| Страниц в теме: < [1 2 3] | When the proofreader does a bad job... Автор темы: Anna A. K.
|
|---|
Tony Keily
Local time: 01:48
итальянский => английский
+ ...
| Sorry if this bothers you | Mar 9, 2022 |
[quote]Anna1307 wrote:
Look at what we have here, a holier-than-thou nitpicker.
If you knew how ridiculous your comment is you wouldn't have said it.
Hi Anna,
Sorry you feel like that and this isn't directed at you personally but at a generalised problem! Maybe I was wrong to use an ironic tone and I can understand how it could look like I was just I was being a smart and putting you down. Sorry for that. Anyway, you're obviously not alone in your usage: many agencies boasting the ISO 17100:2015 standard offer me tasks involving 'proofreading', 'QC' or whatever, when they mean something else.
If you looked through my other posts (I wouldn't recommend anyone actually do this!), you'd see I make this point every time I see it comes up. It's because I believe that it's hard enough for the members of our profession to be taken seriously and treated as we deserve without ignoring the existing professional standards, which to judge by most TSP's websites govern the vast majority of work we do. We only have a handful of frequently used terms for the translation process and each of them should determine the work to be done and the rate paid.
- Revision is correction requiring comparison of target and source.
- Reviewing is target-only correction.
- Proofreading is checking for error before publication. It's a very specific skill and even has its own set of symbols (see, for example, https://www.servicescape.com/blog/commonly-used-proofreading-symbols-with-examples).
Is it too much to ask that we use them accurately? Maybe.
[Edited at 2022-03-09 10:18 GMT]
[Edited at 2022-03-09 15:50 GMT]
| | | | Lingua 5B 
Босния и Герцеговина
Local time: 01:48
Член ProZ.com c 2009
английский => хорватский
+ ...
| They are also used interchangeably. | Mar 9, 2022 |
For instance, if you use Trados, within the software itself, it says “bilingual review”, not “bilingual revision”.
While it’s nice that you took the time to clarify these terms, it’s very much off-topic on this thread. IMO, it’s more about a sloppy methodology the agencies use when selecting checkers.
| | | | Tony Keily
Local time: 01:48
итальянский => английский
+ ...
Lingua 5B wrote:
For instance, if you use Trados, within the software itself, it says “bilingual review”, not “bilingual revision”.
While it’s nice that you took the time to clarify these terms, it’s very much off-topic on this thread. IMO, it’s more about a sloppy methodology the agencies use when selecting checkers.
Really, I felt I owed Anna a proper explanation because she was annoyed at my comment, which, as I said, probably came across as flippant. In a conversation you can say things with a smile that in writing come across as annoying and even nasty and that wasn't my intention. So I just wanted to show that there was a serious intention there.
I guess that in any case making this point almost always involves sidetracking from a discussion on something else. But I agree with you: let's get back on topic!
| | | | Anna A. K.
Германия
Local time: 01:48
Член ProZ.com c 2020
английский => немецкий
Автор темы
Hi Tony,
Thanks for explaining, and sorry for lashing out on you in the overly harsh way that I did.
You have a point there. Since it's our job to be precise with language, we have to be ultra-precise about our own terminology. It is in the nature of things. Interestingly enough, all the agencies I work with use the term "proofreading" for that step. Seems that it has become commonplace. But anyways, thanks for ... See more Hi Tony,
Thanks for explaining, and sorry for lashing out on you in the overly harsh way that I did.
You have a point there. Since it's our job to be precise with language, we have to be ultra-precise about our own terminology. It is in the nature of things. Interestingly enough, all the agencies I work with use the term "proofreading" for that step. Seems that it has become commonplace. But anyways, thanks for pointing it out, I will keep it in mind. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Metin Demirel
Турция
Local time: 03:48
итальянский => турецкий
+ ...
I was once hired by an agency to proofread their existing translations. They had told me from the start that I should not make any preferential changes so that I could fix no more than the actual errors. Most inspiring thing ever said to me. Whenever I am about to proofread anything, I do not do preferential changes.
[Edited at 2022-03-10 19:38 GMT]
| | | | jyuan_us
США
Local time: 19:48
Член ProZ.com c 2005
английский => китайский
+ ...
| You may need to use your energy to judge if the changes you want to make are preferential or not | Mar 10, 2022 |
Metin Demirel wrote:
I was once hired by an agency to proofread their existing translations. They had told me from the start that I should not make any preferential changes so that I could fix no more than the actual errors. Most inspiring thing ever said to me. Whenever I am about to proofread anything, I do not do preferential changes.
[Edited at 2022-03-10 19:38 GMT]
The time you may need to spend in pondering if a change is preferential or not could be longer than that spent in just making that change. So, sometimes the requirement of making no preferential changes can be counter-productive.
[Edited at 2022-03-11 00:24 GMT]
| | | | Metin Demirel
Турция
Local time: 03:48
итальянский => турецкий
+ ...
| Quite the contrary. | Mar 11, 2022 |
jyuan_us wrote:
The time you may need to spend in pondering if a change is preferential or not could be longer than that spent in just making that change. So, sometimes the requirement of making no preferential changes can be counter-productive.
[Edited at 2022-03-11 00:24 GMT]
As my task is limited with the translation errors (grammar, punctuation, consistency, etc.) it diminishes the time I would spend on the text.
| | | | Lingua 5B
Босния и Герцеговина
Local time: 01:48
Член ProZ.com c 2009
английский => хорватский
+ ...
| A video for this thread. | Mar 11, 2022 |
Here is some funny but educational video: https://youtu.be/lt_b4VKBDhI
Btw, this guy is an actual medical doctor (ophthalmologist), just doing some acting on the side.
[Edited at 2022-03-11 09:02 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Tony Keily
Local time: 01:48
итальянский => английский
+ ...
| On reflection, though... | Mar 11, 2022 |
Lingua 5B wrote:
While it’s nice that you took the time to clarify these terms, it’s very much off-topic on this thread.
I guess that if a thread sets out to deal with a subject, but then calls it something else, you could also argue that the whole thread is off-topic!
| | | | Daniel Frisano
Италия
Local time: 01:48
Член ProZ.com c 2008
английский => итальянский
+ ...
Scenario: The client requires an update to your previous translation because the end client added new material, so they provide the amended source file along with your previous translation, which in the meantime – unbeknownst to you – was utterly butchered by a clueless editor.
What do you do?
| | | | Baran Keki
Турция
Local time: 03:48
Член ProZ.com
английский => турецкий
| Another question | Mar 16, 2022 |
Daniel Frisano wrote:
Scenario: The client requires an update to your previous translation because the end client added new material, so they provide the amended source file along with your previous translation, which in the meantime – unbeknownst to you – was utterly butchered by a clueless editor.
What do you do?
Damn their eyes and curse them. What else can you do?
Here is another question: You're paired up with an editor/proofreader who you know favours certain words such as "yearly", "nevertheless", "photograph" etc., would you still use your preferred words such as "annual", "nonetheless", "picture" etc., knowing full well that that c*nt will replace them with his favorite words even though the context is more in line with your preferred terminology?
| | | | Gerard Barry
Германия
Local time: 01:48
немецкий => английский
Baran Keki wrote:
Daniel Frisano wrote:
Scenario: The client requires an update to your previous translation because the end client added new material, so they provide the amended source file along with your previous translation, which in the meantime – unbeknownst to you – was utterly butchered by a clueless editor.
What do you do?
Damn their eyes and curse them. What else can you do?
Here is another question: You're paired up with an editor/proofreader who you know favours certain words such as "yearly", "nevertheless", "photograph" etc., would you still use your preferred words such as "annual", "nonetheless", "picture" etc., knowing full well that that c*nt will replace them with his favorite words even though the context is more in line with your preferred terminology?
This sounds so like a colleague in my last job! He was a pedantic c*nt if ever there was one!
| | |
|
|
|
Baran Keki
Турция
Local time: 03:48
Член ProZ.com
английский => турецкий
| Gerard Barry
Германия
Local time: 01:48
немецкий => английский
| | Страниц в теме: < [1 2 3] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » When the proofreader does a bad job... | 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 » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
