OR – A riddle AI couldn’t crack

Perhaps you too have struggled with a glossary that was more hindrance than help? If not, you must be an escape artist!

In the world of institutional and corporate translation, glossaries and termbases have become omnipresent, and sacred. People treat them like the stone tablets Moses brought down from the mountain. What began as a blessing and a helpful tool to ensure consistency and accuracy has, in many cases, evolved into a rigid framework that can stifle the translator’s creativity and ignore the finer nuances – indeed the richness and playfulness – of language.

Termbases are no longer a mere tool, they are fast turning into a tyrant. Originally, they were the repository for a company’s key terms, helping translators navigate specialized terminology and maintain coherence across projects. They came with definitions, or an indication of context. Nowadays, however, in many organizations, they have evolved into an ever-expanding 1:1 list – sometimes hundreds or thousands of entries long – covering not just rigid, technical terms, but words that are part of everyday language and can take on different meanings. The result? Translators are forced to shoehorn prescribed terms into every context, even when they don’t fit naturally, or at all.

Breaches in the use of glossary entries are perhaps the most frequent cause of complaints in the context of translation projects, and eagle-eyed reviewers across the world are on the lookout, catching culprits who have dared to ignore a term and introduce something new.

Some companies do not stop at terms; they extend their prescriptions to phrases and sentences. Instead of providing a clear glossary, they expect translators to comb through all previous publications to find and replicate the exact terms or phrases used before. This “reference mining” approach can be even more restrictive (and of course terribly time-consuming), as it demands not just consistency in terminology, but in style, sentence structure, and even idiomatic expressions. Much as I like the idea of the circular economy and the recycling of valuable resources, I do not agree that we should extend this to language.

Why do we keep seeing “anywhere, anytime, anyhow” (as in: With our cloud-based platform you can access your files anywhere, anytime, anyhow – whether you are …”, or “Our fitness app lets you work out anywhere, anytime, anyhow…”, etc. etc. Needless to say, these phrases then get echoed in other languages (Wo immer, wann immer, wie immer Sie wollen; N’importe où, n’importe quand, n’importe comment…). Believe me, I have tried to circumvent this many times by using alternative phrases, but my efforts were mostly shot down.

Why do we keep seeing the same collocations over and over again? I am sure you too are tired of: seamless integration; seamless user experience; cutting-edge technology; state-of-the-art design; user-friendly interface; highly personalized service; innovative solutions; real-time insights; the ever-changing business landscape; out-of-the-box solutions… – and can no doubt extend this list. Will we be stuck with these forever? Might it be time for something different? Not as long as these phrases are cluttering up our termbases!

Uniformity at the expense of style

• Loss of Variety: When every word and phrase is dictated, the richness and flexibility of the target language are lost. Texts become repetitive, mechanical, bland and uninspiring. Monotonous.
• Stifled Voice: Translators are reduced to “term matchers” rather than writers, with fewer and fewer options when it comes to adapting a text to the audience or the intended purpose.
• Reader Fatigue: Overly uniform language can make documents dull and harder to engage with, especially when the same phrases are repeated ad nauseam, and when synonyms are not permitted.

Consistency vs. Communication

While consistency is important – especially for branding, legal clarity, or technical accuracy -there is a tipping point where it undermines the very goal of communication. Language is inherently flexible and context-dependent; what works in one document may not work in another.

Technology’s Double-Edged Sword

CAT tools, translation memories, and AI-driven termbases make it easier than ever to enforce uniformity. But they also risk turning translators into mere operators, stripping away the human judgment that makes translation an art as well as a science. Probably the best illustration of this is when you run an automated quality assurance tool. This will tell you that “drop” was not translated as “Tropfen” but as “Sturz” in a risk-prevention scenario; or that “driver” was not translated as “Druckertreiber” but as “Fahrer” in a case study about autonomous cars; or that “operator” should not be “Bediener” but “Operator”.

A Plea for Balance

• Trust the Translator: Rigid glossaries should be guidelines, not shackles. Trust professional translators to know when to follow and when to adapt.
• Prioritize Communication: The ultimate goal is to communicate clearly and effectively, not just to tick boxes for consistency.
• Encourage Dialogue: Clients and translators should work together to refine glossaries and allow for justified exceptions.

And since more and more translation is now done without (much) interference from human, and AI relies totally on the glossaries it’s being fed, this may well be our last chance to weed out all those unnecessary terms – giving some freedom back to the human or the machine.

Conclusion

Without any doubt, glossaries and reference materials are invaluable tools, but they should serve the translator (human or AI), who will use them with caution – and intelligence, rather than being their slave. By allowing for flexibility and trusting in the translator’s expertise, organizations can achieve both consistency and compelling, authentic communication. Remember: A translator is not a parrot with a termbase!