Comments for Translation Outpost http://galexi.com A project of Galexi Wordsmiths, LLC Wed, 07 Oct 2009 10:26:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 Comment on Agency questionnaires… by Igor Vesler http://galexi.com/?p=53&cpage=1#comment-7 Igor Vesler Wed, 07 Oct 2009 10:26:03 +0000 http://galexi.com/?p=53#comment-7 From my experience, such surveys are not just useless – they are misleading. First and foremost, there’s no way to verify respondent’s answers regarding his/her software, skills, etc. Second, the fact that a translator has most advanced computer and whole bunch of software says nothing about his/her ability to properly operate it, save for quality and consistency of his/her translations. A couple of times I faced it myself – for example, asking a subcontractor if he has any experience in translating MS Access databases. Based on his assurances (“Yeah, no problem!”), I assigned a huge project to him. Needless to say that after a week I checked if there are any problems and – surprise, surprise – he could not even open the design template! Third, in many cases such surveys are conducted as a formal step to get ISO certification. This means that such efforts are of purely bureaucratic nature and their substance is of no interest to the agency. Fourth, in most cases it is the agency that designs the questionnaires, not a survey specialist who knows what relevance, pertinence and validity criteria are. Hence, garbage in – garbage out. Fifth, I’ve never seen an agency that publishes the results of such survey on their website or otherwise makes it public. Frankly, I highly doubt if any results of these surveys have ever been statistically processed (probably, due to a small – and, therefore, non-representative – sample) and analyzed for certainty. Sixth – and, probably, most important – is that the very same information can be obtained from an agency’s subcontractors database, provided, however, that it is properly designed. Dixi. From my experience, such surveys are not just useless – they are misleading.

First and foremost, there’s no way to verify respondent’s answers regarding his/her software, skills, etc.

Second, the fact that a translator has most advanced computer and whole bunch of software says nothing about his/her ability to properly operate it, save for quality and consistency of his/her translations.

A couple of times I faced it myself – for example, asking a subcontractor if he has any experience in translating MS Access databases. Based on his assurances (“Yeah, no problem!”), I assigned a huge project to him. Needless to say that after a week I checked if there are any problems and – surprise, surprise – he could not even open the design template!

Third, in many cases such surveys are conducted as a formal step to get ISO certification. This means that such efforts are of purely bureaucratic nature and their substance is of no interest to the agency.

Fourth, in most cases it is the agency that designs the questionnaires, not a survey specialist who knows what relevance, pertinence and validity criteria are. Hence, garbage in – garbage out.

Fifth, I’ve never seen an agency that publishes the results of such survey on their website or otherwise makes it public. Frankly, I highly doubt if any results of these surveys have ever been statistically processed (probably, due to a small – and, therefore, non-representative – sample) and analyzed for certainty.

Sixth – and, probably, most important – is that the very same information can be obtained from an agency’s subcontractors database, provided, however, that it is properly designed.

Dixi.

]]> Comment on Agency questionnaires… by Alexander Feht http://galexi.com/?p=53&cpage=1#comment-6 Alexander Feht Wed, 07 Oct 2009 06:17:54 +0000 http://galexi.com/?p=53#comment-6 My experience is approximately the same. The most reliable sources of translation work are agencies that rely on their personal knowledge of translators they work with. Agencies sending out questionnaires to find translators are groping in the dark and, therefore, cannot be winners in the marketplace by definition. I would add that translation agencies relying on CAT tools (TRADOS memory and such) are also losers in the long run. While computer memory tools may be useful to a translator at home, on the personal scale (though I never needed them in 26 years of work), they are inevitably resulting in the drastic deterioration of the quality of translation if used in collective settings. They proliferate poor translations, impede editing, and make any change for the better almost impossible. Translation is an art. Any automation kills the art. My experience is approximately the same. The most reliable sources of translation work are agencies that rely on their personal knowledge of translators they work with. Agencies sending out questionnaires to find translators are groping in the dark and, therefore, cannot be winners in the marketplace by definition.

I would add that translation agencies relying on CAT tools (TRADOS memory and such) are also losers in the long run.

While computer memory tools may be useful to a translator at home, on the personal scale (though I never needed them in 26 years of work), they are inevitably resulting in the drastic deterioration of the quality of translation if used in collective settings. They proliferate poor translations, impede editing, and make any change for the better almost impossible.

Translation is an art. Any automation kills the art.

]]>