| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | Thinking of "denouncing" a colleague (whose work is really bad) Thread poster: Michail Strijov
|
|---|
Adieu 
Ukrainian to English
+ ...
"Arab-speaking" truly goes above and beyond. Is that a very literal translation or someone's prejudice leaking through?
Sounds like RU > EN "face of Caucasian nationality" and good cause to dismiss a translator on the spot
| | | | | Better Hope The Guy Isn't Vindicative | Jan 27, 2022 |
Based on what you say, this particular person seems to get a lot of work from this agency; so if they let him go, it might very well involve more than just a minor hit against his freelance income, and maybe for a long time. The agency in question might even "spread the word" about him. My late husband, an attorney, and his brother, also an attorney, wouldn't have been surprised/wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he decided to do such a thing, esp. since people often sue others for things th... See more Based on what you say, this particular person seems to get a lot of work from this agency; so if they let him go, it might very well involve more than just a minor hit against his freelance income, and maybe for a long time. The agency in question might even "spread the word" about him. My late husband, an attorney, and his brother, also an attorney, wouldn't have been surprised/wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he decided to do such a thing, esp. since people often sue others for things that seem almost "frivolous". I get the point, though, about how this guy isn't good for the translation profession.
[Edited at 2022-01-28 13:59 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
I see what you're getting at. However, this is where the role of the agency as an intermediary comes into play, and where it should come into its own. A good agency is much more than a postbox. It is a matchmaker, matching end client and translator, and taking care in making sure the proofreader puts the finishing touches to the translator's work. As in any professional relationship, there is an undeniable element of trust. The odd false note will not be dramatic but work that is regularly subs... See more I see what you're getting at. However, this is where the role of the agency as an intermediary comes into play, and where it should come into its own. A good agency is much more than a postbox. It is a matchmaker, matching end client and translator, and taking care in making sure the proofreader puts the finishing touches to the translator's work. As in any professional relationship, there is an undeniable element of trust. The odd false note will not be dramatic but work that is regularly substandard will (should) be a problem for all parties concerned. Maybe the agency already knows that our Asker does a good job of readjusting the particular translator's work. Maybe they don't know and all they do actually know is that the end client is happy. It's not telling tales. Done carefully and respectfully, a proofreader who informs the intermediary that work categorised as proofreading is actually significantly re-worked is alerting them to the fact that this person's work, in this particular sphere, etc. is problematic for colleagues. They should be interested in knowing that.
The question I ask myself has already been raised. Surely the Agency does know about this as they must see the amount of "red ink" that comes back on the proofread text. Somewhere there is something not quite right in the process. It is causing a problem for the proofreader. It might be a good idea to call the Agency and say so. I seldom work with agencies, but when I have, when I have not been satisfied, even allowing for variability of the quality of the texts sent for proofreading, there comes a point when a serious language professional needs to say that one way or another a line has to be drawn. Taking your skillset seriously marks you out as a quality service provider, so long as you are not taking it to dizzy delusional heights! Sometimes it may mean moving on. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Arianne Farah
Canada
Local time: 05:51
Member (2008)
English to French
| I've done this often | Jan 27, 2022 |
Michele Fauble wrote:
Tell the agency that you will no longer edit translations done by this translator. If they ask why, tell them. Or you could continue to accept these jobs, but demand a higher rate. Again, if they ask why, tell them.
Whether the agency wants to keep working with the translator is their decision, but MY decision is not to edit that person's work ever again.
I'm pitiless when it comes to sending bad translations back to PMs, it might be why I actually enjoy editing - I only work with good translators.
Unless it's a minimum charge project which are usually a couple of words on a tight deadline, I don't do reworks so the PMs can send the text back to the translation step or find another editor. This has saved me a lot of grief over the years. No amount of cajoling will get me to review a bad translation, the only remedy I can offer is a full retranslation (@ standard rate of course).
| | |
|
|
|
| Moving On... | Jan 27, 2022 |
...was in the back of my mind, too, when I thought about the poster's dilemma. But perhaps that might not be in her best interests, financially speaking, at the present moment. If another agency or direct client were to offer her another opportunity that can be determined to be, or verified as one that will indeed offer ongoing work (bearing in mind that one still has to be careful if it seems the agency is offering the sky, in terms of the amount of work), I'd say leave this one behind in the d... See more ...was in the back of my mind, too, when I thought about the poster's dilemma. But perhaps that might not be in her best interests, financially speaking, at the present moment. If another agency or direct client were to offer her another opportunity that can be determined to be, or verified as one that will indeed offer ongoing work (bearing in mind that one still has to be careful if it seems the agency is offering the sky, in terms of the amount of work), I'd say leave this one behind in the dust for what might actually be greener pastures, in every way imaginable. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Reading all the above posts, I'm reminded what a "misfit" I am in the translation industry. How can people "tell tales" like this about a colleague? It's the proofreader's job to correct errors in the translation, is it not? If you really feel strongly about it, then just don't proofread that particular translator's work anymore, but I would never squeal on a colleague like that. It's his livelihood we're talking about here and if the agency that pays him for his work is happy, let him be.
| | | | | But Germans translate .... | Jan 27, 2022 |
philgoddard wrote:
He's acting unprofessionally by translating into German in the first place. I'm guessing your client has no way of knowing his translations are poor because they're not German native speakers, so you have a duty to tell them.
into English all the time. In both of my previous in-house jobs as a German to English translator, the majority of my colleagues were native German speakers.
| | | | jyuan_us
United States
Local time: 05:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| This sometimes happens. | Jan 28, 2022 |
By delivering a poorly translated copy for the editor to work on, the translator has actually passed a large portion of his own responsibility over to the editor.
Such a translator is rewarded for his unprofessional behavior by getting a higher hourly income. This is because he spends less time in his translation assignment than he is supposed to do.
A quality sensitive editor could get a lower hourly income, because he has to spend more time fixing the errors.
... See more By delivering a poorly translated copy for the editor to work on, the translator has actually passed a large portion of his own responsibility over to the editor.
Such a translator is rewarded for his unprofessional behavior by getting a higher hourly income. This is because he spends less time in his translation assignment than he is supposed to do.
A quality sensitive editor could get a lower hourly income, because he has to spend more time fixing the errors.
Generally speaking, agencies are more likely to assign editing jobs to those who are better qualified. In this sense, it is very possible that your stronger linguistic skills could lead to a lower income.
This is not an imaginary scenario. It happens.
[Edited at 2022-01-28 11:01 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Gerard Barry wrote:
But Germans translate into English all the time. In both of my previous in-house jobs as a German to English translator, the majority of my colleagues were native German speakers.
So do Russians, and I'd say Germans are way better than Russians at translating their native language into English, but still I saw quite a number of huge websites of huge German tech companies with all their content (including manuals, specifications and all) translated into English, and boy was that English a pain in the butt to make sense of, especially where things started to get techy. People who say it's unprofessional to hire a person to translate into their non-native language do have a point, but I know there are exceptions (exceptions, not rules). As for the 'squealing' part of it, I'd have to disagree even though the non-squealing thing is big where I'm from and close to my heart because of my military background. An in-house editor should talk to PMs about someone's work being consistently below par, and it's easy to do without getting personal or using perjoratives. Somehow, nobody has mentioned the tough deadlines they ususally set for editing/reviewing work: if they keep throwing work like that at you, you have to either fail to meet your deadlines or shrug off all responsibility for the results, or yet convince them you need a lot more time because the translation needs to be done from scratch (I have been lucky to be able to secure the third option for a number of very big and very sad jobs). And people who keep delivering translations as awful as stated above must leave the market and look for other employment opportunities, because if the customers get used to extra-poor quality being delivered by translators, they'll start switching to MT for quicker results and lower costs for the same or higher quality
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:51
Member (2008)
Italian to English
| Plumber analogy | Jan 28, 2022 |
Gerard Barry wrote:
Reading all the above posts, I'm reminded what a "misfit" I am in the translation industry. How can people "tell tales" like this about a colleague? It's the proofreader's job to correct errors in the translation, is it not? If you really feel strongly about it, then just don't proofread that particular translator's work anymore, but I would never squeal on a colleague like that. It's his livelihood we're talking about here and if the agency that pays him for his work is happy, let him be.
OK Gerard - scenario: you get a plumber to come and find a leak somewhere behind your bathroom wall and fix it. The plumber has to break out part of your wall, to find the leak. He repairs it and then goes away, telling you that to repair the hole in your wall, you'll need to find, separately, a bricklayer, plasterer, and decorator. A few days after he's gone you realise he hasn't repaired the leak at all and you're still seeing water seeping through on to the floor. Incidentally, whilst he was working his mate sat on your toilet seat and broke it.
Would you say he's done a good job?
PS this has actually happened to me.
[Edited at 2022-01-28 08:35 GMT]
| | | | Adieu
Ukrainian to English
+ ...
| No, this is worse | Jan 28, 2022 |
This is the kind of person that goes "I just break [the wrong] part of your wall, say 'job done,' and collect the pay, then it's the reviewer's problem. Because fixing my screwups is their raison d'être."
Tom in London wrote: Gerard Barry wrote:
Reading all the above posts, I'm reminded what a "misfit" I am in the translation industry. How can people "tell tales" like this about a colleague? It's the proofreader's job to correct errors in the translation, is it not? If you really feel strongly about it, then just don't proofread that particular translator's work anymore, but I would never squeal on a colleague like that. It's his livelihood we're talking about here and if the agency that pays him for his work is happy, let him be. OK Gerard - scenario: you get a plumber to come and find a leak somewhere behind your bathroom wall and fix it. The plumber has to break out part of your wall, to find the leak. He repairs it and then goes away, telling you that to repair the hole in your wall, you'll need to find, separately, a bricklayer, plasterer, and decorator. A few days after he's gone you realise he hasn't repaired the leak at all and you're still seeing water seeping through on to the floor. Incidentally, whilst he was working his mate sat on your toilet seat and broke it. Would you say he's done a good job? PS this has actually happened to me. [Edited at 2022-01-28 08:35 GMT]
[Edited at 2022-01-28 10:45 GMT]
| | | | | Agency doesn't get to see the translator's work | Jan 28, 2022 |
Gerard Barry wrote:
Reading all the above posts, I'm reminded what a "misfit" I am in the translation industry. How can people "tell tales" like this about a colleague? It's the proofreader's job to correct errors in the translation, is it not? If you really feel strongly about it, then just don't proofread that particular translator's work anymore, but I would never squeal on a colleague like that. It's his livelihood we're talking about here and if the agency that pays him for his work is happy, let him be.
The agency isn't seeing the translator's work though, it's seeing the reviewer's work. If nobody tells the agency the work is substandard, and I can't imagine it being otherwise if someone is translating into a language which isn't their mother tongue (and I don't mean 'native-level', used to explain away a multitude of sins), then how will the agency ever know?
Yesterday I did a tiny review, 200 words, which had about 10 errors/inconsistencies Totally unacceptable, so I let the agency know straight away. They have a right to know!
| | |
|
|
|
Tony Keily
Local time: 11:51
Italian to English
+ ...
| You shouldn't be revising the woprk in the first place | Jan 28, 2022 |
The vast majority of TSPs claim they work in accordance with the applicable standards (for example, ISO 17100). Under the standards, 'translation' has a set definition, which doesn't include sloppy crap. What you're describing isn't translation because it doesn't meet these standards. It follows that you can't revise or review it (because you can only apply these procedures to a translation).
I always point this out to anyone offering me random rubbish for 'revision' (or, worse, 'p... See more The vast majority of TSPs claim they work in accordance with the applicable standards (for example, ISO 17100). Under the standards, 'translation' has a set definition, which doesn't include sloppy crap. What you're describing isn't translation because it doesn't meet these standards. It follows that you can't revise or review it (because you can only apply these procedures to a translation).
I always point this out to anyone offering me random rubbish for 'revision' (or, worse, 'proofreading').
BTW, maybe 'report' would be better than 'denounce'. The latter has totalitarian overtones ('she was denounced before the central committee before expulsion from the party and exile'). ▲ Collapse
| | | | Kay Denney
France
Local time: 11:51
French to English
Gerard Barry wrote:
Reading all the above posts, I'm reminded what a "misfit" I am in the translation industry. How can people "tell tales" like this about a colleague? It's the proofreader's job to correct errors in the translation, is it not? If you really feel strongly about it, then just don't proofread that particular translator's work anymore, but I would never squeal on a colleague like that. It's his livelihood we're talking about here and if the agency that pays him for his work is happy, let him be.
We're not at primary school, and we're not "squealing" or "telling tales". We're providing the agency with valuable information. I mean, giving work to a bad translator and hoping that the good proof-reader will catch all the mistakes is not a feasible business plan. The more mistakes there are, the less likely it is that you catch them all.
Suppose you call on a plumber to mend your loo. The firm sends a guy along who doesn't understand how water flows and puts pipes that go up instead of down. Then they send another guy who checks the work, sees it's wrong and redoes it. Do you seriously think the first guy deserves to be paid for his time? He's wasted time money and resources!
Let's remember that mistakes in translation can have serious consequences. There was that case of a manual for a some kind of hospital scanner where the translator put the decimal point in the wrong place and doctors were using ten times as much product as necessary. It took several deaths before they realised that all the unexpected deaths were patients who'd had that type of scan. The same kind of error could have horrible consequences in engineering too.
If the guy is that lousy a translator, he might need extra training, or to be told that he should stick to translating into English. Otherwise, he would probably be better off doing some other job that suits him more. Most people who are bad at their job are unhappy in it.
And I'm not sure how you could refuse to proofread a particular translator without saying why? I mean you could lie saying you're too busy but then you risk missing out on some lucrative job if the PM believes you.
[Edited at 2022-01-28 13:53 GMT]
| | | | Kay Denney
France
Local time: 11:51
French to English
Tom in London wrote:
OK Gerard - scenario: you get a plumber to come and find a leak somewhere behind your bathroom wall and fix it. The plumber has to break out part of your wall, to find the leak. He repairs it and then goes away, telling you that to repair the hole in your wall, you'll need to find, separately, a bricklayer, plasterer, and decorator. A few days after he's gone you realise he hasn't repaired the leak at all and you're still seeing water seeping through on to the floor. Incidentally, whilst he was working his mate sat on your toilet seat and broke it.
Would you say he's done a good job?
PS this has actually happened to me.
[Edited at 2022-01-28 08:35 GMT]
Great minds think alike, I too used a plumbing analogy and only saw your message after I'd posted!
I hope you didn't pay that first plumber!
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Thinking of "denouncing" a colleague (whose work is really bad) | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
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 
Translation news
