| Pages in topic: [1 2 3] > | Who is to blame for a false translation with legal consequences - the translator or the proofreader? Thread poster: Anna A. K.
|
|---|
Anna A. K. 
Germany
Local time: 01:12
Member (2020)
English to German
I was wondering in case you translate something wrong, say an important legal term, or you omit something important, and it causes the client trouble with authorities, who is to blame from your point of view - the translator or proofreader?
My understanding would be the proofreader, because he was the last person who worked on the document and his job was to make sure everything is correct. Would you agree?
[Bearbeitet am 2023-01-31 13:21 GMT]
| | | |
The translator because he/she should always aim to deliver a translation that can be used as it is, whether it goes through another pair of eyes or not. The editor/proofreader because he/she missed a mistake.
Some of the agencies I work with ask me to approve the final version after being edited. In that case, I will be the person responsible for the final version, but most of the agencies I work with don’t act like this and I don't know if my work is edited/proofread or not…
| | | | Lingua 5B
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Local time: 01:12
Member (2009)
English to Croatian
+ ...
If done via an agency, the agency is accountable. It's the agency that promised to the end client to deliver a perfect product. If they have issues with internal check organization, that's their problem. Perhaps the next time they should select translators and proofreaders based on skills and professionalism.
| | | | | Chain of responsibility | Jan 31, 2023 |
Lingua 5B wrote:
If done via an agency, the agency is accountable. It's the agency that promised to the end client to deliver a perfect product. If they have issues with internal check organization, that's their problem. Perhaps the next time they should select translators and proofreaders based on skills and professionalism.
That's academic really, because the translator and the proofreader are accountable to the agency in turn.
The proofreader is responsible IMO because they signed it off.
| | |
|
|
|
Lingua 5B
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Local time: 01:12
Member (2009)
English to Croatian
+ ...
| What proofreader? | Jan 31, 2023 |
Ice Scream wrote: Lingua 5B wrote:
If done via an agency, the agency is accountable. It's the agency that promised to the end client to deliver a perfect product. If they have issues with internal check organization, that's their problem. Perhaps the next time they should select translators and proofreaders based on skills and professionalism. That's academic really, because the translator and the proofreader are accountable to the agency in turn. The proofreader is responsible IMO because they signed it off.
They usually pick random people they don‘t know anything about who are working for peanuts to sign it off. Weird system, no wonder it doesn‘t work.
In normal organizations, people who sign off, audit, and quality check are the most competent and most experienced of all. And paid accordingly. A thorough check takes time and research, and someone proofreading for 0.02 per word surely won‘t do that. I had instances when I was a proofreader #2, and a document would be returned to me with random comments regarding synonyms or preferences (totally unnecessary), while obvious omissions and mistakes were ignored (by proofreader #1).
To me appears like this entire process is very sloppy and just done for formality. Often times the proofreader introduces new mistakes, which makes the entire thing even funnier.
It‘s not the translator, proofreader or the end client that designed this senseless process, it‘s the agency.
[Edited at 2023-01-31 16:50 GMT]
| | | | finnword1
United States
Local time: 19:12
English to Finnish
+ ...
| The agency is resposible | Jan 31, 2023 |
They can send the proofreader's corrections back to the translator to accept/reject, in which case the translator is responsible. If they don't, it is the agency's problem.
| | | | Jean Lachaud
United States
Local time: 19:12
English to French
+ ...
| That is an academic question... | Jan 31, 2023 |
... because no one has ever been able to quote a court decision finding that a bad translation had caused damages to any person or entity.
At any rate, lawyers here in the USA would never go after the translator, because there would be no money to be squeezed out of those. Lawyers go for the money.
There have been, for at least 30 years, persistent rumors that several thousand pages of technical documentation were once refused, allegedly because of improper translation ... See more ... because no one has ever been able to quote a court decision finding that a bad translation had caused damages to any person or entity.
At any rate, lawyers here in the USA would never go after the translator, because there would be no money to be squeezed out of those. Lawyers go for the money.
There have been, for at least 30 years, persistent rumors that several thousand pages of technical documentation were once refused, allegedly because of improper translation into English, by a Southern hemisphere customer which had purchased a fleet of then-diesel submarines from a European country.
According the these rumors, the translation was done over at the vendor's cost, and no court decision may have been involved.
I'm not even sure that myth is true, even though I worked for several years in one of the businesses involved (but not at the same time as the myth-spreader, whom I never met).
Discussing possible legal implications of faulty translations is good for after-dinner talk at translators' conventions, though, after a cognac or two, right between "I wish I won the Mega-Million" and "How 'bout those declining rates."
J L
[Edited at 2023-01-31 22:30 GMT]
[Edited at 2023-01-31 22:31 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Daryo
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:12
Serbian to English
+ ...
| Whoever delivered it to the client. | Jan 31, 2023 |
If it's a direct client you are responsible. No one else to blame if you couldn't be bothered to track down real experts in the field and check with them, or to add a proofreading done by a second pair of eyes.
If there is a middleman between you and the end client, the responsibility for delivering a suitable translation to the end client is no longer yours. In any case, not directly.
It becomes the agency's responsibility to find a competent translator and org... See more If it's a direct client you are responsible. No one else to blame if you couldn't be bothered to track down real experts in the field and check with them, or to add a proofreading done by a second pair of eyes.
If there is a middleman between you and the end client, the responsibility for delivering a suitable translation to the end client is no longer yours. In any case, not directly.
It becomes the agency's responsibility to find a competent translator and organise the whole process. Trying to blame the translator for agency's penny pinching or plain amateurism is straight from the Boris Johnson's Handbook of honesty. Even if it turns out that the translator is completely out of his/her depth, it's STILL primarily the agency's responsibility for choosing an incompetent translator / editor / proofreader. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 01:12
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
Anna1307 wrote:
I was wondering in case you translate something wrong, say an important legal term, or you omit something important, and it causes the client trouble with authorities, who is to blame from your point of view - the translator or proofreader?
Morally, the proofreader. Legally (well, depending on laws of countries), the translator.
The proofreader is simply an assistant who helps the translator find mistakes in the translation. The proofreader doesn't guarantee that the translation is error-free -- the translator guarantees that.
I agree, though, that if there is an agency involved (the type that buys and sells the translation, and not the type that simply connects the client to the translator), then the agency is responsible. The agency is liable to the client. The translator is liable to the agency.
It gets trickier when there is outsourcing: when a translator outsources work to a colleague (as opposed to simply referring the client to that colleague), the translator himself (not the colleague) is responsible for the final quality of the text. Suppose the client contacts translator A, who then outsources the work to translator B, and then the translator is proofread by either translator C or translator A, and then translator A delivers it to the client, with the client believing that the translation was done by translator A. In that case, translator A is liable. The only way translator B can be liable is if the agency previously agreed with translator A that translator A would simply act as a middleman whose job is to facilitate the movement of documents between the client and translator B.
Here's a simple test: who sends the invoice to whom. Does the translator invoice the proofreader, who then invoices the client? No, usually it's the other way around: the translator invoices the client, and the proofreader invoices the translator. If both the translator and proofreader invoice the client, then both of them bear some responsibility, even if the translator had recommended the proofreader (or vice versa). Only if the proofreader had promised the client that the translation delivered by the proofreader is error-free, can the proofreader be liable for the quality of the translator.
[Edited at 2023-02-01 07:05 GMT]
| | | | | In that case… | Feb 1, 2023 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
Only if the proofreader had promised the client that the translation delivered by the proofreader is error-free, can the proofreader be liable for the quality of the translator.
What’s the point of a proofreader then?
| | | | Lingua 5B
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Local time: 01:12
Member (2009)
English to Croatian
+ ...
| Annulation and oxymoron | Feb 1, 2023 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
The proofreader is simply an assistant who helps the translator find mistakes in the translation. The proofreader doesn't guarantee that the translation is error-free -- the translator guarantees that.r be liable for the quality of the translator[Edited at 2023-02-01 07:05 GMT]
What‘s the point of the proofreader if the translator needs to make sure things are right, after the proofreader‘s work? Are you aware the proofreader can create and introduce a new error from scratch (one that never existed in the original version)?
| | | | | Each responsible for his/her own work? | Feb 1, 2023 |
The question may be: who introduced the error?
When I started as a rookie translator and was asked to proofread translations by colleagues, the setup was that I was the English native speaker, and the translators were responsible for terminology and so on. Their English was usually excellent, but they were subject experts, and not native speakers. It was basically proofreading that I was asked to do, not checking and editing.
Then I had to call the translators an... See more The question may be: who introduced the error?
When I started as a rookie translator and was asked to proofread translations by colleagues, the setup was that I was the English native speaker, and the translators were responsible for terminology and so on. Their English was usually excellent, but they were subject experts, and not native speakers. It was basically proofreading that I was asked to do, not checking and editing.
Then I had to call the translators and check over my corrections with them, so they could defend their versions. I learnt a lot!
Here the translators were responsible. They accepted or rejected my changes, and the situation was quite clear-cut.
Translators can only be held liable for their own work, however. If a proofreader/editor introduces errors, then that person is responsible.
Agencies should really clarify the roles from the start.
I sometimes refuse editing and revising tasks if I am asked to be responsible for terminology and technical content, because I am not expert enough in the particular subject area. I might be able to do the research and deliver the translation, but I cannot promise to catch other people´s errors. It is much more difficult than simply getting it right the first time!
To do that, the proofreader must be a real subject expert, not just any native speaker. Indeed, ´a little knowledge is a dangerous thing´. I have explained several times to clients that sometimes the English expressions used to translate Danish law are different from those used in English law, precisely because Danish law is different. I will not be held liable if someone changes my translation incorrectly. But I thereby assume responsibility for seeing that it is correct in the first place.
It is not always easy for beginners (or even experienced translators) to know their own limitations.
Agencies do not always know precisely what an individual can or cannot do. They should have a policy, however, for allocating tasks and responsibility, and selecting translators with suitable experience for each assignment. As others have pointed out, the agency is responsible to the end client for delivering a translation without errors. That means paying what it costs, too!
If an agency finds translators through bidding rounds, and takes the fastest and the cheapest, then morally at least, the agency is responsible too! ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Holger Laux
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:12
Member (2011)
English to German
+ ...
| Proper QA procedures | Feb 1, 2023 |
One agency I work for has a QA procedure that makes it clear:
As a translator, you do your initial work, which is then handed over to an "Evaluer" (Proof-Reader) who will apply changes and make recommendations.
Then the document is handed back to the translator for a "Final Review" where they can either accept or reject the changes made in the previous step.
Finally, this agency has in-house linguists who glance over any work submitted. But they either may... See more One agency I work for has a QA procedure that makes it clear:
As a translator, you do your initial work, which is then handed over to an "Evaluer" (Proof-Reader) who will apply changes and make recommendations.
Then the document is handed back to the translator for a "Final Review" where they can either accept or reject the changes made in the previous step.
Finally, this agency has in-house linguists who glance over any work submitted. But they either may not be native speakers or do not have the time to check everything in detail.
IMO this makes it clear that it is the translator who is ultimately responsible. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Lingua 5B
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Local time: 01:12
Member (2009)
English to Croatian
+ ...
Holger Laux wrote:
One agency I work for has a QA procedure that makes it clear:
As a translator, you do your initial work, which is then handed over to an "Evaluer" (Proof-Reader) who will apply changes and make recommendations.
Then the document is handed back to the translator for a "Final Review" where they can either accept or reject the changes made in the previous step.
Finally, this agency has in-house linguists who glance over any work submitted. But they either may not be native speakers or do not have the time to check everything in detail.
IMO this makes it clear that it is the translator who is ultimately responsible.
How much is the translator paid for multiple checks, for checks of the checks, for explaining the choices (very lengthy process) and for their ultimate liability? Should be 10x their normal rate, otherwise it doesn‘t make any financial sense for the translator. The agency would love to play with these checks endlessly, as long as they are not paying for those endless hours of work.
| | | | | Legally speaking? | Feb 1, 2023 |
The supplier (whoever it might be) is legally speaking responsible, because it is he/she who is delivering the end product to the end client. If the translator is the direct supplier, he/she is responsible. If the supplier is an agency, well .....
I had a small renovation of my house, for which I contacted a contractor, who sent a carpenter and a electrician. The last one did a bad job. I made my complaint at the contractor, not at the electrician, because it was he with whom I mad... See more The supplier (whoever it might be) is legally speaking responsible, because it is he/she who is delivering the end product to the end client. If the translator is the direct supplier, he/she is responsible. If the supplier is an agency, well .....
I had a small renovation of my house, for which I contacted a contractor, who sent a carpenter and a electrician. The last one did a bad job. I made my complaint at the contractor, not at the electrician, because it was he with whom I made the deal.
It works the same for the translation world.
[Edited at 2023-02-01 12:52 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | 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 » Who is to blame for a false translation with legal consequences - the translator or the proofreader? | 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 » |
| | 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
