| Pages in topic: [1 2] > | Poll: What do you do when client's proofreaders make unnecessary changes to your translation? Thread poster: ProZ.com Staff
|
|---|
This forum topic is for the discussion of the poll question "What do you do when client's proofreaders make unnecessary changes to your translation?".
View the poll results »
| | | | neilmac
Spain
Local time: 22:45
Spanish to English
+ ...
Rush out to the nearest esoteric shop and buy a voodoo doll and a bunch of pins.
But seriously, it happened to me just the other day with an article I had translated for publication in a professional journal. Although the journal's guidelines do not stipulate any preference for the variant of English used, most of their reviewers, especially the non-native English-speaking ones, tend to prefer American English and spelling. What is really galling is that the editor's comments of "t... See more Rush out to the nearest esoteric shop and buy a voodoo doll and a bunch of pins.
But seriously, it happened to me just the other day with an article I had translated for publication in a professional journal. Although the journal's guidelines do not stipulate any preference for the variant of English used, most of their reviewers, especially the non-native English-speaking ones, tend to prefer American English and spelling. What is really galling is that the editor's comments of "the manuscript requires a thorough revision of the English " is obviously just a set template-type response. After the initial revision, the manuscript was again sent back with the same comment, so the authors asked me to check the changes made, and apart from the occasional stylistic preference inserted by the reviewer, the only difference was that he had gone through and systematically changed all the British English spellings to American. However, rather than kick and scream and try to defend our position, I simply advised the authors to accept all the changes in order to get the darn thing published. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 21:45
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Proofreaders have a vested interest in looking for errors and quibbling about nuances. Their entire existence is based on the premise that the translator should never be trusted. That's a very poor basis for working with people who have professional standards to uphold and whose success or failure depends on always turning in a good job.
On the other hand, seeing it from the agency's point of view, the translation industry is infested with charlatans who can barely express themselv... See more Proofreaders have a vested interest in looking for errors and quibbling about nuances. Their entire existence is based on the premise that the translator should never be trusted. That's a very poor basis for working with people who have professional standards to uphold and whose success or failure depends on always turning in a good job.
On the other hand, seeing it from the agency's point of view, the translation industry is infested with charlatans who can barely express themselves in their own language, never mind translating somebody else's; so it's only to be expected that agencies will employ proofreaders to protect them from the cowboys and cowgirls. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | I send a comment to the client | May 24, 2021 |
It depends very much on what type of changes have been made. In fact I often accept them, if they are purely style, or the proofreader knows the end user better than I do.
On the other hand, if I am carefully complying with the user's style guide, or it is something I have researched and considered, I don't accept changes without questioning them.
There have been occasions when I have written and rewritten a sentence a dozen times... and the proofreader changes it to a ... See more It depends very much on what type of changes have been made. In fact I often accept them, if they are purely style, or the proofreader knows the end user better than I do.
On the other hand, if I am carefully complying with the user's style guide, or it is something I have researched and considered, I don't accept changes without questioning them.
There have been occasions when I have written and rewritten a sentence a dozen times... and the proofreader changes it to a version I rejected.
I have my personal style, which some clients like, but others don't. If a good proofreader can make my text usable for the second category, then fine, but if someone just messes my text up, I let them know!
I try to think what I would do when proofreading someone else's text - in general I try to make as few changes as possible. If I only delete a couple of double spaces and correct a typo, then send it back with my compliments to the translator, it actually makes my day! ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
I don’t know how many of my translations are proofread, with the exception of two agencies which always send changes to be accepted. In the case of these two agencies I have been working with the same team and we proofread each others’ work. They are good, accurate and pleasant proofreaders and I have tried to do the same for them. There have been cases where I have just added a comma or deleted blank spaces between words. I must say also that in the process, I have learned a lot. Over the y... See more I don’t know how many of my translations are proofread, with the exception of two agencies which always send changes to be accepted. In the case of these two agencies I have been working with the same team and we proofread each others’ work. They are good, accurate and pleasant proofreaders and I have tried to do the same for them. There have been cases where I have just added a comma or deleted blank spaces between words. I must say also that in the process, I have learned a lot. Over the years (11 altogether), we developed an excellent professional relationship and I don’t remember a single case of an unnecessary change, maybe because most of my translations are proofread in-house before delivery. Anyway, translation is not an exact science and we all have preferences… ▲ Collapse
| | | | | It’s a dirty job... | May 24, 2021 |
Tom in London wrote:
Proofreaders have a vested interest in looking for errors and quibbling about nuances. Their entire existence is based on the premise that the translator should never be trusted. That's a very poor basis for working with people who have professional standards to uphold and whose success or failure depends on always turning in a good job.
They certainly do not have a vested interest in finding errors and quibbling about nuances. The fewer issues they find, the sooner they can go home.
They play the same role as quality control in any industry: minimising errors. How that can be fundamentally wrong, Tom, I do not know.
My work is rarely checked, but even rarer is for the checker to make absolutely no improvements at all.
That said, I am definitely a paid-up member of the voodoo-doll-toys-out-of-pram school.
| | | | | It depends... | May 24, 2021 |
If the changes - even stylistic - make my translation better, then I accept them. If they contain mistakes - grammar, etc. - I correct the mistakes and, if the rest is ok, I accept it, but I write to the client to point this out.
| | | | Baran Keki 
Türkiye
Local time: 23:45
Member
English to Turkish
| Translators should not be proofreaders | May 24, 2021 |
This very morning I received the back translated version of my original translation where the client (meaning the agency's client who asked for the back translation) asked me to update the original translation as well as the back translation in English.
Now my original translation was proofread by one of the translators of the agency and they replaced almost every word with their synonyms and when they ran out of meaningful synonyms they simply came up some cringeworthy, far fetched words... See more This very morning I received the back translated version of my original translation where the client (meaning the agency's client who asked for the back translation) asked me to update the original translation as well as the back translation in English.
Now my original translation was proofread by one of the translators of the agency and they replaced almost every word with their synonyms and when they ran out of meaningful synonyms they simply came up some cringeworthy, far fetched words like translating "sponsor" as "supporter", "coordinator" as "guide" etc. etc. And this was a 700 word document!
I rejected all of the changes, and wrote the PM a lengthy email about this person's incompetence.
This was about 3 weeks ago. Now this morning, as I said, I received the back translation of my original translation (with all of the proofreader's changes rejected) and I was shocked to find that I made a silly mistake translating "letters" as "words". I couldn't believe my eyes, but there it was. The person doing the back translation (without seeing the original English text) naturally saw the Turkish word and translated it as they saw it. So this was flagged by the end client. I searched my download folder and found the proofreader's version from 3 weeks ago, thinking they may have actually corrected this, but in my indignation I must have overlooked it. But no, they, as bloody well expected, replaced the term "words" (which was supposed to be translated as "letters") as "vocabulary"!
They were so busy undermining my translation by replacing words with their synonyms, they didn't even bother to check if it was actually an accurate translation or not.
I think proofreading is best left to the professionals, meaning people who actually make a living out of this profession (if it's called a profession) and certainly not to translators of the same agency. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Adieu
Ukrainian to English
+ ...
| I do like punctuation wars | May 24, 2021 |
They make using shared TMs easier.
If I see straight or single quotes and a plethora of semicolons on numbered lists, I know that isn't my 100% match.
| | | | Mervyn Henderson (X)
Spain
Local time: 22:45
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Unnecessary changes | May 24, 2021 |
Ignore them. But one customer (former customer, mostly because of this kind of thing ...) insisted on sending me the corrected version, and asking for "my thoughts". At first I railed and complained, and began to justify my choices, and then I got smart. I simply waited for an hour or so, and wrote back saying "All fine by me."
I thought, Why waste time and get into an argument? They were going to happily use the second version, unless I said anything, but what's the point of proof... See more Ignore them. But one customer (former customer, mostly because of this kind of thing ...) insisted on sending me the corrected version, and asking for "my thoughts". At first I railed and complained, and began to justify my choices, and then I got smart. I simply waited for an hour or so, and wrote back saying "All fine by me."
I thought, Why waste time and get into an argument? They were going to happily use the second version, unless I said anything, but what's the point of proofreading the proofreader? And why should I do it with a bad taste in my mouth, and do it for free?
[Edited at 2021-05-24 14:23 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tony Keily
Local time: 22:45
Italian to English
+ ...
| Proofreaders, alchemy and me | May 24, 2021 |
I always take issue with the term "proofreading"!
Almost all agencies subscribe to the EN 15038/EN ISO 17100 standards.
These standards provide definitions for the basic services provided by TSPs and also list a number of additional services.
"Proofread" means "examine the revised target language content and applying corrections before printing." In other words, the term only applies to texts that have already undergone bilingual revision and are destined ... See more I always take issue with the term "proofreading"!
Almost all agencies subscribe to the EN 15038/EN ISO 17100 standards.
These standards provide definitions for the basic services provided by TSPs and also list a number of additional services.
"Proofread" means "examine the revised target language content and applying corrections before printing." In other words, the term only applies to texts that have already undergone bilingual revision and are destined to be printed/published. I've provided this service to publishing houses, art institutions, and so on.
This is often seen as nit-picking, but if our professional activity revolves around just a handful of terms for services, why constantly misuse them? For me, this just contributes to a downgraded image of translation as something amateurish and part-time.
There's also another side to this. Increasingly I'm being asked to "revise" (for my quoted revision rate) shoddy texts that have evidently been produced by non-native speakers or are MT output. I always point out that revision can only be done of "translated" work and that translation is not to be understood as "producing any old crap in a target language" but is subject to a number of formal requirements (under the standards, particularly 15038).
The "turning crap into gold" service being requested should be described in terms of another value-added service - post-editing, re-writing, retranslation or conceivably even alchemy. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Mario Freitas
Brazil
Local time: 17:45
Member (2014)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| It happens all the time | May 26, 2021 |
It's amazing how revisers want to show their work and make undue changes in your translation. In the beginning, I thought these were eventual cases, but I soon found out it's a standard.
I always reject all undue changes, explain why, and send a note to the client/agency making it clear that I will not respond for changes made without my approval. If the changes are kept, the person who made them is solely responsible for any later complaints.
| | |
|
|
|
| Proofreading is essential though | May 27, 2021 |
First of all, I would like to underscore that proofreading (or reviewing) not only exists in the translation world. It's also a current and very usual practice in many other jobs.
I mean journalists, for example, who usually get their articles read and approved by their fellow colleagues before their articles being issued on line or published on newspapers. I also think of judges who usually get read their judgments or their orders by one or many of their fellow judges, before thei... See more First of all, I would like to underscore that proofreading (or reviewing) not only exists in the translation world. It's also a current and very usual practice in many other jobs.
I mean journalists, for example, who usually get their articles read and approved by their fellow colleagues before their articles being issued on line or published on newspapers. I also think of judges who usually get read their judgments or their orders by one or many of their fellow judges, before their decision being held. Anyone of us can witness this kind of secure practice in many jobs. As a general rule, two brains always are worth even more than one. Because erring is human...
But one think's for certain: There are seasoned proofreaders and "dabbler" proofreaders.
I came accross this kind of behaviour not later than last week ago. It was about a financial project I had been entrusted with by an agency (I'm used to working with) on behalf of a big French company.
The text source contained a lot of abbreviations marked "Tn", which means "Trillion" of course and worth 1,000 Billions (i.e. in French 1.000 Milliards), what I had correctly translated into French.
But the French in-house reviewer from the French company has reversed my final translation (although correctly reviewed by the agency before) by translating Trillions into Billions… so making a very serious mistake. So that, for example, $2.2 Tn (Trillions) has been finally translated into French as 2,2 Milliards de dollars (i.e. 2,2 Billions in English)… instead of 2.200 Milliards de dollars (which was precisely in line with official figures I had separately checked on Internet).
I made it my duty to point out this unforgivable mistake to the agency, which immediately answered they made exactly the same remark to their own client, sharing my opinion to this regard. But to no avail, because this article is still on line on the French company website with the same HUGE mistake...
The moral of the story is: The proofreader always solely remains accountable of the final version, whatever happens, provided that you deliver your translation with accuracy, and sense of any detail you can justify.
But, as a whole, and except this bad experience, I think proofreading remains more than essential.
Just pray to come accross a seasoned proofreader, not a "dabbler"...
[Modifié le 2021-05-27 19:51 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Mervyn Henderson (X)
Spain
Local time: 22:45
Spanish to English
+ ...
I agree hugely, and in fact more so, billionly and trillionly. Those of us who do financial stuff regularly come across M, K, Mn, Bn, Tn and the like, and depending on the language, it can make a billion or a trillion of a difference.
Why, only yesterday I caught my own accountant out on this. He had posted 3.6 billion euros as my 2020 revenue, when it was really 3.6 trillion. Well, I appreciated his creativity, but it left a bit of a gap in my earnings, natch. Mistake or cream-off?... See more I agree hugely, and in fact more so, billionly and trillionly. Those of us who do financial stuff regularly come across M, K, Mn, Bn, Tn and the like, and depending on the language, it can make a billion or a trillion of a difference.
Why, only yesterday I caught my own accountant out on this. He had posted 3.6 billion euros as my 2020 revenue, when it was really 3.6 trillion. Well, I appreciated his creativity, but it left a bit of a gap in my earnings, natch. Mistake or cream-off? You can never know for sure, can you? But I had to let him go, of course. The lads took care of him down at the derelict warehouse. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Mervyn Henderson wrote:
I agree hugely, and in fact more so, billionly and trillionly. Those of us who do financial stuff regularly come across M, K, Mn, Bn, Tn and the like, and depending on the language, it can make a billion or a trillion of a difference.
Why, only yesterday I caught my own accountant out on this. He had posted 3.6 billion euros as my 2020 revenue, when it was really 3.6 trillion. Well, I appreciated his creativity, but it left a bit of a gap in my earnings, natch. Mistake or cream-off? You can never know for sure, can you? But I had to let him go, of course. The lads took care of him down at the derelict warehouse.
Maybe it was your return tax that I have been translating indeed... And maybe it was your lame-duck accountant who has had to proofread my translation... 
[Modifié le 2021-05-28 18:31 GMT]
| | | | | Pages in topic: [1 2] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Poll: What do you do when client's proofreaders make unnecessary changes to your translation? | 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 » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
