| A témához tartozó oldalak: < [1 2] | How to stop vigilante proofreaders Téma indítója: Milos Prudek
|
|---|
Milos Prudek wrote:
- Before issuing a purchase order for proofreading, client explains to the proofreader that no translation job will be awarded to the proofreader. Client policy should be that all proofreaders are hired as proofreaders for that client, and they are free to work as translators for other companies.
Not feasible. I very often proofread other people's work along with my translation work. If this condition existed... I would systematically reject proofreading work, which I only do as part of my global service to my valued customers.
Milos Prudek wrote: - Only one fifth of the total proofreading will be done. The proofreader and the translator then talk to each other (either privately without the client or "publicly" through the client) and try to agree if the proofreading was fair, and how to proceed with the other four-fifths of the job. If they fail to agree, a different proofreader will be hired. If the second proofreader points mostly the same mistakes as the first one, the proofreaders are right and the proofreading can be finished. If the proofreaders disagree, the situation becomes too complicated to resolve with a simple flowchart 
As other colleagues, I see severe timing problems here.
In my opinion, the agency should choose wisely when it comes to choosing both translators and proofreaders. Conflict between them can only exist if both or either of them is not a good professional. A good translation will always be minimally edited by a good proofreader.
Maybe your problem in this case is that the proofreader was not as experienced as you are in the subject of your translation and made a mess of your good translation. In this case, you should question the proofreader's incorrect marks, by systematically proving that you were right by means of references to clear books, websites, style guides, or dictionaries the customer can check. By proving that the proofreader was wrong, you might help the customer choose a better proofreader and protect quality for the end users.
| | | | | There are a lot more sloppy translators than vigilante proofreaders | May 13, 2010 |
My impressions are virtually opposite to those of the topic starter.
Let me start from the very basics: in my opinion, a qualified professional is entitled to roughly the same hourly rate of payment, whether (s)he is translating, editing, proofreading, etc. (with a possible exception of high-stress work like simultaneous interpreting, which may command a premium). Typically, proofreading rates on a per-word basis are 1/10 to 1/4 of the translation ones; accordingly, to maintain the above ... See more My impressions are virtually opposite to those of the topic starter.
Let me start from the very basics: in my opinion, a qualified professional is entitled to roughly the same hourly rate of payment, whether (s)he is translating, editing, proofreading, etc. (with a possible exception of high-stress work like simultaneous interpreting, which may command a premium). Typically, proofreading rates on a per-word basis are 1/10 to 1/4 of the translation ones; accordingly, to maintain the above premise, proofreading should also take 4 to 10 times less time than translation. In my personal experience, this was a fairly reasonable assumption until roughly two years ago. Then, as the financial crisis struck, the entire translation industry succumbed to cost cutting. Unfortunately, a great many agencies took this a little bit too far, lowering their rates below the minimum accepted by serious professionals in hope that the proofreader would fix the text anyway. As a result, the proofreaders get stuck with twice as much work for the same rate. Having been burned a few times, I no longer accept proofreading jobs until I have seen the actual translation (or at least another text by the same translator). ▲ Collapse
| | | | | It escalates | May 13, 2010 |
I know sometimes proofreading brings out my mean streak!
While most of the time I can see things from the translator´s side, there are occasions when things simply go from bad to worse.
I accept a proofreading job from a regular client, and it arrives late (translator struggling for one reason or another.)
When it does arrive, I find it is not up to the usual standard from that agency/client. This has been anything in the last few months from MT to a 100-p... See more I know sometimes proofreading brings out my mean streak!
While most of the time I can see things from the translator´s side, there are occasions when things simply go from bad to worse.
I accept a proofreading job from a regular client, and it arrives late (translator struggling for one reason or another.)
When it does arrive, I find it is not up to the usual standard from that agency/client. This has been anything in the last few months from MT to a 100-page report translated by a technical expert who was not a linguist, and simply wrote English words with source-language syntax. It worked fine in tables, and the terminology was mostly correct apart from a few dictionary blunders and some odd inconsistencies. But I had to double check, which took time.
Where there was straight text (most of the document), the sentence structures were quite complex.
The translation came across as questions in all the wrong places, or else it was more or less unreadable.
I ended up working evenings and nights, re-translating large chunks because it was simply quicker than trying to decide sentence by sentence whether the original translation was acceptable or not. This is how you get ´rogue´or ´vigilante´ proofreaders.
Very probably, if that translator went through my changes sentence by sentence, there would be plenty that were only changed preferentially, or which in the normal course of events I would not have changed.
Normally, if I am not sure, I check, and often find the translator has used a perfectly valid alternative, which I leave well alone. This is especially true when the translator knows more about the subject than I do, and I am very much aware of the danger.
But this ´nightmare report´ was mercifully in an area where I am quite confident myself, and because I was desperate for time, it was a case of ´if in doubt, cross it out´ !
Luckily this text was for internal use in the end client's own company, because I never did tidy up the formatting or go through it for minor typos like form/from. I was not happy with it, but delivered under protest, because the client needed it and I had another job waiting.
I do not know whether the translator got paid the full rate, or what happened. I charged for my time, but not overtime... and I guess the agency did not make much on it.
There are no winners in a story like that, and I am sure most proofreaders do not deliberately ruin a text.
But there are the cases of beginners who try to make legal language or special subject terminology sound like everyday language because it is more ´natural´ or ´idiomatic´ ... and I´ve been there, done that too! But I was stopped in time by more experienced colleagues. I have had it done to my own work, too - and I know how it hurts!
Many clients simply do not appreciate what is involved, either in translation or proofreading, and the only thing to do is keep explaining and keep educating the clients.
[Edited at 2010-05-13 17:44 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Rad Graban (X) 
Egyesült Királyság
Local time: 11:07
angol - szlovák
+ ...
| Translator vs Proofreader | May 13, 2010 |
I think there is a difference between translator and proofreader. In my opinion, clients should be employing for proofreading professional proofreaders, rather then "translator-cum-proofreaders", and there would be no competition.
I hate proofreading myself as I am not qualified to do it and it can be very frustrating and time-consuming. I only do it for my regular clients, for whom I already work as a translator, and I do it more as a favour rather than for an opportunity to "slag-off" o... See more I think there is a difference between translator and proofreader. In my opinion, clients should be employing for proofreading professional proofreaders, rather then "translator-cum-proofreaders", and there would be no competition.
I hate proofreading myself as I am not qualified to do it and it can be very frustrating and time-consuming. I only do it for my regular clients, for whom I already work as a translator, and I do it more as a favour rather than for an opportunity to "slag-off" other translator just to get more work from them. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| A false premise? | May 13, 2010 |
The original post was based upon the idea that we translators who also proofread are also pirates who want to grab as much work as possible. This is an assumption that is not only wrong, but unfair.
When someone who translates for a customer receives an assignment to proofread somebody else's work in another area, the main goals of a loyal service provider are A) to serve the customer and help them in that need and B) to make sure the customer can safely send the final text to the e... See more The original post was based upon the idea that we translators who also proofread are also pirates who want to grab as much work as possible. This is an assumption that is not only wrong, but unfair.
When someone who translates for a customer receives an assignment to proofread somebody else's work in another area, the main goals of a loyal service provider are A) to serve the customer and help them in that need and B) to make sure the customer can safely send the final text to the end user.
Any professional person will report good results if the translation was a good one, and will report poor results and will give solid and documented reasons if the translation was not that good. If as a result of a poor translation the customer shifts work to the proofreader, now in a translator function, it is not the proofreader who is to blame, but the original translator.
Having said that, I insist in saying that customers should choose their proofreaders with solid criteria, one of which can well be proven success in translation with other end users the customer may have. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | A témához tartozó oldalak: < [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 » How to stop vigilante proofreaders | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
