Quality Management test Thread poster: Deborah Hoffman
|
|---|
Dear everyone,
I'm quite confused tonight. I recently took a test to do QM for agency "X". After not hearing back I followed up and was informed that while I'd passed the straight editing portion, there were a "few concerns" with my proofing of the text that someone else had previously translated in my language pair (Russian to English) and I had failed the linguistic portion.
Now, it's not that it's impossible I could have made a mistake, but to be honest I have never... See more Dear everyone,
I'm quite confused tonight. I recently took a test to do QM for agency "X". After not hearing back I followed up and was informed that while I'd passed the straight editing portion, there were a "few concerns" with my proofing of the text that someone else had previously translated in my language pair (Russian to English) and I had failed the linguistic portion.
Now, it's not that it's impossible I could have made a mistake, but to be honest I have never had feedback like this before. I'm on my third book and have had my work cross-checked, counter-checked, and up- down- and sideways-checked so I'm not worried about my linguistic capabilities.
What is frustrating as well is that this text was a piece of cr**. I have no idea who did the original translation, but personally I would have torn it up and started over. However the instructions clearly stated I was only to correct "objective errors" such as missing text, grammar, unintelligible syntax, and not stylistics, so that was exactly what I did.
Am I the only person who has ever had this experience? I thought I would try QM to branch out, despite the fact that this agency's offered rate is 2/3 of the going one. Now I completely do not know what to think.
[Редактировалось 2009-01-12 23:04 GMT]
[Редактировалось 2009-01-13 06:07 GMT]
[Редактировалось 2009-01-13 14:37 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
| Sounds a little strange alright | Jan 14, 2009 |
Deborah Hoffman wrote: ... What is frustrating as well is that this text was a piece of cr**. I have no idea who did the original translation, but personally I would have torn it up and started over.
I have very little experience with QM so I can't give you any wise observations from personal experience, except to say what my subject title already says - it sounds strange.
Did you try (or even desire) to attempt a dialog with this company, explaining exactly what you said here about the linguistic quality of the piece you were given to work with (maybe with a slightly more polished tone, and perhaps giving a couple of examples)?
From your description, it sounds like you have ample experience, and while I think it's a long shot given how these things usually go, maybe you can convince them to learn something from yours.
Barring that, you can try to ask about what standards they are using, pointing out that you followed the instructions that were provided. Also a long shot, but after all, we can only guess along with you at this point.
[of course, maybe you've done all these things and more already]
I suppose I haven't added any insight, but I wanted you to know you definitely have my sympathy!!
| | | |
As I said in another thread, I have been working for an Internet translation agency. My first proofreading job was so badly translated that I sent it back saying that I would have to practically translate it myself first.
They offered me double the price for the job because I had fought through almost half of the text until I had enough.
I would say it every damn single time.
Hope you can get out of this.
| | | |
Arnaud HERVE 
France
Local time: 19:17
English to French
+ ...
In my experience the tests by agencies are often a highly irrational process.
Apart from the quality management you mention, you are also told sometimes that your translation was "too close to the source text".
"Too close" would be valid for literature maybe, where you must not translate colloquial and restitute the meaning instead, but for a technical text containing detailed instructions, where any omitted detail would lead to major dysfunction, what is "too close"?... See more In my experience the tests by agencies are often a highly irrational process.
Apart from the quality management you mention, you are also told sometimes that your translation was "too close to the source text".
"Too close" would be valid for literature maybe, where you must not translate colloquial and restitute the meaning instead, but for a technical text containing detailed instructions, where any omitted detail would lead to major dysfunction, what is "too close"?
I sometimes suspect the reviewer is deeply incompetent. When you're pointed at the mistakes you made, ok, you made a mistake. But when the agency remains so vague, who can you trust?
I would not take it too seriously if I were you. In your conscience you know that you worked correctly. Sometimes the world of business is absurd. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
It's interesting - they were good enough to send feedback, and I had been so focussed on linguistic quality that I had in fact missed some things. Since I passed the other sections they are going to let me take this one again. Odd how a text where I couldn't understand the meaning of the text at all was the easier one to distinguish errors and omissions. Thanks everyone!
| | | |
| Somewhat positive | Jan 15, 2009 |
Deborah Hoffman wrote: ... Since I passed the other sections they are going to let me take this one again. ...
It sounds like rather good news. Good luck, I hope it all turns out worth the effort and stress!
| | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
