| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | What proportion of proofreading/editing jobs do you have to reject? Thread poster: Phil Hand
|
|---|
| I proofread happily for trusted clients | Jul 8, 2011 |
There are one or two agencies I translate for, but reject all proofreading jobs unless they are very tiny (i.e. at my minimum charge level ).
These agencies pay by the word, and while their translation rates are acceptable, I will not go as low as their so-called proofing rates.
I actually enjoy proofing a well-translated text, and I feel someone has to do it. I am often very grateful for feedback on my own, ... See more There are one or two agencies I translate for, but reject all proofreading jobs unless they are very tiny (i.e. at my minimum charge level ).
These agencies pay by the word, and while their translation rates are acceptable, I will not go as low as their so-called proofing rates.
I actually enjoy proofing a well-translated text, and I feel someone has to do it. I am often very grateful for feedback on my own, so it is a reasonable give-and-take.
I prefer to translate for new clients and get to know them before I proofread for them, but I do not refuse out of hand. If they understand that I need to see the text and they must pay by the hour, then I give them a chance, preferably with a short text.
But rule no. 1 is: if you meet unexpected difficulties, notify the client.
Then decide what can be done within the deadline, or whether the deadline can be extended, etc.
@ José enrique Lamensdorf:
An intriguing idea, but I don't always have that much room for negotiation, so I charge by the hour with very few exceptions! If I can proofread a text fast because it is good, then I can sometimes learn from it, so there are non-cash benefits. Otherwise I can move on and earn money doing something else.
I try to restrict myself to proofreading where I feel confident about the subject area, but if I do have to spend a lot of time checking terminology that a specialist would know, I 'turn off the taximeter' and do not charge the client for the extra research time. Deadline permitting, or afterwards, I note anything useful in my own databases or make a note never to accept anyting in that subject area again!
I have no idea about percentages, but I do refuse to take on jobs that obviously need retranslation rather than editing. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | There is another form of proofreading | Jul 8, 2011 |
that has not been mentioned here. I do a lot of proofreading of papers written by scientists and university professors. They write the papers in English which is not their mother tongue, often by copying and adapting things they have read in other published papers on the same subject.
I generally charge half my translation rate.
There can be a great deal to change but in general they have the terminology right (having read themselves so many articles in their fields).... See more that has not been mentioned here. I do a lot of proofreading of papers written by scientists and university professors. They write the papers in English which is not their mother tongue, often by copying and adapting things they have read in other published papers on the same subject.
I generally charge half my translation rate.
There can be a great deal to change but in general they have the terminology right (having read themselves so many articles in their fields). Actually I have learned a great deal in this work and it has reflected in my translations as well. For me it is a win-win situation.
Eileen ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Fixing vs. redoing | Jul 8, 2011 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
.... I accept a bad translation and work to fix it, but in this case I always make sure to charge by the actual hours spent and warn the customer about it beforehand, so that they can accept or reject my charges. I give them an hour estimate, but always say that the time charged will be the actual time spent. I thus remain on the safe side with poor translations.
Been there, done that. Now and then an outsourcer goes overboard on the cheap side, and the end-client rejects the job. So that outsourcer decides to hire me to 'fix' it. Sometimes the translation is sooo disgustingly bad, that it will take me longer to fix it than to redo from scratch.
It wouldn't be fair to charge a client more for fixing a bad translation than we'd ask for redoing it comme il faut from scratch. They've probably wasted enough money on a wannabe already.
So I give them a range for fixing/reviewing a translation, between 25% and my full translation rate, as reassurance that they won't spend more now than they would if they had hired me to translate it from the start. Whether I'll merely fix it or redo it from scratch, it's my problem; they'll get what they need.
I learned that lesson many years ago, from the most ethical and longest-standing client I have. While I left on vacation, he tried to give a new translator a chance, to have him/her as a backup in case I got overloaded. Jobs there were mostly video for dubbing. Upon my return, when I paid him a visit, he handed me a videotape and a sheaf of papers (I said it was many years ago), pointed to a VCR and TV in his office, and said, "I won't say a thing. I want your unbiased, honest opinion on this translation". I didn't have to watch the entire first minute to realize that was completely useless. So I made an inquisitive gesture of tearing that sheaf of papers over the trash bin. He smiled and said, "Go ahead! Do it! I'd have done it myself, if I hadn't actually PAID for that. How quickly can you get it done?"
| | | | Phil Hand 
China
Local time: 02:53
Chinese to English
TOPIC STARTER | A happy ending | Jul 8, 2011 |
Thank you all for your comments. It's been enlightening for me.
I wrote to one of the agencies from whom I've been getting dodgy stuff, and explained to them why I couldn't accept any more proofreading work from them, and voila, not 48 hours later, I had an offer for translating rather than proofreading. To be fair to them, this agency are pretty good, and do seem to respond reasonably when I say there's a problem.
So thank you all for setting me straight, and remindin... See more Thank you all for your comments. It's been enlightening for me.
I wrote to one of the agencies from whom I've been getting dodgy stuff, and explained to them why I couldn't accept any more proofreading work from them, and voila, not 48 hours later, I had an offer for translating rather than proofreading. To be fair to them, this agency are pretty good, and do seem to respond reasonably when I say there's a problem.
So thank you all for setting me straight, and reminding me that as long as we act in a reasonable and professional manner, the people we deal with will generally do the same in return.
Eileen - I sometimes do work like that as well, and I find it very rewarding, too. I don't yet know why, but my experience is that an original text by a non-native speaker is always miles better than a translated text by a non-native speaker. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
I don't yet know why, but my experience is that an original text by a non-native speaker is always miles better than a translated text by a non-native speaker.
I think it is simply because they know their stuff. They know what they are writing about and are geared in on the right terminology and know how such papers are written. And, perhaps, when they don't know how to say what they want exactly, they are free to change it. Not all translators can or have the courage to do this.
Eileen
| | | | Dave Bindon
Greece
Local time: 21:53
Greek to English
In memoriam | I've just rejected a job, for the first time | Sep 5, 2011 |
I quoted for a proofreading job earlier today. As usual I quoted an hourly rate and, as a guideline, gave an equivalent per-word rate if it was a good-quality translation by a native speaker.
Well, the translator was certainly not a native speaker. The text had already been through one round of proofreading...by another non-native speaker (!) who failed to spot most of the errors and bungled their attempts to correct the ones they did! It would definitely have been far quicker and e... See more I quoted for a proofreading job earlier today. As usual I quoted an hourly rate and, as a guideline, gave an equivalent per-word rate if it was a good-quality translation by a native speaker.
Well, the translator was certainly not a native speaker. The text had already been through one round of proofreading...by another non-native speaker (!) who failed to spot most of the errors and bungled their attempts to correct the ones they did! It would definitely have been far quicker and easier to start from scratch.
Needless to say I told the client that the translation was beyond saving. Time will tell whether they ask me to re-translate, or find some poor soul who's willing to try and work miracles. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 02:53
Chinese to English
TOPIC STARTER | Little chance of them getting it done properly | Sep 5, 2011 |
Dave
They'll find someone to patch it up to a state where it will fool the client, then shove it out the door, if they're anything like the people I work with.
A while ago I was asked to proofread a contract for the transport of radioactive materials. The translator managed to get the type of radioactive material wrong, and the name of the relevant Chinese safety body, all in the first two lines. After retranslating the covering letter, I told them I wouldn't do any mor... See more Dave
They'll find someone to patch it up to a state where it will fool the client, then shove it out the door, if they're anything like the people I work with.
A while ago I was asked to proofread a contract for the transport of radioactive materials. The translator managed to get the type of radioactive material wrong, and the name of the relevant Chinese safety body, all in the first two lines. After retranslating the covering letter, I told them I wouldn't do any more.
A couple of days later, I emailed to ask about the job. If they couldn't find anyone else, perhaps they'd give it to me? I didn't want to seem like I was slagging the translator off just to get the job, hence the delay. The PM's reply was: we didn't have the time or budget to get another translator, so we just got another proofreader.
At that moment, I came very very close to saying, stuff your NDAs, stuff your business relationship, I'm going to the client to tell them that your translation practices are potentially a danger to human health. I didn't, but I wonder to this day if I should have.
It is a truth worth repeating over and over, every day: agencies don't care. If anyone is ever going to care about a document, it has to be us. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Nub, crux, kernel, etc. | Sep 5, 2011 |
Robert Forstag wrote:
So, as I see it, the problem is that you choose to work within a system that requires you to commit to completing work that you have not seen within a given timeframe and at a set price.
Exactly. This point cannot be stressed enough (altho the OP seems to have realised it now, in fairness to him), and yet it is so often requested of us (even expected, in some cases).
By happy coincidence, I wrote a blog post on this topic just 4 days before this thread started. I'll link to it so safe my breath here
http://cbavington.com/blog/2011/07/03/review-pricing-reviewed/
| | |
|
|
|
| Native dimwits | Sep 5, 2011 |
Dave Bindon wrote:
I quoted for a proofreading job earlier today. As usual I quoted an hourly rate and, as a guideline, gave an equivalent per-word rate if it was a good-quality translation by a native speaker.
Well, the translator was certainly not a native speaker. The text had already been through one round of proofreading...by another non-native speaker (!) who failed to spot most of the errors and bungled their attempts to correct the ones they did! It would definitely have been far quicker and easier to start from scratch.
Needless to say I told the client that the translation was beyond saving. Time will tell whether they ask me to re-translate, or find some poor soul who's willing to try and work miracles.
Dave,
I've had such situations with thoroughly native speakers, however clearly non-translators, who made it evident that they didn't know squat about the subject being translated. IMO that's much, much worse than reviewing material translated by a skilled translator who is a non-native speaker of the target language, yet fully familiar with the subject area.
| | | | Dave Bindon
Greece
Local time: 21:53
Greek to English
In memoriam | Non-native dimwits! | Sep 5, 2011 |
I'm not suggesting that native = good, non-native = bad in all cases. Indeed, I've met many native dimwits! But a professional translator working into his/her L1 should be as good as or better than the majority of non-native speakers of the target language.
In the case I mentioned, the (clearly) non-native translator had done a poor job and made the types of error that a native-speaker (even a half-dimwit one) would not have made. A n... See more I'm not suggesting that native = good, non-native = bad in all cases. Indeed, I've met many native dimwits! But a professional translator working into his/her L1 should be as good as or better than the majority of non-native speakers of the target language.
In the case I mentioned, the (clearly) non-native translator had done a poor job and made the types of error that a native-speaker (even a half-dimwit one) would not have made. A native dimwit would have made entirely different errors (and I'd still refuse to edit the text)!
PS - it is not my intention to disparage dimwits ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:53
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Phil Hand wrote:
I don't know if it's my pair or if I just attract the bad'uns or what, but I've had a series of proofreading/editing jobs over the last few months which where just terrible. By which I mean, the translation given to me was so far away from what I would regard as a decent standard of translation that I couldn't edit them; retranslation was necessary.
I get into trouble when that happens, because I have a fetish for getting docs right, and I just retranslate and hope the supplier will agree to reimburse me. That's OK for small jobs, but I'm now having to refuse large proofreading jobs because of the danger that it will actually be a retranslation job. I'm sure there are better ways to handle this, perhaps I should sit and think up a strategy.
Anyway, I was just wondering if my experience was typical. I would say less than 20% of the documents sent to me for editing are in a state that I consider editable/proofreadable. What proportion do you see? And how do you manage this problem?
HI Phil
FOr the reasons you have so eloquently just set out above, I have a policy of not accepting ANY prorof-reading/editing jobs. There's an awful lot of work in them and no professional satisfaction.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » What proportion of proofreading/editing jobs do you have to reject? | 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 » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
