Fidus Interpres :: Translation Blog | Blog de tradução

The End… of Fidus Interpres

Fabio Said — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 09:23:24 +0000

This is my last post. After almost 5 years updating this translation blog with 1,159 posts, I finally grew tired of it. It’s not as fun as it used to be.

For the moment, the “end” means that there will be no more new articles. But the content will still remain online for a long time. And at some point in next few years – when I get used to the idea of giving up a successful blog with a PageRank of 5 out of 10 – the entire blog will be deleted.

Thanks for your support since March 20, 2008! A big thank-you to the thousands of RSS and newsletter subscribers and to all those who have left at least one of the 2,210 comments, joining discussions and explaining their own points of view – interaction is what blogging is all about.

-------------------------------------------------------------
This was originally posted by Brazilian Portuguese translator Fabio Said on his translation blog Fidus Interpres, where you will find more than 1,100 articles about translation, interpreting or terminology. You can browse older articles using the links in the Categories / Tags sections (end of right column), or search for specific content using the search boxes located on every page of the blog.
Follow this link to visit the blog:
Fidus Interpres
Follow this link to rate the quality of the article above:
The End… of Fidus Interpres

Proofreaders: Who Are They and What Do They Do?

Fabio Said — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 08:25:11 +0000

I have often seen misconceptions arising from the fact that translation industry protagonists took the role and the service scope of editors/proofreaders for granted instead of clarifying them beforehand. There are strongly opposing views on what proofreaders should do in a translation project. (Note: The words ‘editor’ and ‘proofreader’ are used interchangeably throughout this article.)

Some people believe that proofreaders should be more specialized and/or more experienced than translators, and should be able to notice imperfections in a translator’s technical capabilities. For others, proofreaders can be fledgling translators who may still be learning the craft, but are very good at spotting even the tiniest language mistakes in a specialized translator’s work. Others still believe the relationship between translators and proofreaders is one between equals: they complement each other like the organs in a single human body.

A minor subject of disagreement is whether the proofreader should be a native speaker of the target language or the source language. I have talked to translators who strongly believed that proofreaders should be native speakers of the source language, as only then would they have increased awareness of flaws in the translator’s understanding of the source text (the translator being a native speaker of the target language). But I have signed agreements with at least two translation companies who specified that the proofreading services I was to provide to them (along with translation services) should be performed by someone who is also a native speaker of the target language like myself, the translator.

So, as you can see, there are different approaches to this matter. And I am not even going into the further specialization of proofreaders in more quality-oriented translation companies: translation editors (who check the target texts against the source texts), monolingual proofreaders (who check the target text for language mistakes), technical reviewers (who check the target text for wrong jargon/style), final copy editors (for ready-for-press translations), quality assurance proofreaders (who check the target text for numbers, formatting, file requirements etc.), and so on.

As for me, at some point or another in my career, I have taken all the roles mentioned above, including the ones in the fourth paragraph, except for technical review, and I don’t have a one-size-fits-all opinion on this. Maybe the best thing to do is deciding on an individual basis, taking into account the individual project’s peculiarities and the individual client’s needs. On the other hand, I also realize that big translation companies (and translators, for that matter) do not have the time and the resources to act on an individual basis, and they must have a standard procedure in place in order to work profitably.

What do you think? How do you view proofreaders’ role and scope of service in a translation project?

Managing Direct Clients

Fabio Said — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:15:50 +0000

Working for direct clients (as opposed to working with translation agencies) is very profitable. But there is a catch. A freelance translator has to be very careful and disciplined in order not to be overwhelmed by the amount of additional work involved in client education, client acquisition, client management and client relations. Here are my thoughts on that.

First of all, talking about direct clients in general doesn’t make sense. A distinction has to be made between, for instance, direct clients who are large corporations vs. smaller companies, local vs. regional/global companies, companies vs. private individuals, those who need a (stamped and signed, hard-copy) certified translation vs. those who are satisfied with receiving the translation by email. Each of those has different needs and expects something different from the translator.

For example, dealing with private individuals who need certified translations can be very time-consuming. They are usually clueless and never talked to a translator before. They need assurance and guidance in the intricate procedures of government agencies, of which the certified translator—when translating government documents and documents for use by the government—is a part. And sometimes they may also be unable to pay the translator’s fee. But when they are, they pay immediately and in cash (before or on delivery of the hard-copy translations), so the translator’s return-on-investment is immediate.

A large corporation, on the other hand, usually has a Procurement Department with employees who may have already dealt with translators and translations before. They also usually don’t fuss about price, and tend to negotiate on delivery deadlines instead. But they need time to pay—in Germany, for example, a market that is known for its liquidity, that would be a minimum of 14 days, and some large corporations need much more than that (the longest payment cycle I’ve seen in German direct clients was 60 days).

And so on…

All that makes it obvious that the time it takes to deal with each one of those clients—all those long minutes and even hours it takes to negotiate, reassure, convince and inform the client—must be accounted for in a translator’s price calculations and time management. Assuming that your productivity will be the same regardless of the type of client (and project) is not a good business idea. And I there is no golden rule to follow—the translator has to be able to quickly assess on an individual basis how much time the client will cost him/her before mentioning the price.

Something I find very helpful is having the basic relevant information already published on my website, so that clients may have the chance to be reassured, convinced and informed before he/she even calls/emails me. Of course, not every client finds me through my website, and not every client has the time to read all the information I have put online. But it helps, and if the first contact is by email I can refer to specific pages of my websites that gives the information the client needs, instead of writing it all over again.

In some cases, though, direct clients drain so much energy that it makes them not profitable at all, despite the fact that they pay a higher fee. On such occasions, thank God for (good) translation agencies!