We’re halfway there

Virtual Team Project – Week 4

Here we are, in the last week of editing. Well, maybe not. I am sure that the translation team’s work will highlight ways to improve the source text. But I will focus on editing this week. Based on discussions with other students in the programme and the blog posts of some of these students, this task has proved challenging for many teams.

The Team 2 process

Two weeks ago, our first draft served as a process for the writing /editing team to research the product and structure in sequential order all the content we needed to tackle. Each of the four writing team members participated in this draft one after the other, building on the previous writer’s input. This was the research & structure part of our process. This first draft had ca. 1,400 words (200 words over the maximum limit).

Then, one writing team member pared down this content to its most essential components and steps and proposed style guidelines. We were now at ca. 650 words (250 words under the minimum). This gave us a clear view of our goal: we needed to make all these steps as usable as possible, in plain language, and we could add between 250 and 550 words. 250-550 words are really not that much when they include the cover, table of contents, captions and glossary.

For the last ten days, the writing team has been adding content to this draft and editing it based on each other’s feedback. Members involved in the translation and final proofreading also offered feedback. As tracked changes piled up, every few days, we resolved feedback and created an updated version. By Tuesday of this week, we could see that the editing flow had dried up.

As a translator, I always found editing – in particular, self-editing – to be more draining than the actual writing or translating. Firstly, the brain tends to read faster than the eyes, guessing what is written instead of reading it, so you can easily miss typos and obvious errors, especially when you know the text already. So, editing requires a higher level of attention to detail. On the other hand, editing is a never-ending process because you can always improve the text. Any new pair of eyes can bring new improvements. The risk, then, is to lose sight of the big picture. Editing is about striking a balance between insufficient and excessive criticism, but also knowing when to take a step back.

A new pair of eyes

On Wednesday evening, we still had unresolved feedback and we still had to do most of the formatting – which would require more feedback. We needed to do all this by Friday in order to be on time for the second test before the final proofreading. Among all team members, I realised that I was the most likely choice to offer a new point of view.

In general, I think the project manager should avoid taking on development tasks. The project manager leads and coordinates the team, and he /she makes decisions. If he /she produces work as part of the development, his /her objectivity might be called into question. During the two weeks of writing and editing, I skimmed over the content, made suggestions to get the feedback rounds started and then I concentrated on other members’ feedback. I avoided creating content. However, by Wednesday, it became clear that I might be able to unlock our situation by making editing decisions, so I resolved the feedback, did the formatting (except the cover), and inserted the graphics we had.

My intention was not to impose arbitrary decisions – I kept a copy of all the feedback for reference. But when you are stuck, implementing ideas can be the solution to decide whether to discard or keep them. Only by seeing what your ideas look like in context can you really test their adequacy.

Also, I am glad that the writing team only implemented limited formatting until Wednesday. They focussed on sequencing the content appropriately, which provided a clear template for me to propose a visual identity with MS Word styles, a glossary, navigation links, etc. Though the formatted document looks very close to the previous version, the different fonts, colours, spacing, etc., seemed to help the writing team to see the content with fresh eyes. It also moved us toward the testing phase as team members reported potential compatibility and usability issues.

Had we followed a different writing process, we could have avoided this situation or solved it differently. For example, we could have split the writing /editing team between two writers and two editors, with the editors working simultaneously or sequentially. In case of editing fatigue, the writers could have taken over again. The two writers and two editors would have worked in cycles. Instead, because of clashing schedules, the writing /editing team organically adopted a four-people collaborative configuration. This configuration worked for this small, non-technical project, but I recognise that it may be too messy for larger scope projects. Laziness is also a risk, especially in a one-person editing team: feeling relieved that you have overcome your editing inertia, you may be tempted to think that your editing work is finished.

Conclusion

When I write or translate, I tend to spend most of my time on the first draft. I want it to be as close to the final version as possible. Not that I hate editing. I don’t, and editing will happen anyway. But projects like this virtual collaboration highlight the biggest challenges of editing: getting stuck in never-ending feedback and striking a good balance between excessive corrections and missed errors. While the solution I described here is not viable for every project type and configuration, I believe that, with careful follow-up, it can be a valid option to overcome inertia after several editing loops.

Surface learning vs Deep learning

This week’s lecture on the depth education model resonated with some worries I have been experiencing lately.

Since I started the MA, I have had more difficulty to make the instructional design aspect of the programme my own. I have been able to relate the “technical communication” part to my background, my expectations and my research into the industry so far. On the other hand, instructional design has required a shift in mindset. After all, my teaching experience is limited to tutoring other students in college and training new translation project managers.

I paid attention during lectures, I read the recommended contents as well as other resources, I found links and common patterns with technical communication practices. But I struggled to project myself in the role of instructional designer and to apply instructional design theories outside the framework of our assignments. I understood the theories, but I felt like I couldn’t go past the surface of these theories. And so, I felt unprepared to apply them.

The depth education model

With their brief comparison of deep, surface and achievement approaches to learning, Garrison and Cleveland-Innes (2005, p.137) provide a concise definition of the depth education model:

“Students employ varying degrees of three different approaches to learning: deep, surface, and achievement approaches. In a deep approach to learning, material is embraced and digested in the search for meaning. Surface learning employs the least amount of effort toward realizing the minimum required outcomes. Surface learners are motivated to complete the task rather than assimilate the learning. Achievement approaches to learning are reflected by an orientation to the external reward for demonstrating learning. Strategies for the achievement orientation focus on the activities that will result in the highest marks.”

In the blog post Why Deep Learning (2018), Elliot Seif argues that a deep approach to learning is more likely help students to develop the skills and attitudes required in the modern economy, like problem-solving, communication, thoughtfulness, leadership, etc. Both the teacher and the student are involved in enabling deep learning, but in my case, there was no doubt that I was responsible for my predicament.

During this week’s lecture, as we discussed a few of the attributes of surface learners and deep learners, and how assignments in our programme are designed to encourage deep learning, I thought about my proposal for our summer development project and how it was an obvious medium for deep learning. More importantly, I realised that I had already found a strategy to solve my problem while writing my proposal.

It’s all connected

See, I had to change course three times in the last three weeks of drafting my proposal. Long story short: my learning resource went from being a website to an e-learning course and back to a website, and I had to tweak my topic a couple of times. Flexibility and anxiety were certainly the keywords during those three weeks as I had to analyse and structure always-evolving contents in different ways: for an educational website and for an e-learning course. It wasn’t easy, but it was a great exercise in adaptation.

What is the link with the depth education model? Well, I felt like a surface learner of instructional design despite my best efforts to be a deep learner. In the last few weeks, however, with the proposal and thinking about what to include in my e-portfolio, I started imagining ways to present the same content on different platforms and for different audiences (e.g., how to get from a memo or a report to an e-learning course or a micro-learning video on the same topic).

I think this is the way for me to develop my instructional design abilities. I was just too caught up in everyday work and worries to be aware that I had already found a solution to this issue. Now, I need to learn how to apply this newly-found awareness to the design of deep learning activities for others.

References

Garrison, D.R. & Cleveland-Innes, M.(2005) “Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction Is Not Enough”, American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148 available: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2.

Seif, E. (2018) ‘Why Deep Learning?’, ASCD In Service, 24 September, available: http://inservice.ascd.org/why-deep-learning/ [last access 23 February 2019].

All hands on deck

Virtual Team Project – Week 3

In week 3, all members of Team 2 continued to be mobilised and focussed delivering a “First Draft” to the translation team by Monday 25 February and we learnt two major lessons about drafting instructions and the need to be flexible. As always, all the time mentions refer to the Irish/French time zones unless otherwise indicated.

A mobilised team

We are very lucky to have a team that is completely mobilised to reach our goals. Here are a few examples.

The 1st draft (not the “First Draft” above) was ready on Sunday 10 February afternoon and we were aiming for a 2nd draft by Sunday 17 February. On Monday 11, one writing team member said that she would start working on the 2nd draft to propose some writing guidelines. By Tuesday 12 evening, she had edited the whole draft and aggregated a PDF with the guidelines she used! Similarly, our graphics designer prepared the first round of graphics within two days based on the 1st draft. We were now a few days ahead of schedule with fully-functional guidelines and graphics to review. My hat’s off to them!

Starting each new discussion on WhatsApp, I can’t help but feel like I am barging into each team member’s life and asking him/her to drop everything at once. I hope that this is only an impression and I have told my teammates that I do not expect answers urgently. I only intend to start a discussion. Nevertheless, I haven’t had to wait long to get a question answered or a discussion started. This week, whenever someone made edits or provided feedback, the other team members – including the translation team – reviewed these edits and this feedback shortly after. When we discussed running the first test on the 2nd draft this week instead of waiting next week (more on that later), the tester made himself available immediately.

With our busy schedules, we did not maintain this pace all week, but everyone made sure to maintain good communication. For example, one team member informed me that his schedule this week made it hard for him to follow the WhatsApp group chat, but that he wanted to participate in the team’s efforts. We agreed that I would send him a private message whenever we needed his input. I understand his position because it mirrors my fears about using group chats to make decisions. I appreciate the fact that he was forthcoming about the situation.

To make discussions easier to follow, I thought of proposing set chat hours as suggested in “Take The Pulse Of Your Virtual Team”. However, based on my teammates’ schedules and the time differences, that would leave very short windows to discuss the project each week. Decision-making may be more efficient as a result, but it might be too efficient. We haven’t found a time window for live team meetings yet, and I am worried we would become Team Robot. Still, in an effort to facilitate communication and updates, I asked that all team members state all their feedback in the latest draft and graphics files. This is not as easy as it sounds with a WhatsApp group chat, but I expect this will be particularly helpful with the next round of edits.

Lessons in flexibility

When we decided on tasks and a schedule, we did not take enough time to do an in-depth analysis of the structure of our instructions. Of course, we discussed what we would cover in the instructions. We would talk about creating a WordPress account, creating a blog, writing/deleting a blog post, assigning categories, collaborating on a blog, etc. I think we all knew the importance of defining the structure of one’s content before writing, but we fell victim to the curse of knowledge. “Sure, the WordPress user interface is not very usable, but the process is straightforward.” It is, once you know it.

With everyone’s feedback, we realised that we had not covered all possibilities, like the availability of a Google sign-in option, the display of alternative languages depending on your location and device settings, the need to provide directions even if screenshots are available, the need for definitions for a “non-technical audience” (what are keywords for?). When we realised that I did not get the same starting page as the others because I am based in Ireland with a French device, we decided to run the first test on the draft this week instead of next week.

As mentioned earlier, the tester moved right away and we all benefitted from it. His feedback as a non-user of WordPress unlocked more feedback from the rest of the team. This was the Russian doll of feedbacks, with each new finding unleashing a new set of feedback and content to include. Fortunately, the 2nd draft had gone down to less than 700 words, so adding content won’t be a problem.

Conclusion

This past week showed once again that our team is responsive, that it takes initiative and that it is committed to reaching the team’s goals despite busy schedules. Maybe we should have prepared a detailed structure for our content as a first step, but I think that starting with a rough draft worked in our favour. Firstly, we were ahead a schedule thanks to this draft and it lifted our spirits and encouraged us to keep the pace. Secondly, the 2nd draft put the team in usability testing mode. It allowed everyone to participate in defining style guidelines and in structuring the content.

We are handing in the text for translation in one week. Until then, let’s see what new challenges await us.

References

Sookman, C. (2018) ‘Take The Pulse Of Your Virtual Team’, IAAP Edge, 21 July, available: https://edge.iaap-hq.org/2018/07/21/take-the-pulse-of-your-virtual-team/ [last access 17 February 2019].

On Interviewing

Here is a sample of our assignments in semester 2 with my first thoughts upon learning about them:

  • Design and develop an online learning resource – I should be fine as long as I can find an interesting topic.
  • Blog – This is not a surprise, but it is still anxiety-inducing.
  • Share and discuss industry insights on Twitter – See “Blog”.
  • Create an e-portfolio – 1. Great idea! 2. Oh! But then, there will be recruitment interviews. See “Blog”.

Amongst these personal challenges, interviewing an industry professional seemed like the easy part. This wasn’t my first time asking questions. Firstly, questions are part of the translator’s role. Also, I just handed in my summer development project proposal, which included a thorough interview with a subject-matter expert. So, why the struggle with this assignment?

Open and closed questions

Interview questions can be classified into several types: open, closed, primary, secondary, and mirroring. In her article “Open-Ended vs. Closed-Ended Questions in User Research” (Nielsen Norman Group), Susan Farrell defines open and closed questions:

“Open-ended questions are questions that allow someone to give a free-form answer.
Closed-ended questions can be answered with “Yes” or “No,” or they have a limited set of possible answers (such as: A, B, C, or All of the Above).”

Closed questions may yield more accurate answers; however, they might yield only the answers you expect. On the other hand, open questions give more freedom to the interviewee to stray from your expectations. Consider this example from the same article:

[Closed] “Do you think you would use this?”
[Open] “How would this fit into your work?”

In order to learn as much as possible when interviewing industry professionals, we should favour open questions, in particular as primary questions to introduce new topics. We should try to limit closed structures to secondary questioning, i.e. to get complementary information.

Old habits die hard

As a project manager, I asked open questions, for example to clients: “What are you looking to achieve with this project?” But mostly, I asked closed questions to get accurate information. As a translator, agencies recommend that I ask closed questions and that I favour multiple-choice questions to expedite the answering process for clients. Of course, this is not foolproof: receiving a “Yes” to an A, B or C multiple-choice question is incredibly common, slightly frustrating, but always funny. On the other side of that spectrum, occasionally, a client will go above and beyond and provide incredibly detailed context. I am forever thankful for these caring professionals.

When I interviewed the SME for my proposal, I used a mix of both closed and open questions, though a few of the closed questions implicitly required the SME to expand on his answers. Thankfully, this SME was a strong advocate in his field and he was willing to share as much as necessary.

I have never had an unwilling interviewee. This is a challenge: learning to prepare for the worst-case scenario. Over the last few days, I have reviewed my interviewee’s profile and made notes about potential questions as I went about other business. Then I sat down to tidy everything. You guessed it: most questions were closed-ended. I managed to improve my questions by referring to the sample ones that Madelyn Flammia provides in “The challenge of getting technical experts to talk” (1993), but I was not satisfied yet.

A double focus

Earlier this week, I shared on Twitter an Informaze article entitled “The power of deep interviews” by Iryna Sushko. Coming back to it later this week, the first two tips finally unblocked something in my brain:

“Tip #1 – Start with why?”
“Tip #1a – Why do you need this question?”

I need to get as much information from my interviewee. But why do I need that information? For this specific interview, my goal is to answer my personal questions and doubts. I have a double focus: the interviewee and myself.

To a greater extent, the issue is the same with each interview. Why am I doing this interview and spending time on it? Why do I need to create this content? These seem like obvious, fundamental questions. But it is so easy to get lost in the what (What questions do I ask? What content do I need?) and the how (How do I phrase this question? How do I structure my content?).  Keeping the “why?” in mind may also prove useful to motivate an unwilling interviewee, by showing him or her why his/her input matters.

Work faster

Each time I go back to my questions, I manage to improve them a little by asking myself why I want to know something. Now, I just need to learn to speed up that process, because I doubt that I will often have two weeks to prepare interviews.

References

Farrell, S. (2016) ‘Open-Ended vs. Closed-Ended Questions in User Research’, Nielsen Norman Group, 22 May, available: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/open-ended-questions/  [last access 17 February 2019].

Flammia, M. (1993) “The challenge of getting technical experts to talk: why interviewing skills are crucial to the technical communication curriculum”, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 36(3), 124-129, available: https://doi.org/10.1109/47.238052.

Sushko, I. (2018) ‘The power of deep interviews’, Informaze, 12 September, available: https://informaze.wordpress.com/2018/09/12/the-power-of-deep-interviews/ [last access 17 February 2019].

.

Sailing toward a common goal

Virtual Team Project – Week 2

After a slow start with some scheduling difficulties, this week Team 2 agreed on a roadmap, picked up speed and is now one day ahead of schedule. In this post, I reflect on the challenges that we faced and how we prevailed. All the time mentions refer to the Irish/French time zones unless otherwise indicated.

Coordination

When we started sharing individual availability to set up a live team meeting, it quickly became evident that such a meeting would not happen this week either. Between studies, part-time or full-time jobs, and several time zones, the highest team count in any time slot was five out of ten. Five hardly seemed enough. Any decision made during the live meeting would ignore the input of half of the team. We could use the opportunity to at least get to know one another, but we would still exclude five people.

Why not have several partial meetings then? I did not suggest it because several meetings would mean an even greater time commitment from all members without the same social or task benefits as a full team meeting.

Without the possibility of a team meeting, we had to rely on our Whatsapp group chat. Still, I hope we can organize at least one team meeting or some task-focused partial meetings.

Task-oriented asynchronous communication

This particular virtual project is different from regular projects in a professional setting because our team members have to balance a student life (with several projects), a professional life (with other projects) and a personal life. At the same time, we all need to be able to rely on one another and to maintain a dynamic sharing of information and opinions. At least in the past week, we seem to have adopted a communication pattern:

  • As the project manager, I start the day by listing the topics that we should discuss for the day and I ask the team members to share other topics they would like to tackle (the agenda).
  • Then I might get the first topic “on the table” and make suggestions. I would rather avoid always making suggestions. However, in this asynchronous setting and with our busy schedules, I find that calling for feedback on my suggestions helps to launch the discussion.
  • Team members start to participate depending on their respective schedules. The discussion continues until late in the evening – until US team members have had a chance to participate after work/college.
  • Then, I recap the tasks we have completed and the decisions we have made. I also propose the next agenda. This way the US members can start to give their input and think about what they want to share or need from their team members.

The whole team stepped up to make asynchronous communication work. Everyone was up and running on Whatsapp by Wednesday morning. By Friday evening, we had agreed on a topic for the instructions, a detailed schedule and a new tester role. The writing/editing team (two in Orlando and two in Limerick) also agreed to have the first draft ready by Monday.

Fast forward to Sunday afternoon and the first draft is ready one day ahead of schedule and all four writing/editing members contributed content and feedback. This is great progress in a short amount of time.

Conclusion

Maybe we were not able to have a live meeting to get to know each other, but everyone focussed on reaching team goals and displayed a proactive and optimistic attitude. Asynchronous communication may have made us more efficient because our discussions are task-oriented. While we have not had casual chats, we are starting to share more personal information little by little. It seems that, for our team, bonding will happen slowly over the course of the project. This week showed that we can already trust one another.

Strings Authoring for Localisation

Talking about intercultural communication in class this week, we delved into several topics, including localisation and writing with an international audience in mind.

According to Bert Esselink (2003), localisation “revolves around combining language and technology to produce a product that can cross cultural and language barriers”. Though at first localisation applied mostly to software applications, today global web communication means that a great number of technical authors write for localisation. Localisation best practices are a broad topic, but this post focusses on some practical strings authoring advice from a translator’s point of view.

Internationalisation

The #1 best practice in localisation is to internationalise your product. This means you should ensure that your product and your content will enable localisation for your present and future markets. “Future” is key because all languages do not have the same requirements, and you should strive to “future-proof” your code and content from the start.

Internationalisation has technical and linguistic aspects. Technical aspects include ensuring your platform and code will support the specificities of each locale, including different character sets and orientations. Three pieces of advice here:

  • Prefer Unicode to maximise compatibility.
  • Do not hardcode text in graphics. Otherwise, you will need to extract the text for translation, and create new localised graphics. Different characters and right-to-left orientation will add extra work.
  • In doubt, check with a localisation specialist before authoring.

You can find more technical advice online, for example on web pages by Microsoft, Google Developers, Mozilla, and Oracle. As you can see on these pages, technical best practices are not enough to get your strings ready for localisation.

Authoring strings for localisation

As a translator, technical issues tend to be solved when I receive the strings, but linguistic issues may remain. Why should you care? After all, it is up to the translator to solve these issues. Yes, but:

  • The translator most likely translates the strings out of context in a computer-assisted translation (CAT) tool. He/she only sees the translatable text and the description keys/strings. More on that shortly.
  • If the translator misinterprets a string and introduces errors in the translation memory (TM), these errors will persist until a) you do the in-context review (best-case scenario) or b) a diligent user (the world?) gives you feedback.
  • If a translator sends you questions for each unclear strings, this translates into extra work and time lost for both of you – maybe extra cost as well.

Below I provide a few pieces of strings authoring advice based on the biggest pain points I have experienced as a translator.

#1 Rule: String descriptions are the best

Unfortunately, translators often localise user interfaces without any visual support. They may have access to the live website/app, but the international version may not be available yet. A demo version of the software may not be in the cards. Translators may have access to screenshots, but these do not display the whole content. There is a simple solution that is beneficial to all the users of the strings files – descriptions. In most strings files, you can insert a description key to clarify the translatable content that follows (button, menu item, alert, etc). This is very useful especially for very short strings. Consider these examples:

  • “Bookmark” and “Contact”: Buttons? Menu items?
  • “Empty”: Button? Message alerting you to an empty folder?
  • “Login”: Form field? Button? Yes, it should be “Login” (form field) and “Log in” (button). Without context, spelling mistakes can create confusion.

You can also insert a description string to clarify some items: what do the placeholders replace? If there are numerical variables, what is their numerical range? Etc. A description string is very helpful in case of length limits (see below). If you struggled to stay within a limit, the translators are likely to struggle as well. In case of a very short string, explain what the button, message or menu item does. It will help to find a shorter alternative.

Keep it short, but do not sacrifice clarity

Clarity is essential in technical communication, but even more so in web/software localisation because length constraints are frequent. Many languages need more space than English to express the same idea. For example, even if instructed to “keep it short”, languages like Latin languages, German, etc., can be up to 30-35% longer than English. Make every word count. This is especially true for menu items, app strings, and Google Ads. If there are absolute length limits:

  • Do not reach the limit in English. Plan for the 30-35% expansion rate. Of course, that may not be possible if the limit is 6 characters.
  • Avoid abbreviating. Abbreviating may not solve length issues in some languages. If available, choose an alternative that does not require abbreviating. If not available, provide a description string.
  • State the limits clearly as a number of characters. CAT tools can highlight strings that are over these limits.

Because of length limits, you may resort to complex noun clauses. Please don’t. If you can. What is a complex noun clause? In a complex noun clause, several words form a complex term without any clear functional link between each word. Typically, one word is the subject and the other words modify this subject. Consider these two examples from the Oracle Guidelines:

  • “Empty File” – Is the file empty? Is it a button to empty the file?
  • “Quantity Changes Impact Rate Master”. Do changes in quantity impact the rate master? Does the quantity change the impact rate master?

As the source of most translators’ questions, complex noun clauses are the best argument in favour of description strings. If you cannot avoid such clauses, clarify them.

List the strings in a logical, not alphabetical, order

Here is why you should avoid ordering strings by alphabetical order, and prefer a logical order by webpage, menu, section, type of string, etc.:

  • A logical order makes it easier to refer to a specific string in case of questions or updates.
  • Picture this: there are two “Empty” strings in the strings file. One is a button in Menu X, and the other is a message in Menu Y. You want to edit the message to clarify it, but both strings follow each other in alphabetical order and there is no clear description key. How long will it take you to identify the right string? And the translator?
  • Concatenated strings are unlikely to be displayed together in alphabetical order. Eg.: you split a sentence into String #1 and String #2. If you order the strings logically, String #2 will be directly after String #1, providing the translators with the right context. Alphabetical order makes this unlikely. Have dozens of concatenated strings and this becomes a puzzle.

On the topic of concatenated strings…

Avoid concatenating, and be careful with placeholders

When concatenating strings, you assume that grammar and syntax rules are the same in all languages. Mozilla provides a good example of concatenation issues and recommends using placeholders instead. This is invaluable advice, but it is not always enough because abusing placeholders and variables also causes grammatical issues. Consider this real-life example:

“Delivery is scheduled {0} {1} {2} from {3} at {4}”

There were no explanation regarding what {0}, {1} {2}, {3} and {4} meant. The author could not say for sure what each stood for. Searching the other strings, we solved the puzzle:

  • {0} stands for “every”
  • {1} is a numerical variable ≥ 1
  • {2} stands for “day(s)”, “week(s)” or “month(s)”
  • {3} is the start date
  • {4} is the delivery location

This works (somehow) in English, but it does not work in French, with or without concatenation. “Day” and “month” are masculine while “week” is feminine, and “every” has to agree in gender. Also, the numerical variable is not needed when it equals 1. For {3}, the proposition is “à partir de lundi 11 février”, but it is “à partir du 11 février”. Here is the French translation with text instead:

Every 1 day(s): “La livraison est programmée tous/toutes les 1 jour(s) à partir de {Date} à l’adresse {Address}”

To be grammatically correct, it should read:

“La livraison est programmée tous les jours à partir de {Date} à l’adresse {Address}”

To reduce the number of alternative strings, we end up with awkward English and localised strings. At least two variants of “{0} {1} {2}” are necessary in French, one for masculine and one for feminine (we could live with the unaesthetic “(s)”). Languages like Russian require even more variants because there are three possible declinations for “day(s)”, three more for “week(s)”, and another three for “month(s)”, depending on the preceding number.

Do not overdo it with placeholders. Limit the number of placeholders that contain variables. If you cannot, define with target linguists the number of variant strings you need to provide for localisation.

Conclusion

String authoring should abide by technical communication guidelines regarding clarity and cultural sensitivity. More than other content types, strings must be concise, but never at the expense of clarity. Though it may seem like a burden at first, providing descriptions and inserting variant strings to account for different writing rules will make strings management easier for you and your localisation teams.

References

Esselink, B. (2003) “The evolution of localisation”, Multilingual Computing and Technology, available: http://www.intercultural.urv.cat/media/upload/domain_317/arxius/Technology/Esselink_Evolution.pdf
[last access 10 February 2019].

Globalization Documentation (n.d.) Microsoft, available: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/globalization/
[last access 10 February 2019].

Internationalization (i18n) open source libraries and APIs (n.d.) Google Developers, available: https://developers.google.com/international/
[last access 10 February 2019].

Localization content best practices (n.d.) MDN Web docs, available: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Localization/Localization_content_best_practices#Avoid_concatenations_use_placeholders_instead
[last access 10 February 2019].

Understanding Translation Issues (n.d.) Oracle, available: https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E17984_01/doc.898/e14698/translation_issues.htm
[last access 10 February 2019].

When a picture is not worth 3,400 words

About that controversial cover of “M, le magazine du Monde”

In communication theory, noise refers to anything that might distort the message, like a bad connection, prejudices, misconceptions…

M, le magazine du Monde is a weekly magazine published by Le Monde, a reputable French newspaper. Its 29 December 2018 cover caused a stir on social media. The cover presents a side profile of French President Emmanuel Macron, jaw clenched and a stern look in his eyes. He is set on a white and red geometrical background. His costume represents the Champs-Élysées packed with people brandishing French flags and taking pictures. The cover title is barely legible. A literal translation could be: “From his inauguration to the “yellow vests”, the Macron presidency plays out on the Champs-Élysées.”

So, what is all the fuss about? Well, for many people in France – and other countries – the association of this exact side profile and a crowd of people raising one arm in the air is an obvious call back to Hitler’s ascent to power. Especially with the red, black and white colour scheme. Just look at the comparison tweet that is embedded in the article linked above. The image on the right is very recent: it is a 2017 Lincoln Agnew illustration for Harper’s magazine. But French readers will recognise each of its components from experience or from seeing them over and over again in school History books and documentaries.

To be fair, some on social media also identified a call back to communist propaganda with the use of the Russian constructivist imagery and colour scheme. Le Monde apologized, confirming the Russian constructivist angle of the cover.

What about the article then? Well, nobody really talked about the substance of the article on social media or elsewhere. I wanted to find out but New Year’s celebrations got in the way and the cover is what stayed with me. I suspect I might not be the only one.

Is the cover consistent with the article? You can read it if you have a subscription to Le Monde. In brief, the article details the important role that the Champs-Élysées avenue has played in Macron’s own ascent to power: his ties to the finance world, his inauguration parade, the Bastille Day parade that drew envy from Trump and was followed by the resignation of the Chief of the Defense staff, a police officer dying in a terrorist attack, the Les Bleus bus driving through the crowd after their 2018 Word Cup win, and the now famous “yellow vest” protests.

So, the article is somehow consistent with the cover title, but it is much more nuanced than the imagery and it can lead to various interpretations. Nevertheless, one can hardly imagine that the designers of this cover did not predict the controversy, the noise that it would create. Was the noise – or buzz – intentional? How many upset people bothered to read the article?

With the Web 2.0, anybody can communicate anything, and it is hard to stand out only on the merits of your message. Communicators need strategies to be heard: How should we package the message? Are all message components consistent? When should we broadcast our message? Should we look out for bad buzz or should we live by Oscar Wilde’s philosophy: “There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.”

Back in the Saddle?

Virtual Team Project – Week 1

So, here’s the deal. My fellow Limerick students and I have to participate in a virtual collaboration project with students in Orlando and Paris. Together, we need to write instructions for an online tool and then translate these instructions into French. That does seem in my wheelhouse… This past week was all about getting to know each other, assigning roles, and deciding the basics of our communication and management processes. Simple, right? Not so much when you have ten people spread over three countries and as many universities.

We saw quickly that we would not have a live online team meeting this week and we would have to rely on emails until everyone joined our Whatsapp group. Long email threads are not ideal, though they were the norm where I was a project manager so I might be more comfortable with them than my teammates.

I am a bit anxious at the thought of Whatsapp being our main means of communication. May I remind you that there are TEN of us? Have you ever tried to organise anything online with more than two people? Don’t get me wrong, a group chat is great: because it is informal, people may share their thoughts more freely. But is it adapted for structured communication and for making decisions? In my opinion, email or any other structured form of communication is still required to keep the focus on set objectives. One option: I may recap the chat daily (or as needed) to summarise what came of it.

Yes, I am the team’s project manager. That was not my intention as I thought the role could provide a useful experience for someone else. I had my eye on a localisation consultant/editor role. Eventually, I did take over planning this week and though I offered to step back, my teammates agreed to leave me this role. In my previous experience, the rules were more clear-cut – I made the decisions based on data from all the project stakeholders (internal client stakeholders, translators, proofreaders, post-localisation designers, reviewers, etc.). In this project, I think we will all benefit from having everyone participate in the decision-making process. So, the main challenge for me will be to foster structured individual engagement – in Whatsapp. Let’s see how this goes.

Welcome!

Every blog needs an introduction post…

Some background is in order, so here goes…

My name is Marie-Frédérique, I have been a French freelance translator since 2014. Before that, I was a project manager in the same industry for four years. Since last September, I am also a full-time MA student again – in Technical Communication & E-Learning – at the University of Limerick, Ireland.

I had mixed feelings about going back to university after eight years, somehow feeling less prepared than the first time when university was in the continuity of high school. But now, I feel more receptive and more ready. Being able to draw from my professional experience and to match what I learn with career goals gives me a clearer sense of purpose.

For example, this blog’s purpose is to reflect on what I learn during this MA, but in my case, it will also force me to step out of my comfort zone and share my own thoughts and contents publicly. This shall be my personal goal. [cue the “I don’t know what I’m doing” dog meme]

I hope the writing process gets easier. I’ll let you guess how long this first post took…