Training for Translators

Classes for translators and interpreters


Corinne McKay

An interesting translation specialization

As promised a few posts back, here’s some information about David Russi, an English>Spanish translator here in Colorado, who after many years of freelancing, has gone in-house as a translator for COMET (Cooperative Program for Operational Meteorology, Education and Training) and loves it. COMET’s outreach efforts including Spanish translation have clearly paid off, as their website notes that they were awarded the 2006 “Excellence in Geophysical Education” award.

David localized COMET’s entire MetEd (Meteorology Education and Training) website into Spanish, and reports that he has so far translated about 80 hours of meteorology instruction into Spanish as well. David says, “This material helps meteorologists in Central and South America use and understand our satellite data and train for their work, it is really useful stuff that is being used by hundreds of people (for now, I’d like to see it get to thousands) to grow in their profession.”


Corinne McKay

Open up

Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), according to my unscientific observations, seems to be gaining some traction in the translation industry. FOSS, software for which the source code is publicly available, is often (though not always) cost-free, and is often localized into more languages than is proprietary software. Now that I’m going steady with OmegaT, my own freelance business is running exclusively on FOSS, so it seemed like an opportune time to revisit the options for open source-minded translators.

The most basic choice in the FOSS spectrum is whether you want to run an open source operating system (such as our home’s distribution of choice, Ubuntu Linux) or run FOSS on top of your current operating system. If you don’t know anything about Linux and would like to learn more, check out your local Linux Users Group. Even if you live in Qatar or Kyrgystan, there’s a LUG there!

Nowadays, a lot of FOSS runs on non-free operating systems too. You can take your current machine, let’s say you’re running Windows, and install OpenOffice.org‘s free office suite, OmegaT, Firefox‘s web browser and you’re in business. Let’s take a look at the FOSS a translator might use, and what’s involved in staying compatible with the market leader proprietary software.

  • Office software: For best compatibility with Microsoft Office, use OpenOffice.org. It contains a word processing program, spreadsheet, presentation program, database and drawing program, and as long as you are not using macros, is essentially completely compatible with Microsoft Office. Just go to File>Save As, then select the appropriate format, such as “Microsoft Word 97/2000/XP.” In 5+ years of freelance work, I have never had a client notice that my OO.o documents were not created with MS Office (and if they had asked, I would have told them). OO.o’s main incompatibility with MS Office is macros; because of the enormous differences between the two macro formats, software such as Trados and Wordfast, which depends on MS Office macros, will not run in OO.o. OO.o comes in Linux, Windows and Mac formats. And it’s cost-free.
  • Web browsing: This isn’t big news, since Firefox is quite mainstream. It’s a great web browser, and eminently customizable with lots of plugins, and runs on basically any operating system.
  • Translation memory: Heartsome jumped the proprietary gap by becoming the first commercially supported translation environment tool to both run on Linux (as well as Windows and Mac) and use OpenOffice.org file formats. I like Heartsome, although it has some speed issues on my computer (not necessarily Heartsome’s fault). Heartsome is inexpensive by TenT standards, but it’s not free. Personally I prefer OmegaT, which also runs on pretty much any operating system (definitely Linux, Mac and Windows) and uses OO.o file formats. I find it much faster than Heartsome, the people who develop and manage it are very pleasant and helpful, and it’s free.
  • If you want to run Linux but still have to run some software that doesn’t have a Linux version (i.e. Photoshop, Quicken, Lotus Notes, FrameMaker, etc.), check out CrossOver Linux (the same company produces CrossOver Mac), a handy tool that allows you to legally run Windows software on your Linux machine without a Windows license. If you want to run Wordfast on Linux, it will work if you use CrossOver Linux. First install CrossOver Linux, then MSOffice, then Wordfast. You can read a page on my website about it here.


Corinne McKay

The environmental benefits of freelancing

Here is an interesting post from the blog “Masked Translator,” focusing on the ways in which home-based translation is an exceedingly environmentally-friendly job. Masked Translator makes a number of great points, including a separation between true home-based workers and “home-based” workers whose carbon footprint is actually quite large because they travel from home to work-related appointments which necessitate a professional wardrobe, reliable/presentable car, fuel use, etc.

This post highlighted to me the ways in which home-based translators (and in general, people who work exclusively from home) live an “environmentally light” life. In our case, the fact that my husband and I both work from home in jobs that don’t require travel has allowed us to have one 17 year old car since we can bike and walk almost everywhere we need to go during the week. Because we’re home most of the time, we have time to cook real meals and have a large vegetable garden, so we almost never eat out. Work clothes are almost a non-issue, with a few presentable outfits (largely purchased at the local thrift store) for meetings and conferences. Check out Masked Translator’s post for more ideas on how to reduce your freelance carbon footprint!


Corinne McKay

Dispute resolution in the translation industry

For better or for worse, the translation industry does not currently have a standard procedure or body for resolving disputes between translators and clients. So, clients who feel that a translator has delivered substandard work and translators who feel that they’ve been unfairly treated by clients do not have a standard avenue of recourse and must either resolve the issue themselves or pursue it through traditional legal means such as small claims court or collections services.

A typical translation industry dispute situation often goes like this:
Translator: “My translation was perfect and now the client is refusing to pay. Several of my friends even looked over the translation and agreed that it was perfect. The client has to pay me.”
Client: “The translator came highly recommended but the translation is horrible, unusable. We’ve nearly lost one of our biggest clients because of this. We shouldn’t have to pay for this work.”

Disputes between translators and clients arise over various issues; quality issues are the stickiest, since they are so subjective. In other areas, a dispute may arise but it’s more clear-cut: either the translator met the deadline or didn’t; either the client paid on time or didn’t. But when it comes to quality, it’s often a “your word against mine” situation that quickly turns acrimonious. Following are some tips for avoiding and resolving dispute situations, both from the translator’s point of view and the agency’s.

First, every translator should belong to an a translation agency rating service (see a post on About Translation listing various services) and should check it before accepting a job from any new client. To me, this is an absolute requirement of running a successful freelance business; recently, I received several e-mails from translators complaining about a non-paying agency. In about two minutes spent on Payment Practices, the agency rating service I subscribe to, I was able to see that this agency had a track record of non-payment going back several years. While these translators certainly didn’t deserve not to be paid, I see no excuse for not investing $15 or $20 per year and a few minutes of your time to check out what other translators think of a potential client.

Second, translators need to be honest about their abilities; the vast majority of the quality issues I hear about (in which the translator admits that he/she did a poor job) involve a situation where the translator took the job for the wrong reasons: was afraid to say no, really needed the money, didn’t look at the documents before accepting, etc. Finally, translators need to be able to hear and learn from feedback about their work. Here in freelance-land, we don’t have annual performance reviews, and even those of us who are ATA-certified take the certification test only once, so outside assessments of our work are few and far between. If a client has legitimate complaints about your work, take them as a learning opportunity and avoid getting defensive; apologize and ask what you can do to regain the client’s trust.

From the client perspective, vetting a translator ahead of a job is somewhat harder, since there aren’t yet any services devoted to critiquing specific translators. A translator might be asked to provide references, but chances are that these will be positive. And, as with investments, “past results are not always an indicator of future performance.” Even a qualified translator will have an off day, technical problems, etc. and either miss a deadline or deliver substandard work.

I think that when this happens, the most important thing from the client’s perspective is to provide specific examples of what was wrong with the document, not just say “It was terrible and we’re not paying you.” For example, a client could provide a document with tracked changes, indicating the revisions that an editor made. Or, the client could provide a list of specific examples that show why the document had to be retranslated. If the document was sent to the end client without being reviewed and the quality objections are coming from the end client, the document should be reviewed by another translator before the quality objections are addressed, since the end client’s objections may or may not be valid.

The hardest-to-resolve situation arises when all of the above steps have happened and there’s still no agreement on whether the translation is acceptable or not. This brings up the question of whether a standard dispute resolution procedure or a dispute resolution organization is something that would benefit the translation industry overall. What we’re missing right now is a neutral arbitration setting, where the translation can be evaluated by someone who has no stake in the outcome. As it stands, the translator is likely to call in a colleague who is in turn likely to agree with him or her that the translation is fine, while the agency is likely to use another translator it works with, who will probably agree that the translation isn’t up to snuff. As of now, in the U.S. at least, there is no third party who will intervene in this type of dispute; maybe it’s a niche waiting to be filled?