| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | A non-native client who thinks he knows my native language better than me! Thread poster: Callum Walker
|
|---|
| Just a word of caution... | Sep 8, 2010 |
Hi Collum,
I join Marina and other colleagues who suggest that you should request a specific explanation of where you are wrong (in their view). However, I have something to add to this suggestion. Callum Walker wrote:
@Alexander:
Your idea of it being too idiomatic is perhaps the most relevant proposal. A few of the phrases which they did pick up on are idiomatic phrases in English. The problem is trying to convince them that this is how we express things in English is another matter. The problem is that they see words/phrases which don't seem to make sense, but in actual fact, that is exactly how we word things in English!
In relation to your other points, I have not already received payment for the job. And this document is not of a legal nature - it is in fact a company performance report for last year. The genre is very general in reality - no special vocabulary, only occasional specialist business/financial terminology, so in truth, it is not really a very complicated document - which is why I am struggling to see why it has dragged on for so long! I am not saying you are wrong; I just hope that you have not underestimated the importance of that "specialist business/financial terminology" (which may also have some legal implications).
I have a good example at hand. Today, we have had a discussion at another website (http://trworkshop.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=62&t=47601&p=743742#p743742). A native speaker from the US, who is a professional translator highly respected by many colleagues (including me), challenged a translation by a Russian colleague where the term "personal data subject" was used. She said ""Personal data subject" is a meaningless string of words. You can't string nouns together like that in English, if you want it to sound like English!". I replied with quotations from both EU and UK legislation on the protection of personal data, where "data subject" is used as a standard term for the person whose data are processed etc. I believe this to be a very good example of those dangerous situations where a native speaker may spoil the meaning because he/she is lacking the subject area knowledge.
[Редактировалось 2010-09-08 08:22 GMT]
| | | | | don't humour them | Sep 8, 2010 |
Callum Walker wrote:
I'm almost tempted to just humour them so that I can be done with this document.
You've done your job, now it's time for them to fulfill their side of the contract, ie to pay up. They have failed to point out any specific issues, therefore you need to tell them to stop wasting your time.
| | | | | No guessing games | Sep 8, 2010 |
Callum Walker wrote:
I'm almost tempted to just humour them so that I can be done with this document.
Do not play guessing games with clients. You will not end the issue by humouring them. You will simply give them a chance to spin it out and then not pay.
The native ear is not infallible. Just as musicians have to study and practice, no matter how good their ear and perfect pitch may be, the same goes for native language translators - that native ear has to be trained, disciplined and tuned in on special terminology etc.
Clients may be right, but not aways. The trick is to convince them that even if an expression is not in their little red dictionary, it IS in your big, blue specialist dictionary, or wherever you can find it, and that you know what you are doing. If you can do that diplomatically, then you gain a satisfied client who will trust you another time, and come back.
Really, you, the client and the PM are all on the same side, though it is not always obvious. In theory you all work hard to deliver quality, but want to avoid unnecessary hassle. Keep respectfully to the point and back up what you say, or simply withdraw and do not waste any more time.
I have learnt a lot of English from non-native clients and colleagues who really know their legal, technical or medical literature and terminology.
But they can always put their finger on the point they want to discuss.
Sometimes it helps to find an illogical expression in the source language. Then explain that language is neither simple nor logical. But without specific questions, simply say you are not prepared to change anything.
I learnt a lot from an in-house colleague who was brilliant at dealing with clients and telling them what they REALLY wanted. Humour and diplomacy are important, but stick to your guns.
Occasionally he would suggest a ´third´ option, usually in marketing etc. where there were plenty of synonyms. If they wanted ´great´where the translator had written ´fantastic´, he would suggest ´impressive´ or ´brilliant´ etc. That way nobody loses face!
But only in response to specific references to specific sections of text.
(The Danes would say: Don´t find yourself in anything... which actually means do not put up with any nonsense.)
That is my take on it!
| | | | Sheila Wilson 
Spain
Local time: 00:50
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| Defend your work (if you believe it's good) | Sep 8, 2010 |
Callum Walker wrote:
I'm almost tempted to just humour them so that I can be done with this document.
That really would be the very worst thing to do, Callum. You'd be giving them the message that you have no confidence in your own work and that you acknowledged that you had delivered a load of rubbish.
If you have confidence in your work, defend it.
| | |
|
|
|
| Who pays the bills while we defend our honour | Sep 8, 2010 |
Sheila Wilson wrote: Callum Walker wrote:
I'm almost tempted to just humour them so that I can be done with this document.
That really would be the very worst thing to do, Callum. You'd be giving them the message that you have no confidence in your own work and that you acknowledged that you had delivered a load of rubbish. If you have confidence in your work, defend it.
Laudable in principle, but we all gotta earn a living (unless we're doing it for pin money).
Personally, I quite enjoy arguing the pointless toss for endless hours at a time (see my posting history!), the time spent doing so is time spent not earning the money that puts food on the table. Eventually, I find it hard to concentrate on the vital minutae of a discussion when distracted by the weeping and wailing of my starving family. The ungrateful buggers, I'm busy being right and they're moaning about not having eaten since last Tuesday.
Callum could just suck it up and not work for them again, or minimise it, in the interests of economic expediency. It's not for us do make that call for him.
| | | | | I hate it when this happens. | Sep 8, 2010 |
It's only once or twice a year, but my heart always sinks, and I think here we go again, a foreigner who thinks he speaks English better than me.
One advantage of working through agencies is that they usually take your side against the customer.
That was very funny, by the way, Charlie.
[Edited at 2010-09-08 19:00 GMT]
| | | | Callum Walker
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:50
Russian to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | response to many different people! | Sep 8, 2010 |
Thanks for all your input... there is far too much to respond to individually, so I'll just make some general comments.
I do agree with what most of you are saying that I need more constructive feedback. I have made *some* headway in this respect... but only by the client highlighting about ten to twenty phrases using 'Track Changes' and saying "re-phrase this please". In every instance I cannot see the problem with the way that I had originally worded each sentence.
As... See more Thanks for all your input... there is far too much to respond to individually, so I'll just make some general comments.
I do agree with what most of you are saying that I need more constructive feedback. I have made *some* headway in this respect... but only by the client highlighting about ten to twenty phrases using 'Track Changes' and saying "re-phrase this please". In every instance I cannot see the problem with the way that I had originally worded each sentence.
As one or two of you have picked up on, if time were of no importance I would have no real objection to making little changes. The main problem is, however, that I'm currently in the middle of a 3-week large-scale project, and that is in addition to all of my regular client translation commitments, and yet I am still being harassed with very general comments about things which (apparently) need changing. I do not have the time to go through this document in full every few days. This large project which I am working on is very complex and is requiring a lot of my time, and that is as well as working on all the regular certificates and correspondence translations which I receive on a regular basis from certain clients.
To be honest, after I've made these changes I think I shall have to be firm and say that unless they can come up with specific problems with sentences (not just saying "re-phrase this"), and say "I do not like the use of X word in this sentence, it seems too vague/not the appropriate word in the context/does not fit the style of the document etc." then I will make changes *where necessary* ('where necessary' being the most important part of that sentence). Charlie made a valid point that we unfortunately don't have time to defend every small choice we make, especially when this has now dragged on for four weeks and should have been done with at the very latest by the 15th August (on the basis of the original deadline).
But it is this idea of "being done with it" which bothers me. I'm sure everyone will agree with me that we all have ethics as translators to which we adhere. And chief among those for me (and this applies to everything I do, not just translation), is the fact that I never like to do a poor job. It bothers me tremendously the thought of submitting something which I know is not right or which I know is not done to the very best of my ability. I have always been like this, ever since school, and I like to think that it is one of my qualities which really helps to make me the good translator which I believe myself to be. So as much as I want to finish this product and get rid of the hassle, part of me is screaming that I shouldn't accept these errors which the client is making by correcting my proofread work.
Another thing which some mentioned is the idea of backing things up. I haven't yet resorted to this, mainly due to a lack of time. I do agree that it is useful. But it seems somewhat pointless trying to explain the intricacies of English definite articles (an issue which is difficult to grasp for native Russian speakers not acquainted with English, given that definite and indefinite articles do not exist in Russian) to someone who has no idea of their use. And in many cases it is the use (or lack of use) of articles which is one of the major things which they keep correcting in my work, which is frustrating me no-end! Where applicable I have suggested alternative options to both my original work and their suggestions, and in some instances they have accepted them, but in others they seem to just ignore me.
I think in summary I am going to make these final changes, set out my position with regard to further changes (i.e. that I will make no further changes without good reason or without specific explanation as to why a certain phrase/word needs changing), and then submit my invoice for payment. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Job worth doing... | Sep 9, 2010 |
... is worth doing well - agreed.
Callum Walker wrote:
And chief among those for me (and this applies to everything I do, not just translation), is the fact that I never like to do a poor job.
And he who pays the piper, calls the tune.
Welcome to World Aphorism Day, incidentally, I hope you got the email.
Anyway, p'raps you could try to take the view that if you fail to provide what the customer wants, then that is a poor job. I don't mean just take the whole thing lying down - by all means argue your position if you have time, by all means charge for time (pipers should be paid), but at the end of day, in a way, you are giving the customer what they want. It might be substandard or suboptimal in your view, but you've done your best and they are insisting and they are signing the cheques....
| | |
|
|
|
e-solutions (X)
United States
Local time: 19:50
Russian to English
+ ...
| I feel your pain | Sep 9, 2010 |
Hi Callum,
I understand how this can be frustrating and can certainly feel your pain. It seems to me that the end client is being too picky -in this case- asking you to re-write things dozens of times. The idea in editing is to ensure that the translation complies with the natural laws of grammar, punctuation, spelling and meaning. The elegant niceties of the language (so to speak) is the writer's style and perfecting the style could be a never-ending project, especially if you are ... See more Hi Callum,
I understand how this can be frustrating and can certainly feel your pain. It seems to me that the end client is being too picky -in this case- asking you to re-write things dozens of times. The idea in editing is to ensure that the translation complies with the natural laws of grammar, punctuation, spelling and meaning. The elegant niceties of the language (so to speak) is the writer's style and perfecting the style could be a never-ending project, especially if you are a perfectionist, such as myself.
But ultimately, I'd like to let you know and can quote me on this as a Russian-native linguist that "according to the EN 15038 Translation Industry Standard (adopted by the European Committee) the editor cannot be held responsible for the translator's product -- the translator has the prerogative of accepting or rejecting the editor's suggestions and is therefore responsible for the final quality of work." So the agency can't come back at you with mistakes you supposedly have made because, ultimately, it is the *translator's* product and you are just editing it. Send them back to the translator. If you would like, I can give you a second opinion on your work as a specialist in International Business, in case you think you messed up some financial terminology that doesn't translate directly into English. In any case, getting a second opinion from a specialist in the financial field may not be a bad idea.
Hope this helps. Best,
-tatyana ▲ Collapse
| | | | Romeo Mlinar
Portugal
Local time: 00:50
English to Serbian
+ ...
| Let me be a devil's advocate for a moment | Sep 10, 2010 |
A foreign speaker can master some elements of a language better than native speaker. The reason is that a learner will pay more attention to some details that are natively absorbed in first language acquisition.
That does not mean you are wrong.
What I actually wanted to comment is: I think you gave them detailed editing, instead of proofreading. And they keep coming back...
Why do people do editing instead of proofreading? Who started that game?
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 00:50
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| I have to disagree | Sep 10, 2010 |
Mlinar wrote:
A foreign speaker can master some elements of a language better than native speaker. The reason is that a learner will pay more attention to some details that are natively absorbed in first language acquisition.
What a native speaker often cannot do is justify the correctness of their choice, although a language service provider should be able to.
An example: my husband (British but not an LSP) cannot explain why he uses "he did" in one sentence and "he has done" in another, but he would never, ever make a mistake.
| | | | Romeo Mlinar
Portugal
Local time: 00:50
English to Serbian
+ ...
| You are right, under the condition... | Sep 10, 2010 |
...that a native speaker acquired the correct form/use etc.
| | |
|
|
|
Paula Borges
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:50
Member (2010)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| Could be two things | Sep 10, 2010 |
Mlinar wrote:
A foreign speaker can master some elements of a language better than native speaker. The reason is that a learner will pay more attention to some details that are natively absorbed in first language acquisition.
That does not mean you are wrong.
What I actually wanted to comment is: I think you gave them detailed editing, instead of proofreading. And they keep coming back...
Why do people do editing instead of proofreading? Who started that game? ]
In Portuguese, there's generally the problem that native speakers translating into English can write better sounding texts, but will misinterpret certain things and miss subtleties.
But there are always stubborn clients who think they know better even if they don't.
| | | | Germaine
Canada
Local time: 19:50
English to French
+ ...
| Devil again... | Sep 10, 2010 |
Mlinar wrote:
...What I actually wanted to comment is: I think you gave them detailed editing, instead of proofreading. And they keep coming back...
I agree with Mlinar. If your client trusted the original translator (most probably refered to him by the same agency with the usual guarantees), the fact that he couldn't recognize his work in your proofreading may explain the back-and- forth dancing: who is he going to trust now? For him, could this other "professional" have been so bad?
Over the years, I learned that, most of the time, clients prefer a good (true, clean and plain) translation where they can recognize their original document to a "superb" or even "brilliant" translation where they get lost. Some want to make the reader feel like he is sharing a drink with the President at the 9th hole; some want to make certain everybody know they graduated from Harvard; and some simply want to... KISS it! Satisfying each type may ask for some compromises, but at the end, both parties should be proud of the final product.
| | | | Jose Herrera
United States
Local time: 19:50
Spanish to English
+ ...
Callum Walker wrote:
I'm looking for some guidance with regard to a situation which has been on-going for many weeks now, and frankly, is beginning to irritate me immensely.
On the 10th August, I accepted a proofreading project through an agency based in Ukraine of a document originally written in Russian but translated into English (my native language). The original translation had clearly been done by a non-native speaker of English and was naturally very poorly done; this required a vast amount of editing and correction. As such, I charged slightly higher than my usual proofreading rate (since, in essence, what I was doing was actually nearer to translation than proofreading!). Anyway, I submitted the completed proofread document, which I believed was very well written, and was probably about a million times better than the original translation, only to receive an email back from the client asking me to "read it through again, checking the English translation with the Russian original". I did this, and made one or two very minor stylistic changes (nothing that would constitute an error), and then re-submitted the document.
Several days later, I received an email stating pretty much the same thing: "read it through again, making sure that the English translation closely matches the expressions in the RUssian original". So again, I did this for the client, going through the (very long) document, checking each sentence against the original corresponding sentence. No problems found once again. I made one or two (once again) stylistic changes, but again, nothing that was actually a mistake. I emailed the document back, explaining that the reason that the English did not closely match the Russian is because languages, by their very nature, are different. English expresses ideas and concepts in a different way to Russian. Just because something is said in one way in Russian, it does not mean that you can directly transfer that concept into English word-for-word. I did however say to them that if they had specific issues, please highlight them or comment on them to bring them to my attention, and that I can pay it special attention. I explained that I cannot devote the time to look through the entire 10,000 document every few days to search for some tiny inconsistency which they believed to have found.
And once again, I got an email back, this time with highlighted sections... but only on the first two pages of a 17 page document. The instruction was "to read through the rest of the document and make similar changes". Apparently they didn't have time to read through the rest of the document. So I made some changes (which didn't really need doing) on the first two pages and explained that I would do no further unless they gave me some constructive feedback.
And this has continued since then, to the extent that they have actually started to 'correct' my English (which I must re-iterate, is my native language). But these 'corrections' they are making are frankly wrong - they are poor from every possible angle: grammar, vocabulary, syntax etc. I have re-corrected their mistakes and I have asked them to respect my professional opinion as a native speaker.
The problem is that I can just see this continuing for ever - it has now been almost a month since I accepted the job, and it is really interfering with my other work. I have explained to them that I cannot keep doing this for them because I have other project commitments, but I fear that this will not matter to them.
Firstly, how do I address this attitude of theirs that "they know English better than me" (the client being a Russian or Ukrainian native speaker, and myself being an English native speaker)?
And secondly, should I charge extra for this continuous re-proofing?
My fear is that they have asked me to edit certain sections so many times that it is becoming 'over-edited' and is actually taking away from the simplicity and accuracy of the original work which I did. They are almost making me turn this document into one which is written in "Russ-glish" (yes, that is my attempt at combining Russian and English), and I'm worried because I'm almost tempted to just humour them so that I can be done with this document. But that of course goes against my translation ethics: that translations should be natural, accurate and correct in the target language.
Help please!
| | | | | 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 » A non-native client who thinks he knows my native language better than me! | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
