Even if you only produce documentation in a single language and don’t deal with an international audience, using consistent terminology matters.

SDL recently released the results of a terminology survey that they conducted earlier this year. The study is an interesting review on the trends and opinions on the subject of terminology management.

They asked two groups about terminology management: a business audience and translators.

When asked what they considered to be the most important impact of inconsistent terminology, the business audience replied the quality of the content, internal communication and customer satisfaction. Inconsistent terminology also impacts the cost of translation and branding.

Three departments are largely responsible for owning the terminology in a company: Technical Publications, Translation/Localisation, and Marketing. They’re responsible for the management, maintenance and approval of terminology.

The most common internal process they used for managing terminology were style guides and spreadsheets to store terms. Over 35% of the business respondents said that they keep their terminology in a style guide. However, only 50% shared their terminology lists with other departments in the company.

This lack of sharing with other departments obviously increases the risk that departments could be using different terms for the same meaning. And yet, as so many departments in a company use common terminology—not just technical publications and marketing—it’s a lost opportunity not to collaborate in sharing terminology to ensure consistency.

All parties taking part in the survey agreed that the problems related to inconsistent terminology start with the source documentation. Indeed 40% of translators said that they frequently encountered inconsistent terminology.
The translators said that the main impact of inconsistent terminology is on translation quality, style and consistency, client satisfaction and their productivity. These are the parameters often used to measure a translator’s success and performance. We can conclude from this that consistent terminology makes the translator’s work much easier as well as improving quality.

An interesting point shown in the survey is how few companies take responsibility for their terminology in the localization stage. The translators said that only 15% of clients drove terminology management. Terminology management just isn’t part of the localization strategy of many companies (they do have a localisation content strategy, right?). Indeed it’s more likely that the translator takes ownership of terminology than the company that created the source documentation being translated. We put all that effort in creating a document and then practically abandon control over it when it moves to another language.

An example: Same meaning, different terms

Over the years my company has been through various acquisitions and mergers. Being a global company, content is also created across the globe by different groups. The content is often then reused in different documents. All this has provided many opportunities for inconsistency in our terminology. For example, the following six terms have all appeared in our product datasheets.

• Operating temperature
• Temperature range
• Temperature
• Working temperature
• Operating temperature range
• Ambient temperature range

Unfortunately these terms all describe the same feature: the operating temperature of a product.

The datasheets were subsequently translated into multiple languages. The inconsistency in the English source terminology has bred inconsistency across the other languages—a domino effect. We’ve found that, for example, we have four different ways to say “operating temperature” in French and three different ways in Spanish (I gave up counting for the other languages). This inconsistency with just one term illustrates the widespread impact that poor terminology management can have across multiple documents and languages.

SDL’s survey clearly showed that terminology needs to be managed during the whole content life cycle, from the moment we decide a source document is needed through to the localisation of the content.

Gripe no. 1. Where did “Why?” go?

Nothing is more frustrating when reading a manual than when the instructions only seem to focus on “How” to do something without telling me “Why” I need to do it.

Gripe no. 2. Receiving a manual for localisation that has serious usability problems.

It really is a waste of time and money getting such documents translated. Good translators will pick out inconsistencies and ask how to handle them (try answering such a question about a product you didn’t document but need the answer quickly.) There’s the real risk that in-country reviewers will then rewrite the translated manual to try to improve the content with the result the translated manual no longer matches the English source one and you may well incur extra charges from the translation agency as the translator now has to do extra work to update the translation memories. And then the customer probably won’t use the manual and will phone Tech Support instead. I can think of better ways to blow several thousand euros without annoying customers.

Gripe no. 3. Poor public signage.

Street names are like chapter titles for streets. They tell you where you are. Some cities are terrible at placing street names on every street corner and placing them so they can be easily seen by pedestrians and drivers (not two stories up the side of the building or just simply missing, for example.) Of course, once you do find that elusive street, you’re assuming the buildings are then clearly numbered…

Gripe no. 4. Why does it rain once I clean the windows?

I have to have some reason why I don’t clean them.

When selling products in Europe, how do we decide into which languages we should translate our user documentation? This is a potentially expensive, yet important, question.

In an ideal world, we would translate the documentation into the language of every country in which we sell our products. However, not only could this be prohibitively expensive, it might also be a waste of money and time. Not all products or audiences may require a translated user manual. Yet by not providing the documentation in a language of a country, we might be breaking that country’s laws. In this era of tight budgets and deadlines, it’s important to know how to select which languages are required for our markets.

When planning the localisation requirements of our documentation, we should consider the following criteria:

1. Legally required languages
2. Legally recommended languages
3. Commercial decision

Always seek the advice of the company’s legal department to get guidelines specific for your products and markets.

Legally required

What we’re selling will play a deciding role in determining which languages are provided to customers. Medical and life safety products, such as fire alarm systems, have much more demanding legal requirements for translation than products with no such impact. As a life safety product even if we sell only one smoke detector in Iceland, for example, we’d have to translate the user instructions into Icelandic.

And the law doesn’t stay still. Recently, the European Union directive for medical devices was updated, requiring software to be now translated. A useful article for information on the legal aspects of localisation is Who is afraid of clinical data requirements?

Regulatory information often must be translated. For some European Union (EU) directives, the information provided to end users must translated into the official EU languages. Examples of such directives are those for WEEE and battery disposal. So some regulatory information may need to be provided to users in more languages than the user manual itself. For more information on regulatory issues across many sectors in the European Union, go to the European Commission’s industry sectors overview.

Several European countries legally require user documentation for any product to be translated into the local language. If selling products in France or Germany, we must translate the software and instructions for use into the local language. The instructions for use can be in print or digital format (for example, PDF, Web, Help…) Further information on the French law can be found in this article about Toubon Law.

Russian and Ukrainian laws insist that the end user and installation documentation be translated into Russian for products to be legally sold in these countries.

And we also need to be aware if our company has any contractual agreements with customers to provide the product documentation in selected languages.

Legally recommended

Unfortunately, sometimes there can be grey areas surrounding translation requirements for some countries. In such situations, seek the advice from the legal department. Although a country may not legally require the user documentation to be translated, if that country’s market is commercially important to a company, the legal department may decide that user documentation must be translated.

Commercial decision

In this situation, languages are selected for purely for commercial reasons. Product managers select the languages required for software and documentation depending on market demands.

We need to know the impact of legal requirements when planning the localisation of documentation. Work closely with the product managers and legal department when selecting the languages required. And develop written guidelines to help all parties in the company know what legal requirements the software and technical documentation must meet in the international marketplace.

We often hear about the advantages of being fluent in a second language such as when visiting a foreign country on holiday. It’s easier to eat, drink and be merry when you can speak with those around you. But what about the professional advantages?

I’ve been reading a few blogs and newspaper articles recently that discuss multilingualism.

• The Language Bridge
• Web pages for the EU Commissioner for Multilingualism
• Column in the Guardian about British linguistic skills

They have made me think about our profession, technical communication, and how it connects with other languages and cultures. We now work in a global marketplace and increasingly are involved with planning, writing, and distributing documentation that cross linguistic and cultural borders. Although most of us work and write in English, does it help us professionally as technical writers to be fluent in other languages? Are employers interested in such a skill?

If you’re based in Europe having another language certainly gives you more freedom to move between countries for work, particularly if you hold an EU passport. Fluency helps us deal with the various bureaucracies that invariably arrive when living in a different country. We become more aware of the diversity of life and can take part in it. We can speak with colleagues in their language. I’m fluent in French so can communicate with my colleagues in France, Belgium and Switzerland in their language, which they appreciate. Communication becomes more shared.

English today is the global linga franca. As a result many English speakers unfortunately don’t see the point in learning another language. Are many of the professional advantages of having a second language only apparent when you are the foreigner rather than the language? My last two jobs both preferred candidates to have a second language as well as good English. Admittedly both were in French-speaking countries.

Yet I think having another language is useful professionally even if you’re not based in a foreign country. We know what it’s like to read technical documents in a second language. Although such fluency isn’t a requirement when writing for a global market, it can help us to be more aware of the consequences of writing clear, concise, and direct information that is easy to translate as well as understood by those reading in their second language.

The practicalities of localisation can become more “alive”. Simply reading documents in other languages can help us appreciate the impact of such issues as text expansion due to translation (particularly around graphics) and inconsistent terminology. In some of my company’s datasheets I discovered that we had six different ways of writing “operating temperature” in English, which translated into four different ways in French and three in Spanish. Ouch!

If you’re fluent in more than one language, what advantages has it brought you professionally in your work as a technical communicator?

Visit the Europe SIG’s updated web site regularly

This is the easiest resolution to keep because you’re here already – just  take a look round our brand new site and come back as often as you can. If you’d like to contribute, please contact our web manager, Karen Mardahl (k.mardahl@gmail.com)

Renew your STC membership

Although money is tight for everyone this year, STC membership gives you access to a worldwide community of technical communicators, writers, editors, illustrators, and educators, that you simply can’t get anywhere else. If you want to keep moving forward with your career, can you afford to let your professional affiliation lapse?

Volunteer to help the STC Europe SIG

You can get even more out of your STC membership not only by staying a member of the Europe SIG, but by giving up a little of your own time and effort to help the SIG move forward. We are still STC’s youngest and smallest Special Interest Group, and we need as much help as we can get. Being a SIG volunteer means that you help decide what kinds of activities the SIG promotes, and how we communicate with our members. So please, even if you can only manage a couple of hours a month, do get in touch. If you’d like to help with the SIG elections please contact Derek Torres (derekctorres@gmail.com). If you’d like to help with anything else, please contact me (david@farbey.co.uk) or Jen O Neill (writer@jennifer-oneill.eu).

With sincere good wishes for the coming year,

David

There is still time to volunteer to serve on the SIG nominations committee, or to be a candidate for a place on the SIG’s management team. Many members of the Europe SIG already contribute their time and efforts to support STC activities in many ways, and we are sure that everyone who does so would agree that being an STC volunteer is a richly rewarding experience.

A little background

The STC Europe SIG was established in 2007 following a petition to the STC Board by interested members with the organizers of the petition, David Farbey and Jen O Neill, being confirmed by the Board as interim co-managers. The SIG began recruiting members in the November 2007 – January 2008 membership renewal season and now has over 180 members. You may be interested to know that only about half our members live in Europe.

During 2008, Jen and David were joined by three other volunteer members who help them run the STC Europe SIG: Alice Jane Emanuel as membership manager, Derek Torres as newsletter manager, and Karen Mardahl as website manager. As we approach the end of our first full year as a SIG, and approach another STC membership renewal season, it is time for us to hold elections for SIG management posts for the very first time.

We do hope that you will consider volunteering some of your time to help run the STC Europe SIG over the next year. Volunteering to help run an STC SIG does not take up a lot of your time, and almost all the work involved can be carried out online from the comfort of your own home or office. (Some SIG activities do take place at the STC’s annual conference.) Being an STC volunteer can be a very rewarding experience, particularly in a SIG such as ours where you will be in contact with STC members from all over the world. If you would like to know more about what might be involved, please contact one of the SIG co-managers.

All the roles held by our current volunteer team are open for election, and any member of the SIG, including the current officeholders, may be nominated as a candidate for election. Members may also nominate themselves. Members should also suggest additional roles that may help running the SIG’s activities (for example, an online programs manager, or perhaps an annual conference activities manager).

Timeline

The timeline and process for the proposed election is as follows:

• Recruit two volunteers to serve on the Europe SIG nominations committee by 19 December 2008
• Invite nominations and self-nominations for all roles in the Europe SIG management team by 16 January 2009
• Publish slate of candidates for all roles in the Europe SIG management team by 6 February 2009
• Hold online elections for all roles in the Europe SIG management team in March or April 2009

If you are interested in helping in some way, however small, please contact our nominations committee manager, Derek Torres (derekctorres@gmail.com), or contact one of the SIG co-managers David Farbey (david@farbey.co.uk) and Jen O Neill (writer@jennifer-oneill.eu).

Europe SIG Management Team June 2008

David Farbey and Jen O’Neill are the true brains behind the creation of the SIG. They are starting the fun as the co-managers of the SIG. Karen Mardahl is kicking off the basic website for the SIG, but looks forward to seeing posts and discussions from all members on the site. Alice Jane Emanuel manages membership and discussion lists very nicely. Who knows when we will have our next photo op – a UK event, the 2009 conference in Atlanta? At least you know they can always be found here at the Europe SIG’s new home on the World Wide Web.

Logo for the Europe SIG

The challenges faced by technical communicators in Europe, which include meeting the imperatives of multi-language publications, ensuring conformity with a changing regulatory environment, and working in diverse cultures and languages (and perhaps different versions of English), are often greater than those felt by their colleagues in other regions. But dealing with Europe-specific issues is also increasingly important for technical communicators outside Europe due to the advancing globalisation of industries, technologies, and marketplaces. The STC Europe SIG is one of the ways in which these challenges can be addressed.

The Europe SIG seeks advance the purposes of the Society by working with individuals and groups across Europe to promote technical communication. The Europe SIG can give STC members who are based in Europe a collective voice in what happens in their region and will seek to establish a dialogue with existing organisations, such as TC-Europe, in a spirit of sharing and co-operation and not as a competitor. Its establishment also creates an enduring framework for trans-European initiatives such as conferences and the Europe-wide technical communications competition. It aims to help share information between members on dealing with the challenges and opportunities of working across Europe. The Europe SIG’s goal is to complement, not compete with, the activities of geographical communities in the region.

If you’re interested in joining a team focussed on European issues related to technical communication, then join the Europe SIG. Membership of the Europe SIG is open to any STC member who is interested in European technical communications issues, irrespective of where they are based.

For further information about the SIG, contact the interim co-managers:
Jennifer O Neill (France Chapter) writer at jennifer-oneill.eu
David Farbey (UK Chapter) david at farbey.co.uk