, search for the add-on, add it). The user interface looks like this:

This video shows an example of Translate My Sheet translating from English into Spanish:

And this one shows English into German:

I found the quality similar to that of the Microsoft Translator – not too bad as long as your language combination includes English.

And don’t forget: Never translate (or even handle) your client’s sensitive data in Google without their permission!


About the author

Anja Rütten is a freelance conference interpreter for German (A), Spanish (B), English (C) and French (C) based in Düsseldorf, Germany. She has specialised in knowledge management since the mid-1990s.

How to measure the efficiency of your conference preparation

Half of the time we dedicate to a specific interpreting assignment is often spent on preparation. But while many a thought is given to the actual interpreting performance and the different ways to evaluate it, I hardly ever hear anyone discuss their (or others’) preparation performance. However, if we want to be good information and knowledge managers rather than mere information and knowledge workers, we need to close the management cycle and put extra effort into checking if our work serves its purpose and making possible adjustments to optimise it.

Efficiency being the ratio between input and output (how much do you spend to make a dollar?), the question now is what to measure in the first place. Admittedly, the efficiency of information and knowledge work is not the easiest thing to measure. Apart from the fact that whilst interpreting we have other things to worry about, it is hard to tell the difference between the way we actually interpret and the way we would have done without the most essential part of our information work, i.e. preparation. Strictly speaking, previous work experience and knowledge acquired outside the interpreter’s professional life also count as “preparation” and can even be more helpful than preparation in the stricter sense.

To put the concept of efficiency of information and knowledge work in conference interpreting into measurable terms, it could be reduced to the following question:

How much time do you spend to make a useful information unit?

As it happens, back in 2006 I conducted a case study to check exactly this: a conference interpreter’s preparation effort in relation to its usefulness. As a baseline, I decided to use the terminology prepared for a technical meeting, assuming that this is what comes closest to a quantifiable amount of information. Even if preparation is not all about terminology (or glossaries), it is an important part, and if it is well done, it covers semantics and context information as well.

So in order to get a number representing the output, I simply counted all the terminological units prepared for one meeting (376) and afterwards had the interpreter count those units that actually came up in the meeting (197) so that the terms prepared “in vain” could be deducted. I then calculated the percentage of the used terms in relation the total amount of elaborated terms, the so called usage rate. In the case study the overall usage rate at the conference at hand was 52%. The usage rate of terminology from a previous conference of the same client about the same subject was 48 % (81 out of 168 terminological units). This has of course no statistical significance whatsoever, but it can surely be a useful indicator for the individual interpreter. And interestingly, when repeating this exercise with my students from now and then, the results are usually of a similar order of magnitude.

Once the output (terms used) has been determined, it can be related to the input. Assuming that the input is mainly the time spent on preparing the terminological units that came up in the conference, this time is divided by the terms used in order to obtain the relative or average time spent per terminological unit. This value can be considered an approximation to the efficiency of the interpreter’s information work. In the case study the average time spent per term used was 5 minutes (9.5 hours for 113 terms). When repeating this exercise with students, this value usually ranges roughly from 1 to 10 minutes.

Such numbers of course merely serve to quantify the information work we do. In order to really complete the management cycle and find out in how far preparation could possibly be optimised, a closer look needs to be taken at the quality of information and knowledge gaps that occur during the interpreting assignment at hand and how they are or could be handled – which is a different story altogether.

References

Informations- und Wissensmanagement im Konferenzdolmetschen. Sabest 15. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. [dissertation] www.peterlang.net

About the author

Anja Rütten is a freelance conference interpreter for German (A), Spanish (B), English (C) and French (C) based in Düsseldorf, Germany. She has specialised in knowledge management since the mid-1990s.

About Term Extraction, Guesswork and Backronyms – Impressions from JIAMCATT 2018 in Geneva

JIAMCATT is the International Annual Meeting on Computer-Assisted Translation and Terminology, a IAMLAP taskforce where most international organizations, various national institutions and academic bodies exchange information and experience in the field of terminology and translation. For this year’s JIAMCATT edition in Geneva, I had the honour of running a workshop on Tools for Interpreters – and idea I found absolutely intriguing, as the audience would not necessarily be interpreters, but translators, terminologist and heads of language, conference and/or documentation services. So I chose a hands-on workshop setting called “an hour in the shoes of a conference interpreter”. Participants had to prepare a meeting using different tools and would then listen to a 10 minute sequence of this meeting and see how well they felt prepared.

The meeting to be prepared was a EP Special Committee on the Union’s authorisation procedure for pesticides on April 12, 2018. Participants could work in two possible scenarios:

Scenario 0: Interpreters haven’t received any documents and hardly any info about the conference. They have to guess and prioritise more than those working under Scenario 1.

Scenario 1: Interpreters have received all the documents one hour in advance (quite realistic a scenario, as Marcin Feder from the EP pointed out).

The participants were free to choose to work either alone or in a team. They were encouraged to test/evaluate one of the tools presented:

InterpretBank, a Computer-Aided Interpreting tool that covers many elements of an interpreters’ workflow, like glossary creation, multi-dictionary search, term extraction, document annotation, quick search in the booth and flashcard learning.

InterpretersHelp, a cloud-based Computer-Aided Interpreting tool that allows online shared glossary creation, glossary sharing with the community, manual term extraction and flashcard learning, as well as document and job management.

OneClickTerm, a browser-based term extraction tool

GT4T, a plugin for looking up words in several online dictionaries or machine translation sites

Sb.qtrans.de, a toolbar for consulting several online dictionaries and encyclopaedias

At the end of the exercise, the participants watched the EP Special Committee on the Union’s authorisation procedure for pesticides on April 12, 2018 of the committee meeting. What followed was a lively and inspiring discussion, where each group described their workflows and how efficient they thought it was.

Those who had the relevant documents and ran them through the OneClick term extraction found that most critical terms that came up in the speech were in the extracted list. Others found the relevant documents by way of internet research and did the same.

Quickly installing programs or creating test accounts didn’t work out as easily for everyone, so some participants reverted to creating glossaries – common practice in the “real world” – and felt well prepared with that. Ten terms of their glossary were mentioned in the 10 minute video sequence. Others spent so much time familiarising themselves with the new tools that they didn’t feel well prepared but were very happy with what they had seen of InterpreterHelp and OneClickTerm.

When it comes to preparing for an EU meeting – at least when working from and into EU languages – there is an abundance of information available on the internet. It became clear once more that EU interpreters, in terms of meeting preparation, live in paradise. The EP legislative observatory, IATE and Eurlex were the main sources of information mentioned. I was happy to learn from Mariangeles Torrent (SCIC) that Prelex has not disappeared, but simply has turned into a tab within Eurlex named “legislative procedures“.

A short discussion about the pros and cons of Eurlex led to the conclusion that for interpreters it would be wonderful to have more than three languages displayed in parallel, and possibly a term extraction feature or technical terms highlighted in the text. Josh Goldsmith had the news that by adding a hyphen plus the language code in the url of the multilingual display, a fourth, fifth etc. language can indeed be added, although the page layout is far from perfect then. For the moment I have decided to stick to the method I have been using for over ten years, which consists of copying and pasting the columns into an Excel spreadsheet.

I was very glad to hear one participant mention the word “thinking” in the context of conference preparation. He looked at the agenda and the first thing he did was think about what the meeting might be about. He then did some background research in Wikipedia and other sources and looked up product names, which actually were mentioned in the speech. He also checked who were the members of the committee, who didn’t appear in this part of the meeting, but would otherwise have been useful.

While terms and glossaries were clearly the topics most intensely discussed, it became clear that semantic and context knowledge is crucial for interpreters to get a grasp of the situation they are working in. For as much as I appreciate a list of extracted terms from a meeting document as a last minute preparation, there is no such thing as understanding the content people are referring to. Hence my enthusiasm about the fact that the different semiotic levels (terms, content, context) did come up in the discussion. And indeed the notes I took while listening to the speech reflect the same thing: sometimes my doubts or reflections were simply about terms (how do you say co-formulant or low risk active substances in German), some about the situation (Can beer and talc be on the list of basic substances? Is the non-native speaker sure that this is the right word?) and some about meaning (What exactly is a candidate for substitution?).

It was also very interesting to see how different ways of preparing a meeting turned out to be useful in the meeting. Obviously, there is not just one way to success in meeting preparation.

Among the software features participants would like to see to support the information and knowledge work in conference interpreting, there seemed to be a wide consensus that term extraction and markup of glossary terms in meeting documents – like InterpretBank and Intragloss offer – are extremely useful. Text summarisation was also mentioned. Several participants found InterpretBank’s speech to text integration (based on Dragon) very interesting, but unfortunately, due to practical restraints we couldn’t test this.

When it comes to search functions, it is crucial that intuitive searching is possible in the relevant (!) documents and sources. Relevance seems to be an important factor in conference preparation. What with the abundance of information available nowadays, finding out what is really useful is key. However, many of the big international organisations like EU, UN and WTO do have very useful document management systems in place which help to find one’s way around.

From a freelancer’s perspective, I think that organizations should rather go for browser-based, i.e. device-independent systems to support their interpreters. This lowers the entry barrier of having to install something on each computer, apart from facilitating mobile access and online collaboration. Although I must say that I do also fancy the idea of a small plugin that works in any software, like my most recent discovery, GT4T. At least as freelancers, we change settings so often (back and forth from personal computers to mobile devices, Excel sheets, shared Google docs, paper, institutional information management systems etc.) that a self-contained environment for conference interpreters is maybe too clumsy and unrealistic. After all, hotkeys seem to be back in fashion: I also heard from the WTO colleagues that they have developed a tool quite along the same lines, creating special hotkeys for translators, check out at https://www.move-central.com.

And finally, my favourite newly learnt word: Backcronym

Backronyms are acronyms that used to be normal words and were re-interpreted later. While translators have a chance to think twice or recognise the word as a backronym because it is written in capitals, interpreters may struggle much more with this. It may take us a moment or two to figure out that the sentence “we need to do what PIGS do” refers to a “Professional Interpreters’ Gymnastics Society” rather than an animal.

Further reading:

Workhop Presentation (pdf) JIAMCATT 2018 Tools for Interpreters

Teresa Ortego Antón (2015): Terminology management tools for conference interpreters: an overview. In: Eleftheria Dogoriti  Theodoros Vyzas (editors): International Journal of Language, Translation and Intercultural Communication, Vol 5 (2016), Editors: Technological Educational Institute of Epirus, Greece. 107-115.

Hernani Costa, Gloria Corpas Pastor, Isabel Durán Muñoz (LEXYTRAD, University of Malaga, Spain): A comparative User Evaluation of Terminology Management Tools for Interpreters. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Computational Terminology, 23 August 2014, Dublin, Ireland. 68-76
Anja Rütten (2017): Terminology Management Tools for Conference Interpreters –
Current Tools and How They Address the Specific Needs of
Interpreters. In: Translating and the Computer 39, Proceedings, 16-17 November 2017, AsLing, The International Association for Advancement in Language Technology, London, England. 98 ff

 

 

New Term Extraction Features in InterpretBank and InterpretersHelp – Thumbs up!

Extracting terminology from preparatory texts into a term database seems to be the hot topic of the moment, judging by what the two most active and innovative CAI (computer-assisted interpreting) tools, InterpretBank and InterpretersHelp, are working on at the moment.  So while I am still waiting to become a Windows beta tester of Intragloss, the pioneer in this field, I am eager to have a go at both InterpretBank5’s (beta) and InterpretBank’s (experimental) new extraction features.

InterpretBank by Claudio Fantinuoli has been adding quite some time-saving features for conference preparation lately. Apart from searching online ressources on the go while building your glossary, it now promises to extract terminology from your glossaries, view original and translation in parallel and link documents to glossaries. This does indeed sound like Intragloss combined with the sophisticated booth-friendly terminology management system that InterpretBank has been for many years. So off we go!

As you can see in the picture, a new “documents” icon has been added to the familiar three others (editing, conference mode, flashcards). When I press the magic button, the documents pane appears in the bottom left corner and lets me add documents like pdf or pptx in my two languages and display them next to each other. Unfortunately, there is no synchronised scrolling and no search function to look up word in the documents, but these functions are to be implemented soon. The selected documents are now linked to the glossary, so whenever this particular glossary is opened, they will appear in the documents pane. Highlighting words in the two texts and inserting them into the glossary or looking up translations in my favourite online resources (like IATE, Linguee, Pons, LEO and others more) works so swiftly, when I first tried it the terms were in my glossary before I had even noticed.

For English texts, context examples can be looked up using the right mouse button or using the icon in the list of extracted terms.  And what’s great for sharing with colleagues and for using in the booth: The text can be opened in a separate window and annotated with records from the glossary:

Automatic extraction of terminology or key concepts so far only works for English, but will be implemented for other languages, too (German, Spanish, French and Italian are planned to be released in April). Quality of extraction, as always, depends on many factors, like the amount of text and the subject area, but it is good to get a first impression of the subject matter at hand.

InterpretBank as a locally installed application raises no confidentiality issues with your client’s documents being opened and processed, as everything InterpretBank does happens on your computer (unless you use the “send document to any device” option).

If you are more of a team glossary and online networking person, InterpretersHelp by Yann Plancqueel and Benoît Werner is the other option to manage glossaries and manually extract terminology from texts. It is quite straightforward: Adding documents works via Copy & Paste, you just paste the text into a field for the respective language so you have the two language versions displayed next to each other (but with no synchronised scrolling either). When I tried it, inserting 20 pages from a pdf worked fine. Words can be looked up in the texts using the browser search function.

The highlighting and inserting also works very swiftly and you can look up terms in Google Translate and the Oxford Dictionaries. Once you have extracted all the vocab you need, you press a button to add all the new entries to your glossary. When changing back from the glossary view to the extractor, the texts have disappeared.

InterpretersHelp as a cloud-based tool addresses the data protection issue by encrypting the data that transit to and from the website (https://interpretershelp.com/help/secure_hosting).

Of course there are zillions of other functions interpreters need for CAI tools to support their workflow perfectly. But I think that both InterpretBank and InterpretersHelp have added one super useful feature to make our lives easier. Thanks a lot!

About the author:
Anja Rütten is a freelance conference interpreter for German (A), Spanish (B), English (C) and French (C) based in Düsseldorf, Germany. She has specialised in knowledge management since the mid-1990s.

Further reading:

Summary Table of Terminology Tools for Interpreters. <www.termtools.dolmetscher-wissen-alles.de>

Josh Goldsmith: The Interpreter’s Toolkit: Interpreters’ Help – a one-stop shop in the making?. In: aiic.net February 12, 2018. <http://aiic.net/p/8499>.

Anja Rütten: InterpretBank 4 Review. 31 July 2017. <https://blog.sprachmanagement.net/interpretbank-4-review/>.

Alexander Drechsel: App profile: Interpreters’ Help. 2 Oct 2015. <https://www.adrechsel.de/dolmetschblog/interpretershelp>.

Anja Rütten: Booth-friendly terminology management revisited – two newcomers. 29 April 2014. <https://blog.sprachmanagement.net/booth-friendly-terminology-management-revisited-2-newcomers/>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flashterm revisited. A guest article by Anne Berres

  +++ für deutsche Fassung bitte runterscrollen +++

One of everything, please!

Have you ever wished there was a terminology management system (TMS) that would provide all the functions you are looking for and prepare for the conference largely automatically? Wouldn’t that be splendid? You’d just have to type in the event’s title and the speaker’s name and the tool would sift through your existing terminology and the web, compile a list of useful terms – with their correct translations and including collocations, obviously – and present it to you as an audio file on your smartphone which you would “only” have to memorise. Thank you very much! We don’t yet have such a supertool but much is changing in the realm of TMS. This also holds true for flashterm.

Flashterm was designed to be used in enterprises, and most customers are large businesses. Its developer, Joachim Eisenrieth, does, however, find our profession very exciting and offered to create a new version for interpreters in which he would take my suggestions for improvement into consideration.

Naturally, I immediately came up with a tech shopping list: voice recognition, a field for collocations and 200 grams of fuzzy search, please. I’d also like a vocab learning mode – auditive, if possible – some nice and fresh terminology extraction mechanism – multilingual, please – and a simultaneous search in online dictionaries. But without the need for an internet connection, of course, and I’m afraid I can’t have the search slowing down.

None of the solutions on the market today is a panacea for all our woes, and the tools set different priorities. Flashterm focusses on knowledge management. This brings immense benefits because the tool stores very diverse data and lets us find and reuse terms more easily. It therefore provides useful features that most TMS targeted at interpreters lack:

  1. Most TMS for interpreters are term-based, which means that their structure is similar to a bilingual or multilingual dictionary. Flashterm, in contrast, is concept-based and can therefore be used as a kind of thesaurus where everything revolves around the meaning rather than the wording. This gives us the opportunity to store more relevant information.
  2. There are no collective data fields under a heading like “Additional information”. Every single piece of information has its allocated spot. This again enables us to use various filters, such as the admin and status filters. With their help we can quickly find abbreviations or acronyms, revise changes we made in the booth or have those terms displayed that still lack a target-language equivalent. Such filters do not only speed up the term search but also reduce the time needed for “tidying up” after the conference.
  3. Terms receive tags for the subject areas and projects they are to be allocated to, which we can use to our advantage to be a little more creative. Subject areas do not necessarily have to be limited to the traditional ones, e.g. “automotive”. We can also define subject areas for “speaker”, “slogan”, or “product line”, for instance. This way we could create a term entry for the speaker’s name, add a photo and details from their CV and allocate them to our project tag for this event. The CV info would then be stored together with the terminology and we would not have to switch in between different sources. Also, if the same speaker were to give a talk on a different occasion and the name rang a bell but we couldn’t quite remember where we heard it before, we could just search for the name in our database and would immediately receive information on past events. Just get creative!
  4. You can create internal links to other term entries which are likely to come up in the same context as the term you searched for. This can be very helpful in the booth and also during preparation to memorise information on the subject matter more effectively.

Joachim Eisenrieth and I have been able to add a few features that were not included in flashterm for businesses. How did we do this? Well, I’d usually express my desire for an, in my opinion, indispensable feature for interpreters and he’d get down to programming. Once the programming was done, I’d receive a new software version for testing, give feedback from an interpreter’s perspective and help detect bugs. This would go on until the feature ran flawlessly.

From a developer’s perspective, the most challenging programming task was probably designing an import and export feature that could be easily used even by non-techies. The data import and export used to be offered exclusively as a service by Eisenrieth Dokumentations GmbH but now interpreters can import all the information they have in their existing glossaries themselves via Excel. And this includes definitions, grammar details, context, subject areas, project allocation etc. Even if you wanted to use flashterm only for the booth, and otherwise preferred Excel, you could keep on using Excel to compile your glossary and then simply import it.

Of course, entries can also be created directly in flashterm. The interpreter version now includes fields for collocations and pronunciation so that the information is displayed right next to the term.

This description might be a little too theoretical but if you have a look at the user interface, you will understand why flashterm offers so many features and is still easy to use. The user interface is unbelievably intuitive, well structured and you can learn how to use the software in only a day. As an additional plus, the user interface can be reduced to a simple bilingual dictionary view should you prefer this in the booth. In accordance with current trends, flashterm can be used just as well on tablets and on the iPhone. Of course, that’s brilliant for assignments where you need to be mobile.

If you want to know more about flashterm, feel free to get in touch with me or visit one of my (free-of-charge) webinars or even just contact Joachim Eisenrieth directly for a trial version.

Anne Berres: kontakt@ab-dolmetschen.de
www.ab-dolmetschen.de
+49 17645844081

Joachim Eisenrieth: joachim.eisenrieth@edok.de
https://www.flashterm.eu/

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Einmal mit Allem, bitte!

Wer kennt es nicht – die Suche nach dem einen Terminologiemanagementsystem (TMS), das alle Funktionen bietet, die man sich wünscht und einem die Konferenz, wenn möglich, weitestgehend automatisch vorbereitet. Wäre das nicht fantastisch? Ein Tool, bei dem man den Titel der Konferenz und den Namen des Redners eingibt, das Tool durchforstet dann automatisch den eigenen Terminologiebestand sowie das Internet auf brauchbare Vokabeln mit deren Übersetzung in die gewünschten Sprachen, extrahiert von alleine noch die passenden Kollokationen und bereitet uns diese Infos als Audiodatei auf, die wir natürlich über das Smartphone abrufen können und dann „nur“ noch zu lernen brauchen. Ganz so weit sind wir leider noch nicht, doch im Bereich der TMS tut sich tatsächlich Einiges. So auch bei flashterm.

Das Tool war ursprünglich auf Terminologiemanagement in Unternehmen ausgerichtet und zieht auch hauptsächlich Unternehmenskunden an. Doch der Entwickler, Joachim Eisenrieth, findet auch die Dolmetschertätigkeit sehr spannend und hat angeboten, mit meinen Verbesserungsvorschlägen eine neue Dolmetscherversion auf den Markt zu bringen.

Das war der Startschuss für das große Wunschkonzert: einmal bitte mit Spracherkennung, Anzeige von Kollokationen und fehlertoleranter Suche, aber bitte ohne das Programm zu verlangsamen, dann noch bitte Lernmodus, am besten auditiv, automatische Termextraktion, in mehreren Sprachen natürlich, und gleichzeitiger Suche in Online-Wörterbüchern, aber bitte ohne eine Internetverbindung zu benötigen.

Die eierlegende Wollmilchsau gibt es heute noch nicht und die verschiedenen Anbieter setzen ihre Prioritäten unterschiedlich.

Flashterm hat sein Hauptaugenmerk auf dem Wissensmanagement. Dies hat zum Vorteil, dass verschiedenartigste Informationen verwaltet werden können und die Auffindbarkeit von Termini sowie deren Wiederverwendbarkeit erleichtert werden. Es gibt zahlreiche Elemente, die flashterm zu einer wahren Wissensdatenbank werden lassen, die andere dolmetschorientierte TMS nicht derart anbieten:

  1. Die meisten Terminologietools für Dolmetscher sind benennungsorientiert. Das bedeutet, dass sie eher mit einem zwei- oder mehrsprachigen Wörterbuch zu vergleichen sind. Flashterm ist begriffsorientiert, was bedeutet, dass sich das Tool nicht nur als Wörterbuch, sondern fast eine Art Thesaurus verwenden lässt, bei dem nicht das Wort, sondern das Konzept im Mittelpunkt steht. Das hat den Vorteil, dass mehr Informationen abgespeichert werden können.
  2. Es gibt keine Sammelfelder beispielsweise mit dem Titel „Zusatzinfos“, in die alles Mögliche hineingeschrieben werden kann, sondern jede Information hat ihren gerechten Platz. Das bietet die Möglichkeit hilfreicher Filter, so zum Beispiel die Admin- und Statusfilter, die einen Abkürzungen/Akronyme ganz leicht auffinden lassen, einem geänderte Begriffe noch einmal vor Augen führen und einem diejenigen Begriffe aufführen, bei denen ein Äquivalent fehlt. Solche Filter erleichtern nicht nur die Suche nach Termini, sondern beschleunigen auch die Nachbereitung von Dolmetschaufträgen.
  3. Die Zuordnung zu Sachgebieten und Projekten findet eher Tag-artig statt. Das bietet mehr Flexibilität und erlaubt es einem, mit den Möglichkeiten der Datenbank zu spielen. So könnte man sich z.B. überlegen, nicht nur traditionelle Sachgebiete (z.B. „Automobil“) zu definieren, sondern auch Sachgebiete mit den Titeln „Redner“, „Slogan“ oder „Produktlinie“ anzulegen. Zur Veranschaulichung: Im Sachgebiet „Redner“ ist der terminologische Eintrag dann der Name des Redners, ein Bild desselben kann auch hinzugefügt werden, sowie im Feld für Definitionen die Daten seines Lebenslaufs. So hätte man erstens auch diese Infos mit der Terminologie an einem Ort abgelegt und könnte zweitens bei einer künftigen Konferenz einfach den Namen des Redners in das Suchfeld in flashterm eintippen und überprüfen, ob man diesen vielleicht schon einmal gedolmetscht hat und, wenn ja, bei welcher Veranstaltung. Der Kreativität sind also keine Grenzen gesetzt!
  4. Es können verknüpfte Begriffe angelegt werden. Bei einem terminologischen Eintrag können andere Begriffe, die diesem inhaltlich nahestehen oder häufig mit diesem in Verbindung auftreten, sehr einfach verlinkt werden, sodass sie gleichzeitig angezeigt werden. Dies kann sowohl in der Kabine hilfreich sein als auch während der Vorbereitung, um sich inhaltliche Zusammenhänge besser merken zu können.

Joachim Eisenrieth und ich konnten in der Kooperation noch einige Funktionen hinzufügen, die nicht Teil der normalen Unternehmensversion flashterms waren. Ich habe dann meist den Wunsch nach einer Zusatzfunktion geäußert, die ich als für Dolmetscher überlebensnotwendig erachtet habe und er hat sich daraufhin ans Programmieren gemacht. Wenn die Funktion dann einmal programmiert war, habe ich die neue flashterm-Version zum Testen erhalten und konnte somit als Teil der realen Zielgruppe eine Rückmeldung geben und dabei helfen, eventuelle Bugs aufzudecken. Herr Eisenrieth hat mit meinem Feedback dann, sofern nötig, noch ein paar Nachbesserungen unternommen, bis die Funktion einwandfrei zu verwenden war.

Zu diesen neuen Funktionen gehört als vermutlich größte Entwicklungsherausforderung die Anfertigung einer Import- und Exportfunktion, die auch von Laien problemlos genutzt werden kann. Zuvor wurde ein Datenimport oder -export lediglich als Dienstleistung von der Eisenrieth Dokumentations GmbH angeboten, nun können die Termini und alle weiteren unterstützenden Angaben (Definition, Kollokationen, Aussprache, Grammatikangaben, Kontextbeispiel, Sachgebiet, Projektzuordnung, Links etc.) ganz einfach aus Excel in die dafür in flashterm vorgesehenen Felder importiert werden. Man kann hiermit nicht nur seine bestehende Terminologiesammlung übertragen, sondern kann auch weiterhin, sofern man das bevorzugt, mit Excel arbeiten und seine Daten dann einfach in flashterm importieren.

Natürlich kann man auch direkt in flashterm arbeiten und dort neue Terminologieeinträge anlegen. Hier kam als Neuerung in der Dolmetscherversion hinzu, dass es nun Felder für Kollokationen und Aussprache gibt, sodass einem diese Informationen, so man sie denn angelegt hat, direkt neben dem Fachbegriff angezeigt werden.

Zum Teil klingt das nun vielleicht etwas theoretisch, doch wer sich die Softwareoberfläche selbst anschaut, weiß, warum so viele verschiedene Funktionen möglich sind und diese dennoch einfach zu handhaben sind. Die Oberfläche ist einmalig intuitiv, sehr übersichtlich und der Umgang mit dem Programm deswegen kinderleicht zu erlernen. Zudem kann sie minimiert werden, sodass man, wenn man dies in der Kabine bevorzugt, wirklich nur ein zweisprachiges Wörterbuch hat. Im Einklang mit der modernen Technik ist flashterm auch auf Tablets nutzbar und für das iPhone gibt es eine App, was für mobile Einsätze äußerst nützlich sein kann.

Wer an mehr Infos interessiert ist, kann gerne direkt bei Joachim Eisenrieth nach einer Testversion fragen oder mich kontaktieren bzw. eines meiner kostenlos dazu angebotenen Webinare besuchen.

Anne Berres: kontakt@ab-dolmetschen.de
www.ab-dolmetschen.de
+49 17645844081

Joachim Eisenrieth: joachim.eisenrieth@edok.de
https://www.flashterm.eu/

Team Glossaries | Tips & Tricks von Magda und Anja | DfD 2017

Aus unserer Kurzdemo zum Thema “Teamglossare in GoogleSheets” bei “Dolmetscher für Dolmetscher” am 15. September 2017 in Bonn findet Ihr hier ein paar Screenshots und Kurznotizen. Detaillierte Gedanken zu gemeinsamer Glossararbeit in der Cloud findet Ihr in diesem Blogbeitrag.

Magdalena Lindner-Juhnke und Anja Rütten

Grundsätzliches zur Zusammenarbeit

  • Einladung zum Online-Glossar
  • Erwartungshaltung auf beiden Seiten
  • “Share Economy” oder Schutz des Urheberrechts/vertrauensvolle Zusammenarbeit
  • Organisation in Ablage/eigene und gemeinsame Ordner
  • Glossarstruktur – mehrere Reiter?
  • Vorteile/Bedenken
  • Teilnehmerstimmen
  • “Live-Teamarbeit” vor und während der Konferenz
  • “praktisch, sich […] GEMEINSAM vorzubereiten”, einheitliche Terminologie, Zeitersparnis
  • Glossar sortieren nach Chronologie im Vortrag -> Absprache
  • “Ich kann mit Word besser umgehen als mit Excel …”
  • “Teilen mit anderen Kabinen evtl. zu kompliziert?”
  • “Datenschutz?“

Musterglossar

demo glossary

Word geht auch!

word works, too

Aufbau (z.B. Zeilen/Spalten fixieren) oder Kopie erstellen

copy document

Die wichtigsten Kniffe, um nicht zu verzweifeln

  • Textumbruch oder fortlaufend, Textausrichtung in Zelle
  • Absatz in Zelle (Alt+Enter) – Vorsicht, zerschießt beim Exportieren evtl. die Tabellenstruktur
  • Suchen (Strg+F), alle Tabellenblätter durchsuchen
  • Zellen kopieren
  • Zeilen/Reiter hinzufügen
  • Spalten/Zeilen fixieren
  • Jedem eine “Privatspalte” zuweisen, für eigene Prioritäten/Anmerkungen etc.
  • Tabellendatei hochladen (schlecht zu bearbeiten) vs. Tabelle in Google erstellen – Kollegen fragen oder Webinar besuchen!

Kommentare, Chat, Kommentarspalte

comment in table

Sortierung, Chronologie

(nicht ohne Absprache umsortieren, es sei denn die ursprüngliche Reihenfolge lässt sich wieder herstellen)

sort chronologically

Datensicherung (was ist, wenn jemand anderes das komplette Glossar zerstört)

Private Filteransichten (bei großen Datenbeständen)

Herunterladen, Drucken, oder Copy&Paste

Paralleltexte “alignieren”

Alternative Airtable (verschlüsselt)