Assessed Exercise 3 :: Text 2 ::

Google, Apple and Microsoft Knuckle Under to Telcos

If you think Google, Microsoft and Apple are bad-ass, cutthroat, take-no-prisoner companies, you should meet the nation’s wireless carriers, who have collectively convinced those intensively competitive software giants to cripple their products.Need any more proof that the nation’s four largest wireless carriers – AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile – have too much control over the airwaves, what phones you can use and what applications you can run on them?

Look no further than Microsoft’s release this week of its 12 commandments for developers working on apps for the upcoming Windows Mobile 6.5 OS and for its Windows Mobile Marketplace — it’s upcoming iPhone app store competitor. Number 4 rule? Don’t make apps that let users make phone calls using the mobile phone carrier’s data connection.

That restriction joins Microsoft to Google and Apple, all of which now all block true VOIP apps in their online marketplaces where users can quickly buy trusted apps from third-party developers. That means no Skype, or at least only Skype when your iPhone has a WiFi connection, or only Skype-Lite which uses your phone’s minute plans.

Let’s get this straight. Google won’t sell more Android phones by crippling them. Nor will Win Mobile phones be more attractive because of Microsoft won’t let a useful program for business users into its store. Oh, and Apple’s iPhone certainly isn’t more cool for having crippled Skype on behalf of AT&T.

Skype has hundreds of millions of registered users, and a very dedicated fan base. Why would the three of the largest software companies in the world intentionally cripple their products in the exact same way, when not crippling them would give them a competitve advantage.

Still, the nation’s top carriers keep telling Congress and the FCC that there’s plenty of competition in the mobile marketplace.

But, we’ve said it before, and we’ll keep saying it: FCC, free the airwaves! Free the devices! Free the apps!

Part 1

Cripple  ———————————–>  Inutilizar

On behalf  of —————————>  En nombre de…

Part 2

Take-no-prisoner companies  ——–>  Empresas que “explotan” a sus empleados

Look no further—————————->  Sin mirar más allá

Let´s get this straight  ——————-> Vamos a aclarar esto

Assessed Exercise 3 :: Text 1 ::

Energy of the Future: Igniting a Star With Laser Light

LIVERMORE, California – It may look like one of Michael Bay’s Transformers, but this mass of machinery could soon be the birthplace of a baby star right here on Earth.

Using 192 separate lasers and a 400-foot-long series of amplifiers and filters, scientists at Lawrence Livermore’s National Ignition Facility (NIF) hope to create a self-sustaining fusion reaction like the ones in the sun or the explosion of a nuclear bomb — only on a much smaller scale.

Sci-fi-inspired End of Days jokes may follow this historic undertaking like they did for CERN’s Large Hadron Collider, but the science behind this advanced laser system is profoundly serious.

“Completion of the NIF construction project is a major milestone for the NIF team, for the nation and the world,” said Edward Moses, the facility’s principal associate director for NIF and photon science. “We are well on our way to achieving what we set out to do — controlled nuclear fusion and energy gain for the first time ever in a laboratory setting.”

The hope is that this reaction will release more energy than the lasers put into the target isotopes and perhaps redefine the global energy crisis in the process.

Wired.com visited the National Ignition Facility just as the final lasers were coming on line. Read on for a virtual tour of one of the most sophisticated scientific facilities on the planet.

In the enormous target chamber, the 192 laser beams enter the blue, 33-foot-in-diameter vacuum chamber where they will collide with a target roughly the size of a peppercorn.

The beams start out in a different part of the facility as lower powered infrared light, similar to what’s inside your DVD player. Next, the lasers pass through a complex series of amplifiers, filters and mirrors  in order to become powerful and precise enough to create self-sustaining fusion.

Part 1

Undertaking ————————> Empresa/Tarea

Milestone  —————————-> Hito

Collide  ——————————–> Chocar/Colisionar

Part 2

Self-sustaining fusion reaction  ———————–>  Reacción de fusión auto-alimentada

33-foot-in-diameter vacuum chamber  ————>  Cámara de vacío de 33 pies de diámetro en el interior

Lower powered infrared light  ————————->  Luz infraroja de baja potencia

Assessed Exercise 2

Translation and Project Management are being a close words because the globalization, and as the time happens this is being even more solid.

People needs to work together in order to improve and make wider the area of knowledge of their products.

Translation is the tool to make it easier and to join those parts interested in working together.

The process of a translation will be the same in most of the cases, but the result it will be adapted depending the client’s work area.

A translation process begins with a Request for Quoting and commissioning; the project manager receives a bid for translating a particular item, and the immediate action is to define client’s need making a feasibility study. If the study is passed then it’s time to make a planning bearing in mind the time, cost, team members working on it…

Once the ‘planning is made starts the translation phase, the core of the project. Succed at this phase depends of the well work done before at the other phases.

Finally, the wind-up stage should be considered as important as the rest. This phase it’s based in consistency, grammar check, detection of  any missing fragments and testing of the applications.

Quality is about stakeholders’ satisfaction, about work efficiency, about team cohesion, about control and communication techniques. Quality involves all aspects of project management and, in translation, affects both the process and the product.

From the standpoint of quality as a deontological issue, the European Translation Platform has prepared The European Code of Practice for Translators, Interpreters and Translation Companies, a document summarizing the elements which make up best practice in these profession

Some Concepts

• Dynamic equivalence: AKA functional equivalence, attempts to convey the thought, meaning and pragmatic intention expressed in a source text.
• Formal equivalence: Is essentially the same as word-for-word translation.
• Source language: Language in which the text to be translated is written.
• Source text: The text to be translated.
• Target language: Language into which a text is going to be translated.
• Target text: The translation, the result of the translation process.
• Text type: Class of text with specific characteristics of style, sentence formation, terminology, etc.

Assessed Exercise 1

Scientific Texts are own of each speciality, in wich there ir a use of a specilized lexicon, by the use of concises phrases and avoiding ambiguous structures. Both of them, submiter and receiver, are at the same communication level.

Once we want to translate a scientific text, we can find a kinf of words or structures to take into consideration. Each one of this will be used to give the text the desired sense; Borrowings, Calques, Literal Translations, Modulations, Reformulations, Adaptations and Compensations.

Terminology, from a concept oriented perspective, can be defined as: “a group of concepts of a especialized area and their associated signs.” As a secon definition, from a term oriented perspective: ” the items which are characterized by special reference within a discipline are the terms of that discipline, and collectivelly they from its terminology.”

There are 3 basic concepts in Terminology:

• Object: “Any part of the perceivable or conceivable world”, can be material or immaterial.
• Concept: “A unit of thought constituted through abstraction on the basis of properties common to a set of objects.”
• Term: “Designation of a defined concept in a special language by a linguistic expression.”

The concept-oriented terminology approach is more adequate for translators because they work with more than one language and only concept-oriented entries can be mono- , bi- or multilingual.