The Post-Editing Workflow: Training Challenges for LSP s, Post-Editors and Academia (2021)

Abstract: Language technology is already largely adopted by most Language Service Providers (LSPs) and integrated into their traditional translation processes. In this context, there are many different approaches to applying Post-Editing (PE) of a machine translated text, involving different workflow processes and steps that can be more or less effective and favorable. In the present paper, we propose a 3-step Post-Editing Workflow (PEW). Drawing from industry insight, this paper aims to provide a basic framework for LSPs and Post-Editors on how to streamline Post-Editing workflows in order to improve quality, achieve higher profitability and better return on investment and standardize and facilitate internal processes in terms of management and linguist effort when it comes to PE services. We argue that a comprehensive PEW consists in three essential tasks: Pre-Editing, Post-Editing and Annotation/Machine Translation (MT) evaluation processes (Guerrero, 2018) supported by three essential roles: Pre-Editor, Post-Editor and Annotator (Gene, 2020). Furthermore, the pre-sent paper demonstrates the training challenges arising from this PEW, supported by empirical research results, as reflected in a digital survey among language industry professionals (Gene, 2020), which was conducted in the context of a Post-Editing Webinar. Its sample comprised 51 representatives of LSPs and 12 representatives of SLVs (Single Language Vendors) representatives.

## introduction the role of the post-editor was first mentioned almost thirty years ago. however, the skills, competences, tasks and processes related to this role need to be revised in light of the rising significance of mt @xcite and the translation workflow needs to be human-centered to offer advantages for all stakeholders @xcite . the use of translation memories (tms) and mt in the localization workflow paved the way for the exploration of new methods of producing higher-volume translations at lower costs while maintaining quality. this resulted in new translation workflows including pre-editing and pe of raw output and the creation of new guidelines to support the work in this environment and the training of translators @xcite . according to @xcite , even if the pre-editing and post-editing of raw output have been implemented in some organizations since the 1980s, it is only in the last ten years that machine translation post-editing (mtpe) has been introduced as a part of the standard translation workflow in most localization agencies worldwide @xcite ). as a result, the need of training in the ways that technology affects the standard translation workflow and the agents involved in the process becomes a priority. ## the training challenges of the pew we may envision the translators at the very center of the post-editing process, using the computer and deciding how to best combine the materials they have on hand at each part of the process, either glossaries, translation memories or machine translation engines @xcite . the training challenges of the pew, including pre-editing, post-editing and error annotation, are examined in relation to three groups: post-editors, lsps and universities based on a digital survey among language industry professionals (gene, 2020). ## conclusions as we have attempted to highlight throughout this paper, post-editing is actually but one step in the optimal workflow. industry experience shows that, in practice, language service providers rarely stick to this 3-step comprehensive workflow, with preediting and annotation steps often skipped, and consequently fail to profit from a real return on investment. however, unless pre-editing and annotation procedures are applied we could argue that the whole process is at best ineffective or even futile; without these a post-editing project is merely a one-off that simply saves the linguist and client some time through the use of mt technology, but bears no real value for the company supporting it. for this reason, lsps should revise their standard practices and establish a workflow that is both profitable and sustainable in the long term by making the most of available technologies. to sum up, on the one hand, lsps should bear in mind that post-editing is best suited to larger volumes (over 100k tus). on the other hand, they should not forget that human processes such as pre-editing and annotation are the keys to achieving a better return on investment in the long term. workflows limited to mt and post-editing processes do not constitute an effective strategy with long-term profitable results, but only temporary discounts. in order to enjoy the real benefits of integrating postediting to their list of offered services, an investment should be made in the complete, optimal post-editing workflow. regarding the training challenges arising as a result of the pew, the suggestion is to abandon the current machine-centered paradigm and work with all stakeholders towards a translator-centered process, in which the post-editor is transformed in a translation expert applying critical thinking, problem-solving and decision-making skills not only being involved to correct the errors stubbornly produced by the mt system signed, and courses explained and described, by doherty et al. (2012), doherty and moorkens (2013), doherty and kenny (2014), @xcite and @xcite but having a vital role in each and every step of the workflow @xcite . the derived data on training challenges among the stakeholder will serve for further analysis and speculations for future problem-solving and more specific training pathways. the closer interaction between the academia and the lsps during the traineeships with a common training model agreed between them would be interesting to be examined along with the evaluations of lsps and the queries of post-editors, which could feed the pe teaching models of the universities. bridging the distance between the different stakeholders (lsps, post-editors and academia) through training is the key to the enlargement of the translation industry. translators should be encouraged to embrace mt processes and companies to integrate post-editors into their processes, investing in the linguist-focused and not the machine-centered processes for higher quality and productivity.