| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Should the translator be responsible for making changes as recommended by a reviewer? Thread poster: Mark Sanderson
|
|---|
| It's not unusual... | Jul 15, 2015 |
... and I must add that I prefer this practice over the total silence, as this allows me to accept or reject the changes made. In general, I accept them but reviewers (like translators) are not infallible!
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 04:04
Member (2008)
Italian to English
After working hard on a translation, checking it carefully, researching all my terminology, checking it again, printing if necessary, and checking again, and then delivering it, I'm always very reluctant to accept anyone else's suggestions as to better terminology or better phrases.
Moreover: acceptance of somebody else's "corrections" implies that I accept liability for having used the"wrong" words in the first place.
For these reasons, if anyone ever queries even a s... See more After working hard on a translation, checking it carefully, researching all my terminology, checking it again, printing if necessary, and checking again, and then delivering it, I'm always very reluctant to accept anyone else's suggestions as to better terminology or better phrases.
Moreover: acceptance of somebody else's "corrections" implies that I accept liability for having used the"wrong" words in the first place.
For these reasons, if anyone ever queries even a single word or comma in any of my translations, I normally reject all of them outright, except in rare cases. If necessary, I explain at length and in great detail, for each term that is queried, why I have chosen that word rather than another.
My client should assume that having commissioned me to do a translation, the translation I delivered to them is 100% correct and requires no changes. It's analogous to the situation of buying something, for example a car. The buyer must be able to assume that everything has been checked and is 100% operational.
[Edited at 2015-07-15 12:49 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Mark Sanderson 
United Kingdom
Local time: 04:04
Chinese to English
TOPIC STARTER | Feedback can be valuable | Jul 15, 2015 |
Feedback can be valuable
Thanks for all of the replies. I guess that I should take this feedback in a positive light and use it to see how I can improve my translations. Of course, not all reviewers are infallible and I will be sure to keep both eyes open as I am going through their corrections.
I think I will have to occupy the middle ground on this one by only checking the changes made by the reviewer, and not spending extra time giving the agency a fee-free full rech... See more Feedback can be valuable
Thanks for all of the replies. I guess that I should take this feedback in a positive light and use it to see how I can improve my translations. Of course, not all reviewers are infallible and I will be sure to keep both eyes open as I am going through their corrections.
I think I will have to occupy the middle ground on this one by only checking the changes made by the reviewer, and not spending extra time giving the agency a fee-free full recheck.
Thanks for all of the replies. ▲ Collapse
| | | | LEXpert
United States
Local time: 22:04
Member (2008)
Croatian to English
+ ...
| Keywords: "in the bilingual file" | Jul 15, 2015 |
Mark Sanderson wrote:
When I questioned them on this they stated, "the translator is responsible for updating the final bilingual file".
Mark
As I understood it, being required to make (i.e., recreate) the changes from the Word file in the bilingual file, when the editor has made the tracked changes in target file only, was the focus of Mark's question, not having to accept or reject changes in general.
Since most major CAT tools now have the ability to track changes in bilingual files, requests to update the bilingual separately are annoying and result in pointless duplication of effort by the translator.
| | |
|
|
|
| Use this as an opportunity to set things straight | Jul 15, 2015 |
As has been noted by others, this is fairly standard practice by some agencies, but this doesn't mean that you have to perform these extra read-throughs for free for the rest of your relationship with this agency.
If I were you, I'd tell the agency that you're happy to go through the edits this one time at no extra charge, but that for future projects you'll need to lay some ground rules. There are several ways to do this, but basically you want to let the agency know that you will ... See more As has been noted by others, this is fairly standard practice by some agencies, but this doesn't mean that you have to perform these extra read-throughs for free for the rest of your relationship with this agency.
If I were you, I'd tell the agency that you're happy to go through the edits this one time at no extra charge, but that for future projects you'll need to lay some ground rules. There are several ways to do this, but basically you want to let the agency know that you will charge extra money in the future if you're again asked to go through a bunch of (mostly) meaningless edits.
This approach makes good business sense all around: you're giving the agency a good deal this time, and have protected yourself for future projects. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 08:34
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | I prefer it that way | Jul 16, 2015 |
That is, to have the opportunity to have the final say on what happens to my translation. This way I can ensure that the reviews and editing and proofing are actually an improvement on my translation and not the opposite.
If the reviewer et all, have made too many changes which are unwarranted, I get back to the client with detailed clarifications as to why these changes are no improvements and should not be implemented.
I have faced this situation several times, where ... See more That is, to have the opportunity to have the final say on what happens to my translation. This way I can ensure that the reviews and editing and proofing are actually an improvement on my translation and not the opposite.
If the reviewer et all, have made too many changes which are unwarranted, I get back to the client with detailed clarifications as to why these changes are no improvements and should not be implemented.
I have faced this situation several times, where agencies have employed less competent translators/reviewers to review the translation and they have made changes for the sake of making changes. If the agencies had not referred back to me, these changes would have got implemented in the final translation and the client would have got an inferior translation for the money he is spending, and also, if someone notices this, my reputation as a translator would have got tarnished.
So I usually welcome clients bringing back reviewer changes to me. Besides, these changes also give me valuable feedback on how other competent translators view my translation and I have many times learned valuable translation lessons from the changes they have made to my translation. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | "Urgency" can be a problem | Jul 16, 2015 |
I'm quite happy to review a client's review of my work and make changes if I think they are justified.
As I said in this thread before, all too often the "reviewer" is not a native speaker of English and wants explanations of my (native) use of English grammar - and wants them "urgently" - when I'm already extremely busy with another (urgent) order.
I haven't time to give English lessons in those circumstances. It would be rude and unprofessional to ignore their request but sometimes... See more I'm quite happy to review a client's review of my work and make changes if I think they are justified.
As I said in this thread before, all too often the "reviewer" is not a native speaker of English and wants explanations of my (native) use of English grammar - and wants them "urgently" - when I'm already extremely busy with another (urgent) order.
I haven't time to give English lessons in those circumstances. It would be rude and unprofessional to ignore their request but sometimes I feel I just can't cope with supplying the explanations at that moment. What to do? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 04:04
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Jenny Forbes wrote:
What to do?
Give them extremely long and detailed explanations of the process you followed before deciding on using the particular terms you adopted, including why you rejected other options and what they were.
I've found that if you do this a couple of times, punctiliously and at great length, they stop asking.
| | |
|
|
|
| Being annoying | Jul 16, 2015 |
Thanks, Tom. A good idea to be annoying. I'm probably quite good at that but I like to have time to do it properly☺ and the problem with these non-native reviewers is that they want the explanations urgently and unpredictably when I'm working on another urgent job and haven't time to be seriously annoying. Heigh ho.
| | | |
You're not the agency's secretary, so updating the file to reflect their own preference is their own problem, as opposed to fixing actual errors and making a decision on the final version.
| | | |
Jack Doughty wrote:
This is not an unusual procedure. The translator can learn from it and has a chance to argue the case for his/her point of view.
Yes.
| | | |
I just make some comments on the changes I reject because they are false (just had that this week...).
But otherwise I see that as Lukasz: I am not the agency's secretary.
As I am no generalist, but only take projects on in my specialty fields I consider my translations as perfect. If someone does not like the style okay, that might happen because sometimes that's very subjective, but then he makes the changes himself or he pays me for it.
If I got another... See more I just make some comments on the changes I reject because they are false (just had that this week...).
But otherwise I see that as Lukasz: I am not the agency's secretary.
As I am no generalist, but only take projects on in my specialty fields I consider my translations as perfect. If someone does not like the style okay, that might happen because sometimes that's very subjective, but then he makes the changes himself or he pays me for it.
If I got another urgent project lack of time will sometimes make that this won't be possible though. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
It happens from time to time that agencies ask the translator to do this, but it takes time which is not included in my translation offer.
If I made an error then just tell me, I will take that into account for the next time, but I cannot take responsibility of modifications another person (often a newbie, because it is difficult to find 2 translators in my language pair) makes in my translation.
In general: if they are confident that my translation is so bad that it ... See more It happens from time to time that agencies ask the translator to do this, but it takes time which is not included in my translation offer.
If I made an error then just tell me, I will take that into account for the next time, but I cannot take responsibility of modifications another person (often a newbie, because it is difficult to find 2 translators in my language pair) makes in my translation.
In general: if they are confident that my translation is so bad that it needs a proofreader, then trust the proofreader.
The other workflow is to have two persons work on the same translation, up to them to deliver a perfect translation, but I only encountered this situation once in my life, 20 years ago. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Lincoln Hui
Hong Kong
Local time: 11:04
Member
Chinese to English
+ ...
| The other side of the fence | Oct 13, 2015 |
If I flagged something as an error, the translator better darn well change it. If I say it's wrong, it's wrong. Not preferential, because I would have said so. And it can get pretty amusing when a clearly incompetent translator attempts to defend a translation that wasn't even close to being in the right ballpark.
Case in point is a review of some video game-related translations that I did recently. I get these jobs from time to time and the translations that come through can be any... See more If I flagged something as an error, the translator better darn well change it. If I say it's wrong, it's wrong. Not preferential, because I would have said so. And it can get pretty amusing when a clearly incompetent translator attempts to defend a translation that wasn't even close to being in the right ballpark.
Case in point is a review of some video game-related translations that I did recently. I get these jobs from time to time and the translations that come through can be anywhere from quite excellent to absolutely dreadful. This particular one was perhaps no worse than some others, but there were some egregious errors and complete mistranslations that I marked as such.
In one case a segment was completely mistranslated, and I also pointed out that the translator had translated "nationality" into "race" (種族).
This morning the translator's response came back (exact quotes):
(My original comment): (In combination with next segment) Sentence is completely mistranslated. In addition, "race" is absolutely not an appropriate substitute for "nationality".
Translator: OK, but in https://hk.dictionary.yahoo.com/dictionary?p=nationality, it lists "ethnic group" as synonyms, which means "race" in Chinese as well.
Me: Abso-MF-lutely not you idiot. Now shut up while I beat you over the head with the dictionary, because we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place if you had bothered to read it and simply copied the first definition.
Other errors include translating "career" as occupation/profession rather than progress through course of life:
Translator: OK, but the oringinal translation is also right, please see: https://hk.dictionary.yahoo.com/dictionary?p=career
Me: No it's not you idiot, they're separate entries for a reason
Translation changed object reference of pronouns:
Translator: OK, but it is also preferential change, similar meaning.
Me: No it's not you idiot, they were talking about the apples and you're talking about the oranges.
So if you feel that a proofreader is overzealous, remember that there are many, many terrible translators out there and every proofreader has seen their share. You're not going to get the benefit of the doubt, at least not until you have some cred with the client.
[Edited at 2015-10-13 02:32 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Just do it.
Most agencies reject working with problematic translators that insist on their translations being 100 % perfect. Perfection doesn't exist.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Should the translator be responsible for making changes as recommended by a reviewer? | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
