Translation quality

Test translations, whereby a potential client, often a translation company, asks a translator to complete an “audition” translation for free before beginning work with the client, are a frequent subject of controversy in the industry. Translators wonder if they should complete unpaid translations, if they should set a limit on the length of test translations, if they should offer to provide samples of their work instead, or if clients will be reluctant to use them if they do not complete test translations. Clients understandably want to hire highly-skilled translators, and one element of this is often to give the translator a test that many other translators have taken, in order to compare the new translator’s work with that of established and trusted translators. In rare cases, translators either suspect or have proof that unscrupulous clients have used “unpaid tests” as a way to get some translation work done for free, which adds to the atmosphere of distrust surrounding tests.

One of the most common questions surrounding test translations (from the translator’s point of view) is “should I take unpaid tests?” In and of itself, this question doesn’t provide enough information to ensure a reliable answer, since the answer depends on a variety of factors. How long is the unpaid test? Who is the client? Is the test a tryout for a specific project? How much does the translator need or want the work in question? All of these are important factors to consider when deciding whether the time investment in taking an unpaid test is a good one.

Interestingly, item D of the ATA Code of Professional Conduct and Business Practices for “employers or contractors of translators and/or interpreters” reads: “I will not require translators or interpreters to do unpaid work for the prospect of a paid assignment.” Although I guess that there is some room for interpretation (so to speak!) here, i.e. what constitutes “requiring” work; is a test translation “unpaid work” or something else entirely, this clause seems to take a stance against unpaid test translations, at least when they are given by translation companies that are ATA members.

For translation companies, the alternatives to unpaid tests, such as paid tests or small paid assignments, are more expensive and more risky, unless they have vetted the translator’s background and experience before administering the test. For an agency that receives many unsolicited resumes, it’s much easier to have the next step in the application process be “if you’re interested in working for us, complete this test and return it” (which is likely to weed out many candidates). Also, translation is not the only profession where unpaid testing, even if it’s not referred to as such, occurs. Within the past few years, I’ve conducted my own “unpaid tests” on a primary care doctor and a financial planner, both of whom offered a complimentary half-hour consultation before I committed to using their services.

Ideally, translation companies should consider paid translation tests as a cost of doing business, in the same sense that they see recruiting, hiring and training their in-house employees as a cost of business. Barring that, I think that it makes sense for translators to set some guidelines on when and how they take unpaid tests. In my own case, I ask the potential client to confirm two things before I take an unpaid test: 1) that they currently have or anticipate having a need for additional translators in my language combination; I do not take unpaid tests for the purpose of being added to an agency’s general pool; and 2) that my rates (and I provide a rate sheet) are within the range of rates that they pay for my language combination. If the agency cannot confirm these, I don’t take the test; other translators at a different point in their careers may have a different opinion about this. In addition, I think that it makes sense to put a limit on the number of words that you will translate as an unpaid test; I think that half an hour’s work (for me this would be 200 to 250 words) is a reasonable limit, but again this is a personal decision.

Yet another option is for the translator to offer the prospective client some samples of work that he/she has done in his/her areas of specialization. To me, this is a more reliable indicator of the quality of the translator’s work and it also allows the agency to review a larger sample of the translator’s work than it can by administering an unpaid test.

Recently, the Colorado Translators Association held a great workshop with local editor and editing instructor Alice Levine. This session was really enlightening in a number of ways; Alice is a lively and engaging presenter and she seemed to enjoy speaking to a group of fellow “word geeks,” and it also made me realize that translators and proofreading have a complex relationship that isn’t easily resolved in the conditions under which most of us work.

Alice talked a bit about “the proofreading mindset,” and how it’s important to get into the right frame of mind when you’re proofreading; right here, I realized why proofreading is one of the aspects of translation that I really have to work on. If I’m going to yoga three times a week, my mind is more in the mood to proofread; otherwise (and here I mean most of the time), I’m one of those people who naturally reads too fast, talks too fast, etc. and I think that many other translators fall into this category as well. At the same time, I, along with probably most other translators, have a very low error tolerance when it comes to the written word. A couple of days ago I was bothered for an inordinate amount of time over the fact that when taking my daughter to swimming lessons, I had to sign a paper saying, among other things, that she would not wear a swimsuit equipped with “flotation devises.” So, it’s a tightrope that we as translators walk; we want our own work to be error-free, we’re intensely bothered by errors in other people’s work, yet most of us don’t or can’t do what it takes to produce perfect work.

To start out with, Alice advised our group that it’s almost impossible to proofread well if you proofread on your computer screen, proofread your own work, proofread when you’re tired, or proofread something without allowing a break of at least several hours between when you write/translate it and when you proofread it. Right there, you can see a variety of stumbling blocks that are just the nature of our jobs as translators. Often, printing hard copies of the documents we work on isn’t practical because of length, or because we want to keep the translation in a translation environment tool until after it’s been proofed. The reality of most of our specializations is that deadlines are tight; there often isn’t time for a proofreader to go over the document and send it back to the translator for approval. Because of these tight deadlines, there is often barely enough time to finish a quality translation, much less allow a few hours’ break before going back and proofing it two or three times.

At the risk of sounding like it’s all gloom and doom, Alice’s workshop definitely helped me come up with some techniques that I feel are realistic for myself and for other translators who work under deadline and who proofread on the computer screen. First, I think it’s absolutely necessary to edit the target file against the source file once, then just read the target file on its own. When I do this, it amazes me how many errors I catch when I’m looking just at the target file. Alice emphasized the importance of realizing the limitations of the spell-checker, and she advised doing a search for homonyms such as too/to, their/they’re, etc., which I think is also doable. Along those lines, whenever I’m working on a translation where I find myself confusing two terms that are similar (i.e. loan/credit, contract/agreement, agent/representative etc.), I do a search for just those words so that I can individually compare each word in the target document to the corresponding word in the source document.

Part of this goes back to my previous post on being paid by the word versus by the hour, or maybe this just relates to rates in general. In some sense, I think that being paid by the word discourages careful proofreading, because every time you go back over a word, you’re effectively decreasing your hourly rate, whereas if you’re paid by the hour, you’re essentially rewarded for doing two, three or more very careful revisions of a document. In essence, this is what I think is at work in some environments such as high-level governmental and international organizations where translators may be expected to translate as few as 1,500 words a day because of the unending emphasis on quality. For those of us who work largely with the private sector, the speed versus quality equation is one that requires careful balancing. Alice’s workshop was a really enlightening chance to reflect on how all of these factors affect translators’ work and how we can improve quality within the parameters of our clients’ needs.

Many translators insist that talking to anyone (clients, potential clients, colleagues, beginning translators, etc.) is unnecessary and detracts from their true calling, which can only be fulfilled by spending at least 10 hours a day at the computer. While that’s somewhat of a joke, I think that many translators do feel that unlike interpreters, they don’t really need to keep up their active language skills in their source language(s), and that passive (i.e. understanding what you read or hear) skills will suffice. In my experience, especially when dealing with higher-paying direct clients, it’s actually quite important to be able to communicate fluently in your source language(s). Direct clients in particular are, I think, more inclined to use translators with whom they communicate well, whether it’s over e-mail or on the phone, and are also more likely (whether for good reason or not) to mistrust a translator who has difficulty communicating in the client’s language.

Obviously, many translators have a comparatively easy time keeping up their source language skills because they live all or part of the time in a country or community where their source language is spoken, marry someone who is a native speaker of their source language, use their source language in their non-work life, etc. However, many of us, and I’ll include myself in this, have more logistical barriers to overcome. Taking myself as an example, my foundation in written and spoken French is strong, and I’ve spent quite a bit of time going to school, living and traveling in French-speaking countries. However, French is not widely spoken where I live, nor does anyone in my family speak French, nor do I, as the parent of a young family, visit French-speaking countries anywhere near as frequently as I did until a few years ago.

Once I realized that being able to maintain my written, spoken and cultural skills in French was essential to my business, I decided it was worth an investment of my time and money, and I think that this applies to other translators as well. I think that “linguistically isolated” translators have a number of options for keeping up their source language fluency: with the prevalence of online resources such as podcasts, blogs, online editions of newspapers, etc., it’s quite easy to find free, high-quality materials in your source language. In addition, organizations such as the Alliance Francaise and the Goethe-Institut sometimes have classes that are suitable for advanced speakers. Many college and university towns also have foreign language conversation groups that welcome people at a variety of levels.

One resource that I’ve become very enthusiastic about is the audio magazines from Champs Elysées; (my association with them is only as a customer, no affiliate deal!) these are monthly publications that are available for French, Italian, German and Spanish and are intended for “intermediate to advanced” language learners. You have a choice of receiving just the audio magazine and the accompanying script and notes, or an additional audio study supplement with practice exercises. Although they might take you back to your junior high school days (repeat after the speaker…turn the verb into a noun…turn the “always” sentence into a “never” sentence), I find listening to the French edition to be a fun way to keep up with French culture, listen to a variety of French speakers’ accents and speech mannerisms, and do some targeted speaking practice. So, as they say in the Visa ads; One-year subscription to Champs Elysées including the audio study supplement: $266. Batteries for Discman to listen while doing housework: $2. Being able to banter with a client about the Sarkozy-Bruni scandale: Priceless.