Laurent KRAULAND France Local time: 22:00 Member (2007) French to German + ...
My small experience
Nov 26, 2009
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
I would be interested in your opinion about what percentage of translators in the market you feel are "bad translators". Please share!
As a proofreader with a small experience, I would say that 1 text out of 4 doesn't need editing. The 3 remaining may not be overly bad, but to some degree don't feature the highlights one would expect from a professional translator. And I don't even mention the obvious crap that some agencies dare to name "translations to be proofread": mere MT'ing/GT'ing, unedited.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 11:28 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Monika Elisabeth Sieger United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 Member (2009) English to German + ...
We always request sample translation on texts handed out by us
Nov 26, 2009
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
Dan Brennan wrote:
I would be happy to be able to present, as evidence in support of such feedback, the translation that has caused problems, where it doesn't contravene confidentiality/NDA agreements. I think the potential sanction of a translator's having their work judged by their peers would be enough to deter many from providing shoddy work, or from adopting the 'take the money and run' approach.
I entirely agree.
About the texts in question, I think most of us will agree that seeing 200 words or even less of a poor translation is more than enough to detect weaknesses and plain mistakes and to imagine what the rest of the job looks like.
Of course, there are always people for whom ALL corrections are just the reviewer's preference!
You are absolutely right. Our agency always give a text chosen by us to the applicant and we then decide whether the translation is good or bad.
And this is always one of the subject the applicant has to cope with later!
As an experienced and specialised translator you see after 500 words how good somebody is and how thorough he/she works.
If other agencies think that such sample translations are not necessary they are not acting professionally. If I apply for a job I am happy to deliver a sample translation and I always got the job. I think this is how professionality is shown.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 11:35 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Dan Brennan United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 Member (2006) Russian to English + ...
TOPIC STARTER
how many is a lot?
Nov 26, 2009
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
If there were 50 million engineers in the world and only 1% were bad engineers, we would have half a million bad engineers, which is really a lot. However, it still leaves a 99% of average, good, or very good engineers. I feel it is reasonable to defend the reputation of that majority.
I would be interested in your opinion about what percentage of translators in the market you feel are "bad translators". Please share!
Tomas, if I thought that only 1% of translators were bad, then I would be thrilled. I think overall it is not particularly controversial to suggest that good translators are in the minority. Based on the translation tests we receive back, and based on the jobs that we review, maybe 2-3 out of 10 translators produce work of a quality that makes me think that I'd want to work with them again. But I don't see the point in taking a stab at a pseudo-scientific percentage.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Dan Brennan United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 Member (2006) Russian to English + ...
TOPIC STARTER
kudos
Nov 26, 2009
Cilian O'Tuama wrote:
Charlie Bavington wrote:
As I said earlier in the thread, somewhere between 30% and 50%.
IMO, more than half of the Kudoz participants cannot be taken seriously, at least in my language pairs, where good translators are outnumbered.
That's how I see it anyway.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 11:25 GMT]
Aye, that be how I is seeing it too.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 11:39 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Michele Johnson Germany Local time: 22:00 German to English + ...
40/50/10 breakdown
Nov 26, 2009
Dan Brennan wrote:
Aye, that be how I is seeing it too.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 11:39 GMT]
Here, here!
I'd say 40% are truly bad, 50% are just mediocre, and 10% are good.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Tomás Cano Binder, CT Spain Local time: 22:00 Member (2005) English to Spanish + ...
On the contrary: it is most interesting!
Nov 26, 2009
Dan Brennan wrote:
But I don't see the point in taking a stab at a pseudo-scientific percentage.
On the contrary: it is very interesting information, as the many answers is proving. It is most revealing to put "pseudo-scientific" figures to the general perception of insufficient quality with many translators. Thanks everyone!
Keep 'em coming! My apologies to Dan for stealing the topic for a moment.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Dan Brennan United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 Member (2006) Russian to English + ...
TOPIC STARTER
fair-to-middling
Nov 26, 2009
Michele Johnson wrote:
Dan Brennan wrote:
Aye, that be how I is seeing it too.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 11:39 GMT]
Here, here!
I'd say 40% are truly bad, 50% are just mediocre, and 10% are good.
That is broadly in line with my experience.
One problem is that the translation business, unlike many others, allows bogus or very bad operators to carry on undetected for much longer than they would manage to get away with in other fields of work, largely because the clients often do not speak the language that they are working into.
And as was stated here previously, even if end-users try to 'safeguard' themselves by going through an agency, there are a lot of agencies that don't put in place proper quality control checks, or indeed offer anything like the level of expertise that they claim - as their aim is to maximise their margins - and quality controls and superior translations cost more.
Let me give you one example of an agency that we once subcontracted work to - won't name them of course. It was a big job for a big client.
They appeared to be all-singing all dancing. Did a good test translation; were ISO certified; promised a translator to match the subject, with two levels of checking post-translation.
When the translation proper started to roll in, I soon began to smell a rat. Had some of their work reviewed by a second translator we had worked with. Turned out the quality was so poor it could not have been done by a native speaker of the target language. After finding out the translator's name and doing some digging, I confirmed that they had employed a native speaker of a different language to do the translation! Unbelievable eh?
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Charlie Bavington United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 French to English
Cilian, you too are too kind
Nov 26, 2009
Cilian O'Tuama wrote:
Charlie Bavington wrote:
As I said earlier in the thread, somewhere between 30% and 50%.
IMO, more than half of the Kudoz participants cannot be taken seriously, at least in my language pairs, where good translators are outnumbered.
That's how I see it anyway.
I think it is probably fair to say that in my pair, that description applies to far and away the vast majority of askers. I don't think I'm the only one who thinks the same, since the good answerers now only pop up once in a while. I say "now", it's been a couple of years...
I think Michele's figures are probably pretty close to my experience too. But I seem to recall we were only asked how many were "bad", not to provide a further breakdown of the non-bad.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Dan Brennan United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 Member (2006) Russian to English + ...
TOPIC STARTER
Kudoz
Nov 26, 2009
Cilian O'Tuama wrote:
Charlie Bavington wrote:
As I said earlier in the thread, somewhere between 30% and 50%.
IMO, more than half of the Kudoz participants cannot be taken seriously, at least in my language pairs, where good translators are outnumbered.
That's how I see it anyway.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 11:25 GMT]
I still think KudoZ can be very useful, if you can filter out the growing amount of noise and nonsense.
In my main pair at least, I find that it is too often an exersize in the blind leading the blind, dominated by non-native speakers of the target language. What makes me laugh is the degree of certainty with which some make their proposals, and then receive 'approval' from their fellow non-native speaking peers. Can be quite entertaining, but potentially dangerous for anyone who can't see through the bluster.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Dan Brennan United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 Member (2006) Russian to English + ...
TOPIC STARTER
A jury of one's peers
Nov 26, 2009
ProZ has competitions - with entries rated by fellow translators.
It has KudoZ - with translators' suggestions rated by their peers.
It has had a stab at 'certification', but the jury appears to be out as to how rigourous or reliable an indicator that is of quality.
But what about a system where a translator had to submit a translation to a panel of fellow translators for assessment, and based on that they were granted or refused some kind of 'Peer-approved' certification? That, in my book at least, would count for something, as long as the jury was made up of seasoned and respected pros.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 23:56 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Cilian O'Tuama Germany Local time: 22:00 Member German to English + ...
Supertramp
Nov 27, 2009
Dan Brennan wrote:
ProZ has competitions - with entries rated by fellow translators.
It has KudoZ - with translators' suggestions rated by their peers.
It has had a stab at 'certification', but the jury appears to be out as to how rigourous or reliable an indicator that is of quality.
But what about a system where a translator had to submit a translation to a panel of fellow translators for assessment, and based on that they were granted or refused some kind of 'Peer-approved' certification? That, in my book at least, would count for something, as long as the jury was made up of seasoned and respected pros.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 23:56 GMT]
Dreamer! None of that's ever gonna happen here. We/ProZ are just selling bananas, remember?
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Dan Brennan United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 Member (2006) Russian to English + ...
TOPIC STARTER
Hey Mister Tally Man
Nov 27, 2009
Cilian O'Tuama wrote:
Dan Brennan wrote:
ProZ has competitions - with entries rated by fellow translators.
It has KudoZ - with translators' suggestions rated by their peers.
It has had a stab at 'certification', but the jury appears to be out as to how rigourous or reliable an indicator that is of quality.
But what about a system where a translator had to submit a translation to a panel of fellow translators for assessment, and based on that they were granted or refused some kind of 'Peer-approved' certification? That, in my book at least, would count for something, as long as the jury was made up of seasoned and respected pros.
[Edited at 2009-11-26 23:56 GMT]
Dreamer! None of that's ever gonna happen here. We/ProZ are just selling bananas, remember?
Well, I guess if you're going to be called a tramp, there is some consolation in being called a supertramp.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Cilian O'Tuama Germany Local time: 22:00 Member German to English + ...
Not worth it.
Nov 27, 2009
ProZ is a market. Sell&buy on the spot!
If some sucker buys blindly, his problem!
Dan, I had higher hopes too.
c
Dan wrote:
Well, I guess if you're going to be called a tramp, there is some consolation in being called a supertramp.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Charlie Bavington United Kingdom Local time: 21:00 French to English
Take a look at my rating, it's the only one I got
Nov 27, 2009
Dan Brennan wrote:
That, in my book at least, would count for something, as long as the jury was made up of seasoned and respected pros.
Thing is old chap, seasoned and respected pros are, it is hoped, a bit too busy to get involved to any great extent, unless suitable financial recompense was offered, perhaps. After all, time is money, especially if you are a seasoned and respected pro. And I can't see proz stumping up the folding stuff for it, so presumably the applicant would need to pay and if you're gonna start slinging cash around, you might as well pay for proper accreditation from your national body or similar.
Getting back to blacklists per se, I would see it as a step in the right direction if it only rated cold, hard, facts (much like the BB is intended to). As cold, hard fact number 1, I suggest delivery on-time.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Tomás Cano Binder, CT Spain Local time: 22:00 Member (2005) English to Spanish + ...
ATA certification
Nov 27, 2009
Dan Brennan wrote:
But what about a system where a translator had to submit a translation to a panel of fellow translators for assessment, and based on that they were granted or refused some kind of 'Peer-approved' certification? That, in my book at least, would count for something, as long as the jury was made up of seasoned and respected pros.
But my friend, that exists already with the ATA certification. Controlled exam conditions and an ATA official as the proctor, limited time, controlled resources, identity verification, and evaluation by two seasoned and respected peers, or more peers if the candidate does not agree with a fail mark. (Of course these peers get paid for the job of marking the papers.)
If you meant was some Internet-based test... sorry I don't believe in that option as there is no way to guarantee the identity of the candidate and having unlimited time for the translation makes it more difficult to assess the real capabilities of a candidate to deliver a good translation in a limited time as we have to do every day in our work.
[Edited at 2009-11-27 06:52 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Save time by automatically extracting terms. 15% off!
SDL MultiTerm Extract 2011 allows you to automatically create candidate term lists from your existing documentation. This removes the manual effort involved with traditional terminology creation, allowing you to rapidly add terms to SDL MultiTerm.
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro 3.0 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
The translation workplace 
Translation news