Voices and technology concatenation

Q:  For concatenated computer applications, like IVR, are there secrets to successful translation?

There are quite a few secrets, so let’s try one at a time:  translation for concatenation.  The approach to translation for technologies that concatenate (technologies that form sentences by putting phrases or fragments together at run-time), is quite different from “normal translation”.  This is the first downfall of most developers - the assumption that anyone who speaks a language can translate an application that concatenates - particularly if that application inserts variables at run-time such as dates, times, numbers, spoken names, and more.  Actually, it is exactly the opposite - a very special translator is required to translate concatenating products.  Why?  Because the way foreign languages concatenate is vastly different from the way English language concatenates.  So, if your application has a prompt “Transferring to…” and you plan to insert a person’s name (e.g. “Joe Brown”) your application will not play properly in Russian or Polish or a number of other languages.   If you plan to insert a number in:  “You have <number> messages.” your application will not play properly without reprogramming or data table alteration in 98% of the world’s languages.  First, because many languages have up to 25 different ways to speak the same numbers, varying with what they modify (e.g. “messages”), and also there are many more possibilities than just “messages” - many languages have multiple plurals, such as “messagi” and “messagu”, and the developer will need to modify the programming to play the correct plural for the correct number of objects.  Translating for technology requires not only someone with experience and outstanding grammar, but also someone who can tell the developer clearly when and where to alter the programming. Plus, the translator must understand the concept of translation for technology - an amazing number of translators just translate “You have…” word-for-word as “you have”, where in their language , the technology should really say/play  “there is” or “there are” - not “you have.”

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.