| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Reviewing the work of someone you know Thread poster: Aditya Ikhsan Prasiddha
|
|---|
Tina Vonhof (X)
Canada
Local time: 07:03
Dutch to English
+ ...
I like Laura's and Lukasz' suggestions and I agree with others that you should not have accepted this job in the first place - it is a 'conflict of interest'.
When you say " I could even give a perfect grade in the report when in reality the translation is full of errors and the agency wouldn't know a thing about it", I hope you don't mean that. That would be unprofessional and dishonest and you would not be doing anyone a favor.
Write an accurate report but when you a... See more I like Laura's and Lukasz' suggestions and I agree with others that you should not have accepted this job in the first place - it is a 'conflict of interest'.
When you say " I could even give a perfect grade in the report when in reality the translation is full of errors and the agency wouldn't know a thing about it", I hope you don't mean that. That would be unprofessional and dishonest and you would not be doing anyone a favor.
Write an accurate report but when you are reviewing the article, make sure you don't correct every little thing. A reviewer is not an editor, i.e., it's not your job to make the text the best it can be. Some things can be left as they are if they are an adequate rendition of the source text that is understandable in the target language, even though there may be a better way to say it. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Tina Vonhof wrote:
When you say " I could even give a perfect grade in the report when in reality the translation is full of errors and the agency wouldn't know a thing about it", I hope you don't mean that. That would be unprofessional and dishonest and you would not be doing anyone a favor.
Write an accurate report but when you are reviewing the article, make sure you don't correct every little thing. A reviewer is not an editor, i.e., it's not your job to make the text the best it can be. Some things can be left as they are if they are an adequate rendition of the source text that is understandable in the target language, even though there may be a better way to say it.
Giles Watson wrote: Aditya Ikhsan Prasiddha wrote:
I could just omit the errors in the review report, I could even give a perfect grade in the report when in reality the translation is full of errors and the agency wouldn't know a thing about it
... you wouldn't, would you?
Noooo, of course not. In fact, I wrote a pretty accurate report, with benefits of the doubt used as much as possible. And no preferential change was reported, I even omitted very minor errors. But that still made me uncomfortable as there were still many errors which could make my colleague look bad.
Orrin Cummins wrote:
If I was an agency, and a reviewer came to me and told me they had a conflict of interest like this, I wouldn't want them to review that particular translation. There would be no way to really trust the objectivity of the review.
So I think if you told them they would understand. There was no way that you could have known who the translator was before they sent you the job, right?
As long as a lot of time hasn't already passed since they first sent you the job...
Actually I already finished the review, hence why I made this thread. There might be more batches coming and I think I will resign from the reviewer position for reasons stated by the wonderful Proz members above.
| | | | | The tables are a pain, I agree | Jun 21, 2014 |
Ideally, the object of reviewing is to make a good text better. If we can't give and take criticism, then we are not acting professionally. I would not be very happy criticising a colleague I know, but luckily it practically never happens.
I bear in mind the times colleagues have corrected my errors - and in the long term I have been grateful for their good advice. If I am asked for my opinion, I give it as diplomatically as possible - but I would never cheat or accept errors. That ... See more Ideally, the object of reviewing is to make a good text better. If we can't give and take criticism, then we are not acting professionally. I would not be very happy criticising a colleague I know, but luckily it practically never happens.
I bear in mind the times colleagues have corrected my errors - and in the long term I have been grateful for their good advice. If I am asked for my opinion, I give it as diplomatically as possible - but I would never cheat or accept errors. That is not really in anybody's interest.
It's a small world in my language pairs, and generally I have no problem about reviewing the work of a colleague I know. I can sometimes guess who the translator is, but I try to give everyone the same treatment. In fact I sometimes have more trouble with translators I do NOT know, because the work is not up to standard!
I agree with comments above, and I hate filling in the reports.
I think it is a waste of time analysing every little point of grammar. Terminology is also time consuming to check and then quote chapter and verse explaining why it is wrong, though there is more sense in that.
The chances are that the report takes longer than simply correcting the text! And how much of it is relevant to another text anyway?
Normally I simply send the text back and say it was fine, please ask if the corrections are not self-explanatory. I invoice for my time in any case.
If a friend or colleague is reviewing my work, I prefer to see the results, so that I can learn from them, but I would not want reviewers to ignore errors or leave unchanged anything they could have expressed better. I do my best, but I know I am only human.
But everything can be said in several ways. When reviewing, I make changes, but only if I think they are actual improvements. I never change anything just because I would have put it differently.
In this case I would fill in the report with the mildest and shortest comments (which is what I always do) - 'typing error', 'verb singular, subject plural,', or whatever, and add as a general comment that most of the translation was fine. (Assuming that was possible!)
I might send a copy of my review to the translator. When I really know who it is, the agency usually does so, and the translator has the last word and can reject my changes if they are not reasonable. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Tina Vonhof wrote:
I like Laura's and Lukasz' suggestions and I agree with others that you should not have accepted this job in the first place - it is a 'conflict of interest'.
For me, there would be a conflict if I altered my judgment just because I know the translator. Besides, there are lot of people who claim they are good translator where they are not.
"Polishing" your feedback would be counter-productive for you as a professional. You had to work more on your proofreading job because the translation was substandard.
I know a couple of person who say they are translator, but when you read someone else's translation, you can clearly notice if the job is at a professional level.
The lack of professionalism was on the translator's part -either because he/she took a job he was not able to do, or because he/she did the job carelessly. If you do your proofreader's part as you would normally would, there is no conflict of interest.
| | | | | 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 » Reviewing the work of someone you know | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
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
