Training for Translators

Classes for translators and interpreters

Freelancing


Corinne McKay

Paid by the word or paid by the hour?

At last year’s American Translators Association conference in San Francisco, I overheard a few conversations about how the translation industry would be affected if translators started billing by the hour rather than by the word. In some cases and for some jobs, translators do bill by the hour, but the tried-and-true per-word charge is still the norm. Here are a few thoughts on charging by the word versus by the hour.

Pricing translation by the word has some advantages: Especially if you charge by the source word, everyone knows up front how much the translation will cost, down to the cent. No surprise overruns to deal with and no estimating how many hours a project will take. Per-word pricing encourages translators to maintain their skills and technology, since efficient translators effectively earn more per hour. In some sense, per-word pricing may also drive translation technology innovations, since translators may be more likely to purchase a tool that allows them to work faster. Also, skilled and efficient translators can probably earn more by charging by the word than clients would be likely to pay by the hour. Say that you’re translating 600 words an hour at 14 cents a word, not out of the question for many translators, but I’ll venture a guess that those same clients might balk at paying $84 an hour for translation.  Per-word pricing also allows translation buyers to compare apples to apples when it comes to costs, rather than weighing a higher per-hour quote from a translator who claims to work faster versus a lower per-hour quote from someone who works more slowly.

But then again…:Pricing by the word has an obvious disadvantage from the translator’s side, which is that you are agreeing to work for a flat and fixed rate. So, when you get to those three pages of barely legible handwriting, or the document that’s been scanned, faxed and photocopied eight times before arriving in your inbox, you have to decide whether you need to negotiate a higher per-word rate. This can be a particular problem when it comes to editing, which is why I personally decline to be paid by the word for editing.

So then maybe pricing by the hour is better?: Well…yes…no…maybe! The main advantage of pricing by the hour is that there is no risk of loss on the translator’s part; if you charge $50 an hour and you work ten hours, you make $500. If you charge 20 cents a word and think you can translate 600 words an hour but the nature of the document is such that you really translate 250 words an hour, you’ve just taken a big hit. However, my main reasons for continuing to believe in pricing by the word are: a) the client knows up front how much the translation will cost and b) I think that most experienced and efficient translators can earn more by the word than what most clients will pay by the hour. Just don’t forget to agree in advance on whether the billable word count is source or target!


Corinne McKay

The art of saying no

Recently, several newly established freelance translators have asked me about how and when to say no to clients who are offering translation projects. It’s a delicate topic, since as freelancers we need to accept work in order to stay in business, but we also need to decline work in order to maintain a good quality of life to avoid taking on projects that are outside our areas of expertise. Following are some tips on how to say no to clients without harming your future relationship with them.

When I decline a job because it is outside my area of expertise or because I think the deadline is unrealistic, I tell the client what the issue is, because I think that this builds an honest relationship with the the client, who is then more likely to believe me when I say that I can take something on. For example if the project involves very technical documents or hard science, I simply say, “It’s not my specialization; the end result will be much better if you use a translator who specializes in that area.” If the deadline is more than what I can take on, same plan of action: “I’m concerned that I can’t do a quality job in that amount of time. Of course if you can extend the deadline…”

One advantage of this strategy is that I offer it as evidence to new clients. If the client seems nervous about using me and I want the project, I tell them that I regularly turn down work that is outside of my specializations, or I say “I never take on a project that I feel I can’t do a good job on. I wouldn’t give you a quote for this project if I weren’t confident in my ability to produce a high-quality translation.” This way, the client knows that I don’t automatically say yes to everything.

Personally, I try not to refuse a project because of rate or deadline issues without at least putting forth a counter-offer. For example if a client says “we can pay X cents a word,” where X is much lower than my rate, I might say “I would be very interested in this project if you can pay my base rate of Y cents a word.” Depending on the situation, for example if I can tell that the client is new to purchasing translations, I might also suggest that “Of course you’re welcome to look for someone who will work for that rate, but I would be concerned about quality since most established professional translators don’t seem to be working for that rate.” If the issue is deadline, I usually take a similar approach, “It sounds like a really interesting project, but I find that in order to produce a high-quality translation, I need to limit myself to 2,000-3,000 words per day. If you could give me 4 days to translate your 10,000 words, I would be happy to help out.”

When you’re weighing your decision on whether to accept a project, I think it’s important to differentiate between a rush deadline and an unrealistic deadline. For better or worse, rush deadlines are the reality in many translation specializations. However, I think there’s a difference between doing 10,000 words in three days (a real squeeze, but possible if you are very familiar with the subject matter and the documents are either in a read/write format or a very legible PDF and don’t involve complex formatting) and doing (or more likely trying to do) 10,000 words in two days; at that level, I think it’s almost impossible to work accurately enough that quality doesn’t suffer.

I think it’s also important to differentiate between going the extra mile/kilometer for your regular clients and allowing yourself to be exploited by new or infrequent clients who are in a bind. Not all translators share this view, but I feel that my regular clients deserve some special treatment for the quality of life that they allow me to enjoy, working on my own schedule, on interesting projects and earning a healthy income. So, if a regular client needs 10 words translated, I do it without charging. If a regular client’s project requires a few hours of work on a weekend, I charge my regular rate instead of a premium rate. However, I don’t do these favors for non-regular clients; the “royal treatment” is reserved for my top few (very few!) clients on whom my business depends. That’s a post for another time, “The Art of Saying Yes!”


Corinne McKay

Which English?

Rumor, or should we say rumour, has it that many (or at least more than usual) translators on this side of the Atlantic are being approached to translate into what we commonly refer to here as U.K. English. I would guess that this has more to do with the falling U.S. dollar and weakening U.S. economy than with a sudden shortage of qualified into-English translators in the U.K.

This brings up a number of interesting questions. The first is, what is meant by U.K. English? Does this mean that the translator simply sets her/his spell-checker to U.K. English and uses U.K. date formats? Or does the translator attempt to write with a British flair, substituting “pudding” for “dessert” and “chemist’s” for “pharmacy,” or “at weekends” for “on the weekend”? A more conceptual issue is whether some sort of culturally neutral English is possible or desirable, and whether translation consumers are satisfied with translations that may be technically correct but stylistically more American than British.

U.S.-based German to English translator Jill Sommer says, “Translating into U.K. English involves more than switching a z to an s. When a client contacts me for a U.K. English translation, I turn it down.” Jill sees part of the problem as client misunderstanding of the many differences between U.K. and U.S. English and relates the story of a U.S.-based colleague who was asked, halfway into a 100+ page translation to “make it U.K. English.” “At a minimum, clients should be willing to use a U.K. English proofreader. They underestimate the differences that make a text sound British or American,” says Jill.

With session proposals for the 2008 ATA conference due next Friday, it seems like there might also be a niche for some linguistic education on this topic. Maybe a session on “Fundamentals of U.K. English for U.S. English translators” or “English with a British flair”? I would also be interested to know whether the reverse phenomenon happens on the other side of the Atlantic; do U.K.-based translation buyers automatically use U.S.-based translators, or do they ask U.K-based translators to Americanize their translations?


Corinne McKay

Strategies for sustaining a freelance business

Michelle Vranizan Rafter’s blog has a great post
entitled “Freelancers’ Strategies for Prospering in Bad Times.” Although my sense is that most translators are not feeling the hit of the economic downturn, this post has some very useful information for growing your freelance business under any circumstances; even a beginning freelance translator could apply this information to get established, and for those of us who are already in the business, it’s always good to be reminded about the importance of continuous marketing.

The advice in this blog post reminded me of an interview with noted financial translator Chris Durban that appeared on Business Week’s website in 2004. I like to hear Chris Durban’s thoughts about pretty much anything (her “Onionskin” column is the first thing I read in every issue of the ATA Chronicle), but I thought that her comments about marketing were particularly insightful. Chris’ interview and Michelle Rafter’s blog post point out what I see as critical marketing errors on the part of many freelance translators:

  • Living by the computer alone. I’ll second the person in Michelle’s blog post who said that most of their best clients have come through in-person meetings or personal referrals. I actually met one of my biggest clients in the hallway at an ATA conference, and I find that I have a closer rapport with clients who I’ve met in person and cultivated a relationship with. In addition, I think that high-value clients, those who either pay very well or have a large volume of work, are much more likely to trust someone they have met in person. So, every once in a while (or even more often!), shut off the computer and talk to some live people. Attend an ATA or local chapter event, join your local Chamber of Commerce, go to a freelancers’ group potluck, attend a trade show for your specialization.
  • Competing on price alone. I think that many translators do this simply because they can’t think of a way not to; they automatically assume that if they need more work and the going rate for their language is X cents per word, if they charge X-2 cents, they’ll stand out. There are a few problems with this. First, I think that many quality-conscious clients are skeptical about translators who charge low rates, feeling that there must be some reason why the person is willing to work for so little. Second, I think that most translators do a better job when they feel that they are being paid fairly, and that the reverse is true as well. Third, I think that competing on price sets up a negative dynamic between the client and the translator, where the client’s view of the translator is as a commodity provider. Lastly, racing to the bottom is a losing battle; there will always be someone willing to work for one cent less. Rather than competing on price, charge what you feel your work is worth and compete on quality and service.
  • Resting on laurels. No question, the translation industry is booming, and most established translators are not hurting for work. However, many of us also rely on steady flows of work from regular clients, each of whom may provide 30%, 50% or more of our yearly income. It’s important to have a plan for what happens if one of these relationships dries up. Instead of assuming that you’ll be happily translating away for your current clients indefinitely, always be thinking of who your next clients will be and how you will market to them.


Corinne McKay

Euro vs euros: why translators need each other

Every once in a while, I get a glimpse of some of the ways in which translators (and probably other obsessive “word people” too!) are different from the rest of the population, and thus why we need to stick together. Earlier this week, a French translation listserve that I belong to engaged in a lively discussion of whether, in English, the correct plural of “euro” (as in the currency denomination) is “euro” or “euros.” While a non-translator might feel hopelessly nit-picky for even thinking about this type of issue, the listserve members had clearly spent some time mulling it over even before the question came up. One member pointed out that the actual bank notes say “100 euro” “50 euro,” etc. and that other currencies (yen, yuan) are invariable in the plural (1 yen/1,ooo yen, etc.); others pointed to the Guardian style guide’s use of “euros” (“he will be fined a few thousand euros”) and to the fact that the New York Times uses “euros” as well. Yet another example of the value of associating with like-minded translators!