|
|
Those of you who were on the Honyaku mailing list in June and July 2004 will remember a thread about what to do when it turns out that the customer is not always right -- how to respond when the customer “suggests” unacceptable changes in your translation. This discussion was so informative that JAT has collected the thread and saved it for future reference:
Hello, Fellow Slaves to the Whims of Linguistic Caprice,
I have a kind of strange situation on my hands. I did a very long (約35000字) manga translation related to a video game, and there were several 仲介者 between my agency and the end client. There were several levels of checks for accuracy of terms and whatnot, and there were several rounds of corrections, but overall it was fairly straightforward.
Well, the end client (who's a big shot in the video game industry) did their check and it came back with comments along the lines of 訳者が英語のネイティヴスピーカーかどうか疑わざるを得ないほどダメな訳です (or at least that was the gist of it), among other things.
Of course this was a big shock. We got the comments before we got the actual sheets with all the corrections on them, so I was eager to find out exactly where I had gone so wrong. Well, the sheets come back highlighted, color-coded for "incorrect term," "unnatural English," "ungrammatical English," and "mistranslation."
But there are no comments, no corrections. Just highlighting.
Okay, put aside the fact that they called my English so unnatural that it sounds like it was written by a non-native speaker. Do they expect me to guess what the bleep they want me to correct?
Here's an example of a phrase marked "unnatural English":
"This ain't no bed of roses, sonny boy."
Here's another one:
"Who was that masked man?" (This one is particularly laughable because it's accompanied by the comment, "not masked.")
For the rest, it's pretty clear.
100% of the phrases marked "ungrammatical" are typos: missing "a's," "that's," misspelled words, etc. (Yes, I hang my head in shame, but in my defense, I have to state that the number of agencies between me and the end client meant that all the deadlines telescoped down into a pretty unreasonable time limit.)
The "mistranslations" do indeed include a couple of bona fide mistranslations, but they also include parts where I departed from the original in order to develop a joke (This is manga aimed at 14-year-olds, after all).
And the "incorrect terms" are pretty much on the spot, but pretty inconsequential because they almost all involve capitalisation problems.
So, coming back to the comment about my English being unnatural: What am I to conclude when, for example, I use "Boy, you're greener than I thought" as a translation for お前、甘いね, and it's highlighted as unnatural and accompanied by "←!!??"? Or the examples above, with the "masked man"? All I can conclude is that it's the checker who isn't a native speaker of English.
Now, under normal circumstances, this wouldn't be that big a problem. However, it looks like my agency might not get paid (although they have already paid me). I am personally not affected, but it's a pretty unprintable thing to do, and I feel like I should do something.
The way it looks now, though, I'll hand in the corrections (a lot of which are based on pure conjecture), which will get sent up the 仲介者 ladder, and the end client will take them or leave them, but either way, I won't have a way of directly stating my case to the end client. And I feel that if I can't tell them that whoever they have proofing their translations is a total moron, then they might decide that no one gets paid.
Any ideas on what I should do?
Marc Adler
Wow, Marc, as Bill once said, "I feel your pain."
What a lousy situation.
It would seem to me, though, that your handing in more corrections to hopefully placate the people ripping your current translation to shreds would be just another shot in the dark, since they don't seem to understand colloquial American English.
Since the agency's reputation is on the line, and the situation is frustrating for you, could you offer to approach the people doing the checking for a chance to defend your translation? I know agencies are there for a reason, but in this case your coming forward would send the message that the agency (and you) stand behind your translation, and you're willing to put your money where your mouth is (bad metaphor, but you get the idea). If the big company is so unhappy that they are threatening to not pay (or are trying to get out of paying?), they would welcome a chance to work this out, no?
It sounds like the folks doing the checking are not native-E speakers, and they are taking advantage of being unseen to trash your work. For some reason I keep conjuring up this image of some non E-native, anally-challenged cretin, likely the only person nearby who can understand Japanese, getting thrills out of trashing your work. Call 'em out into the open.
Judy Howland
Marc,
A couple of things I would do if I were in your situation...
1) Ask whoever did the editing/highlighting to explain what was wrong with each highlighted section.
2) Send in your pic saying that you are indeed a native speaker (well, sorry kinda kidding...)
From what I read, I believe you did the right thing -- some jokes and slang ought to be adopted like you did and not 直訳. I think they either had some non-native translator proofread or someone who didn't understand your sense of humor. Sorry I am not very helpful.
Regards,
Noriko Fujiwara
Marc Adler wrote:
>Any ideas on what I should do?
Get direct clients. </billlise>
Seriously, with that many rungs on the ladder between you and the person making these complaints, there's not much you can do. You can outline your view of the situation, just as you did in the mail to the list, and send it along with the requested "corrections" and hope it makes it up to the people who need to see it.
You might also push for some direct contact with the end user, making clear that your aim is to straighten out any problems in the most efficient way possible (if time is of the essence, this might overcome the middlemen's tendency to prevent this kind of contact).
If you're worried that the agency giving you the work will feel pain from this, make sure the agency knows that you did a good job and it's the unreasonable client -- not little old service-providing you -- that needs to be avoided in the future if possible.
Good luck.
Peter Durfee
Marc Adler wrote:
> Now, under normal circumstances, this wouldn't be that big a problem.
> However, it looks like my agency might not get paid (although they have
> already paid me). I am personally not affected, but it's a pretty
> unprintable thing to do, and I feel like I should do something.
The client may not simply unilaterally declare the translation defective and refuse to pay.
If the translation is in fact defective, then the client needs to give the contractor a chance to correct the mistakes and submit an acceptable product (which is then presumably pushed down the chain to the translator). Only if the contractor cannot procure an acceptable translation after being given a chance to make corrections, then there might be a 契約不履行 situation, which might relieve the client of his obligation to pay the contractor (or ask for his money back).
If you do not understand the client's criticism, then it might be a good idea to point that out to your client.
HTH,
Friedemann Horn
I would say that you have a couple of options in a case like this. One, you could explain in detail your reasons for translating the items in question in the way you did. I've had several experiences with Japanese clients criticizing or calling into question certain items (items it turns out that they didn't understand), but a well-reasoned explanation generally solves the problem. Point out that the phrases are commonly used in pop culture and are appropriate for this context.
On the other hand, you could just offer to change the translation so it satisfies the client. This can be galling, especially if you know you're right and you have to change it to something that is inferior, but it is true that the client is ultimately in control. However, as you say, they haven't given you much useful feedback to know where to start. It sounds like they probably want something a bit more literal.
I agree with others that it isn't acceptable for the client not to pay the agency without giving them an explanation of precisely what is wrong and giving them (you) a chance to do something about it. How many problem areas are we talking about?
Evan Emswiler
>Any ideas on what I should do?
Marc,
I think that sometimes someone loses faith in a translation when they see one mistake and all of a sudden they look through these strange tinted glasses of prejudice. To them, everything seems wrong.
I would personally try to help out your client as much as possible. Be patient, and fix up the things as best you can. When it comes to a phrase that you think is quite acceptable, Google the phrase and make a list of web usages as evidence that these phrases have currency in native-English-speaking land. Be polite, diplomatic and patient. Stick to your guns when you think you should and offer alternatives where you can.
FWIW,
Geoff Trousselot
I should have made it clearer in my first message, but they are giving me a chance to correct the "mistakes" and I am doing so. I'm being as diplomatic as everyone on this list knows I can be <g>, and we are currently going through the first round of corrections from the end client. One of the 仲介者 comments that has filtered down to me is that the end client is 「かなり高飛車な態度をとっている」。
In terms of exactly how many mistakes they have found, well, since 90% of them are capitalization mistakes, and although I was following the capitalization conventions of other related strategy guides here in the US, almost every 四コマ漫画 has at least a few corrections. All the places highlighted as "ungrammatical" are clearly typos and there have only been two sincere mistranslations (one involving a misinterpreted subject and the other involving a misread verb tense, and I'm already 3/4 of the way through the corrections).
I agree that one possibility is that they spotted all the miscapitalizations and that put their radars on "tree-top" mode, but the real mistranslations come about halfway through, so I don't think those are the problem.
In any case, I'm replacing all the funny translations with stiff-necked literalisms (oh, another one just came to mind: "whoopin' some serious booty" got one of those priceless "←?!?!" comments), and not bothering with the explanations, because it would just take so bleeping long to do all that. If what they want is a mediocre translation, then that's what they'll get, I guess.
As for the payment, after Friedmann Horn's message, I sent my agency an email telling them about the contract situation (well, asking, really), and they said that they didn't think there would actually be a problem, since the original comments are at such variance with the actual corrections that came back. Still, the client is the bleep in this industry and everyone is "Oh Bleep Sama-Sama," so apparently they use that position to lord it over everyone.
And here I was thinking that they were just a bunch of anti-social computer geeks with no self-confidence...
Marc Adler
Make the corrections that are actual corrections. And thank them for pointing them out. This includes typos. Graciously.
Make the capitalization and other acceptable-preference changes but point out that those are not so much "corrections" as they are "after-the-fact style preferences." Graciously.
If there are places where you think you are right and they are wrong, respectfully decline to make those changes -- since they are not corrections but would actually harm the translation. Of course, the client is welcome to make those changes, but you cannot be responsible for that output. Graciously if possible.
Note: I have done this last. Have told a client that the things they want to do to the translation would ruin it and I cannot be a party to such action. After all, I have promised to do a translation to the best of _my_ ability, not theirs.
FWIW
Fred Uleman
Fred's suggestions are exactly what we do as well.
In several cases we have asked the customer to tell us in writing to make specific changes, and explained very honestly that it was to make sure that we wouldn't be blamed for their mistakes (note: I do not recommend this with most customers -- it is a good way to truly and sincerely PO a customer unless you have a very good relationship...).
Edward Lipsett
Judging solely by what has been said here, and though it doesn't address your immediate concerns, in future you might consider refusing jobs with short deadlines that conduce to sloppy work, particularly for important end clients.
Perry E. Gary
Yeah, I'm doing it all graciously, since doing things graciously is second nature to me
However, finding out that my agency doesn't actually think non-payment is a possibility has taken a big load off.
Thanks to everyone who responded, on and off-list!
Marc Adler
> unfortunately I'm not in a position to refuse.
May I ask why? I think Fred's advice is perfect for this situation. Standing up for your translation defends your reputation, which may have been dented somewhat by the other, legitimate errors. Whenever a client asks me to make changes I don't agree with, I just tell them that they now own the translation, and can do whatever they want with it, but that I must decline to make changes which I believe result in an inferior product. I think this actually improves your credibility. If you cave, it just reinforces their belief that you are in the wrong.
In your case, I would suggest to the client as tactfully as possible that they have one or more native E speakers look at the portions in question.
James Sparks
> May I ask why? I think Fred's advice is perfect for this situation.
I suppose you're right, but the problem is it's not the end client that I'm dealing with. My agency is beholden to the other 仲介者 who are all in the thrall of the end client, so they've basically begged me to do it. I told them at first that I wouldn't (I was irate at first), but I got about a hundred そこをなんとか emails, and I caved. You're right. I should've stood my ground, but I do a lot of work with this agency, and it wasn't their fault, after all. etc.
As an update to all this, apparently a couple of the 仲介者 have gotten their own native checkers to look at the translation, and they have all said it was fine, so we'll see how the end client reacts to that.
Marc Adler
>Fred said:
>Note: I have done this last. Have told a client that the things they
>want to do to the translation would ruin it and I cannot be a party to
>such action. After all, I have promised to do a translation to the best
>of _my_ ability, not theirs.
Faced with a similar situation, I have added a final shot: Please remove my name from the credits. I have a reputation to keep up, and this is no longer my work.
An acquaintance of mine actually did this with an entire English textbook. It took some detective work on my part to find out. I had been hired by the company to do a last-minute rescue job on the teachers' notes that were causing trouble to their two bright young trouble-shooters. They couldn't handle the explanations to some of the illustrations and captions. It soon became apparent that the original text had been fine, but the illustrations didn't match up. The person working on the illustrations had got into a fine old mess with countables and uncountables (ice cream is uncountable, yes? -- but it was illustrated with a picture of three ice-cream cones, which can be called "ice creams"), and with unmarked plurals (why is it all right to say "All the fish has gone bad" but not "All the sheep is in the field"? ).
One final suggestion as to the possible origin of Marc's problem: a new hire at the client company who wants to impress them with his/her knowledge by finding fault with a whole lot of things, but is unwilling to suggest corrections that will show the real state of his/her competence.
FWIW,
Doreen Simmons
Doreen Simmons writes:
> The person working on the illustrations had got into a
> fine old mess with countables and uncountables (ice cream is uncountable,
> yes? -- but it was illustrated with a picture of three ice-cream cones,
> which can be called "ice creams"),
Yes, but only in British English if I am not mistaken. An American would not generally say "ice creams" when referring to ice cream cones. The plural "ice creams" could be used in AmE when referring to a number of different brands or varieties but not cones.
I ran into this same sort of problem when working on an English textbook with a British collaborator. I would change things that sounded "strange" to my American ears, and he would change them back. Both of us were doing our level best to make the text in the examples sound "natural" but neither could understand how what sounded "natural" to them sounded "strange" to the other person.
Alan Siegrist
Alan Siegrist ripostes to Doreen, who said:
>> The person working on the illustrations had got into a fine old
>> mess with countables and uncountables (ice cream is uncountable,
>> yes? -- but it was illustrated with a picture of three ice-cream cones,
>> which can be called "ice creams"),
>
>Yes, but only in British English if I am not mistaken. An American would
>not generally say "ice creams" when referring to ice cream cones. The
>plural "ice creams" could be used in AmE when referring to a number of
>different brands or varieties but not cones.
True; and as a Brit I would not use this kind of plural in a textbook, especially one for beginners. It's too colloquial and too socially and regionally limited in usage. The point I was trying to make was that the author of the text (an American acquaintance, BTW, and an expert at writing textbooks) was not consulted about the illustrations, and the person in charge of the illustrations made a mess of some of them because he was unaware of the pitfalls. The book was already in the production process before the author found out what had happened, and all he could do was insist on his name being pulled from everything connected with it.
I had over twenty years' experience of both using and helping to produce English textbooks, and the problem Alan mentions is largely a matter of getting wider experience. At beginners' level there are some noticeable differences and anybody in working in Japan. or for the Japanese market, should be aware of them. Since my job is now one of producing English for very wide consumption, I often have to compromise; that is, the expression I use may not be the first choice for either US or UK users, but can be readily understood by anybody with a good basic grasp of the language.
But we have now gone far beyond Marc's original problem, and I see no point in prolonging this thread.
Doreen Simmons
And nor does JAT see any need to prolong the thread -- except to thank all of the participants for their permission to collect and publish it.