Post‑editing vs. Full Translation — what’s right for you?
You don’t always need from‑scratch human translation. In many cases, post‑editing of machine translation (PEMT) delivers speed and savings without derailing objectives. In others, full human translation is the only safe path (legal, high‑impact marketing, safety‑critical). This guide helps you decide when to use each approach — with practical criteria, quality levels and the impact on cost, timeline and risk.
What’s what?
• Post‑editing (PEMT): a professional linguist edits MT output to a defined quality level (light or full), using glossaries, style guide and QA.
• Full translation: a human translator works from the source without MT to produce a faithful, fluent and contextualised target text, with review.
When to use each approach
Choose Post‑editing (PEMT) when:
- High volume + short deadlines (manuals, FAQs, knowledge base, tickets).
- Repetitive/technical content with established terminology.
- Moderate risk: occasional errors won’t cause legal liability or major reputational damage.Functional purpose: the priority is understanding and action, not persuasion.
Choose Full translation when:
• High risk: legal, compliance, contracts, HSE, regulatory, clinical.
• Brand voice and persuasion: marketing, main website, slogans, campaigns.
• Creative texts or those with cultural ambiguity/nuance.
• Formal requirements for audits/tenders (ISO, authorities, penalties and deadlines).
Quality levels in PEMT
• Light PE: fixes critical issues (meaning, grammar, key terminology). Ideal for internal use and time‑to‑market.
• Full PE: close to human‑translation quality, with fluent style. Ideal for publication with controlled risk.
Rule of thumb: Light PE = faster/cheaper; Full PE = higher quality/lower risk.
Typical impact (indicative)
• Timeline: PEMT is usually 1.5× to 3× faster than full translation (depending on domain/MT quality).
• Cost: PEMT tends to be 20–40% more economical than full translation when content is suitable.
• Risk: increases with creativity, ambiguity, legal obligations or when glossaries/style guides are missing.
(Values vary by domain, language pair and terminology maturity.)
Quick decision matrix
Use PEMT (Light/Full) if:
- Repetitive technical topic
- Existing glossary and style guide
- Low‑to‑medium publication risk
- Short deadlines / large volume
Use Full translation if:
- Legal/regulatory requirements
- Critical brand/marketing content
- High ambiguity/cultural nuance
- Zero error tolerance
How to maximise PEMT results
1) Train the engine with TMs and glossaries (where possible).
2) Define quality level (Light vs Full) per content type.
3) Style guide + domain termbase maintained by an owner.
4) Structured QA (ISO 17100): checklist, sampling, error metrics.
5) Feedback loop: feed corrections back into TM and glossary.
6) Security: ISO 27001‑compliant pipelines and NDAs for sensitive data
Ensuring quality in full translation
• Clear brief (audience, purpose, tone).
• Access to references (TMs, glossaries).
• Dual review where risk is high.
• Client validation for brand voice and claims.
Use cases (examples)
• PEMT (Full): 200k‑word technical knowledge base → published in 10 days, controlled terminology, sampled QA.
• Full translation: digital campaign for Iberia launch → persuasive tone, cultural adaptation, creative review.
What Consenso Global delivers
• Content audit: risk mapping by content type and recommended approach (Light/Full PEMT or full translation).
• Terminology management (ISO 17100): creation/optimisation of glossaries and TMs.
• Secure pipelines (ISO 27001): data protection, approved workflows, NDAs.
• Metrics & SLAs: turnaround, error rate, terminology consistency, satisfaction.
Quick FAQ
Conclusion
There’s no one‑size‑fits‑all. Decide by risk, purpose and content value. With clear criteria you gain speed, consistency and ROI — while keeping quality where it matters most.
