After much pushing and prodding from various colleagues (thank you, I needed it), I decided to get back to blogging. I’ve been periodically sharing thoughts as they occur to me in Standing Up on Facebook, but I realise this is a somewhat limited audience for ideas I’d like to spread. Seeing as I’ve gone to the trouble of ensuring this site is completely GDPR-compliant (did you like the cookie notice?), I should at least deign to write here a little more often.
This particular blog post is an expansion of something I shared earlier in Standing Up. Do take a closer look if you’re in the group (or willing to join), as the discussion below was very fruitful. Today I was in a writing mood, so decided to expand it and turn it into a blog post.
No reviewer = no referral
A few weeks ago, I was considering referring a very talented translator, but decided against it because I know they don’t have a regular reviewer.
The problem is, this is not especially unusual. In fact, the lack of a trusted reviewer as part of the colleague’s standard workflow is frequently a reason I find it hard to refer colleagues. And yes, this comes up quite often – not just because I am in high demand as a translator in my own language combination, and people often come to me regarding fields I don’t cover, but also because I work both into English and as a copywriter, and my work is often used as a basis for translation into other languages.
Why do translators not use reviewers?
Don’t get me wrong: I know why people don’t use reviewers, because I didn’t when I obtained my first direct clients. Instead, I preferred to set longer deadlines and review my own work after a few days, enlisting the support of German- and English-native colleagues on certain sections. I’d also enlist a monolingual native English speaker to review the text.
Part of my problem was that I had not found a good reviewer. With the right reviewer, you’ll have different but compatible skills, styles, and approaches. You’ll also have a certain amount of interpersonal chemistry, too – you have to be happy with them seeing you without your makeup on – or, er, with your trousers down, in the case of those who don’t wear make-up.
For a long time, I resisted using a reviewer, because I found the people I’d worked with would miss obvious mistakes and insert others. This is partly because I took the misguided agency approach of assuming a reviewer doesn’t need to be as qualified, skilled, or experienced as the original translator. But for truly effective revision, your reviewer should instead be equally or even more experienced and skilled than you.
Kevin Hendzel (do read his valuable post on collaboration) in particular pushed me to keep exploring collaboration and keep searching for the right person. Part of my fear, I admit, was the risk of paying more for a job I could do better myself.
A fortuitous pairing
Then a client paired me with the person who has since become my regular reviewer, and I’ve never really looked back.
For the first time, I saw genuine improvements every time something came back from review:
- Intelligent comments in the margin.
- Stylistic adjustments to improve the flow.
- Ideas or considerations I’d not had.
- Thoughts on what the client might also have meant.
- Just better work.
After that fortuitous matchmaking on the part of our client, I began regularly hiring this same colleague for all my client work.
Over time, we became more and more comfortable, learning from each other, and becoming more open about other ideas on the texts. We became less concerned with being (or appearing) perfect in our individual roles and more concerned with producing optimal results. Neither of us is afraid of a sea of red, nor of expressing our uncertainty. For the collaboration to work, we have to put our sensitivities to one side. Ego does nothing for the quality of a translation.
We take more time when needed. We discuss issues openly. I then discuss things that really can’t be resolved between us (or with the insights of German-native colleagues and my German husband) with the client.
Contrary to some rather misguided advice you may see from a number of translators serving the bulk market, quality-driven translation buyers appreciate well-founded questions – and this process ensures none of these queries or comments are a waste of time. The result is clients who are reassured rather than worried by the questions I ask, and who consistently praise the rare quality of my (our) work. And my (our) diligence, of course.
Real revision means real interaction
These wonderful outcomes described above are hard (impossible?) to achieve when you’re both freelancers hired by an agency, or a colleague acting as a one-man-band agency. That is also why many of us (however harshly) emphasise how much we prefer working with direct clients, in the hope of pushing others to do the same.
Working for direct clients but not charging enough to afford to take your time and hire very competent reviewers (or any at all) has the same effect. That is why many of us (however harshly) emphasise the importance of charging professional rates, in the hope of pushing others to do the same.
Unfortunately, the reality is that most translations delivered to clients fall into one of the following categories:
- Translator translates, reviewer reviews, translation is delivered.
- Translator translates, translation is delivered.
Of course, sometimes there are some small but ineffective steps in between. For example, a non-native PM might have a quick look for obvious mistakes (or insert some of their own). But the key point here is that there is little or no dialogue.
To produce our best work, even the best translators require the support of other excellent or even better translators.
They also require the source language skills and tact to be able to properly articulate any queries they may have to their client, and ensure the translation and/or source text are adapted accordingly.
Real revision is collaborative. If you’re doing it alone, or not engaging in twenty-minute discussions on anything from syntax to an ambiguous idiom, you’re not doing it right.
It worked for me
I will try put this in concrete terms for those who work with (or intend to work with) direct clients and are in a position to implement best practices to secure their long-term success right now.
I already spoke about my reticence to hire a reviewer, and the reasons for this. I was also pretty clueless when I first went after direct clients, and started off charging around 14 cents per word. For relatively demanding work, that was far too little – even without external revision. As my confidence, skills, and client base grew, I soon started charging closer to 20-25 cents per word. Many people would say that was good, but that would involve extensive internal or native English revision, albeit no external German-English revision.
The first few times I experimented with quality revision by this skilled colleague, I gulped a bit at the cost. But I felt so humbled by what came back – mistakes I could never have spotted or improvements I could never have made without the help of the reviewer – that I felt I had to continue working this way, even if it cost me more…
I upped my rates to compensate, and found most clients were fine with closer to 30-33 cents, which is where my rates also stayed for a long time.
Nowadays, I’m at around 40-47 cents per word on average, and I don’t think I’d have got there without the reviewer – or the engaged approach to discussing all potential issues with the reviewer, my husband (the German-native), colleagues (English-natives, German-natives, and translators in both directions), educated non-linguist users of English who are based in the target country (my parents and certain friends – not all!), and – naturally – the client.
My work at 14 cents was good. My work at 20-25 cents was a bit better. But my work today, at around 40-47 cents per word, is the best it’s ever been. The key difference? I stopped translating alone.
TL;DR:
Long story short, someone would have received a referral. They didn’t, because I couldn’t be sure that the translation they’d deliver would be properly reviewed. They are a very good translator, but still charging rates to direct clients that are too low to afford a good reviewer. Without that, they may never realise their full and impressive potential.
- Charge more.
- Hire a reviewer with complementary skills, who is just as good as you or better.
- Profit.
Post previously published on the original Translator’s Teacup at lingocode.com
First time I come across your blog. I loved it !
Thank you, Araceli! I’ll try to stay active. 🙂
Good stuff Rose, thanks. KH brought me here via his tweet on this article. Great read. I’m 4 years into this business, and have been trying to develop this workflow, albeit with the same early results you had, i.e.not yet finding a fit. Also I’m still only about 70/30 when it comes to agency/direct clients, which I’m hustling to change as fast as I can, but I still think it might take 2 years.
Kevin gave me the same advice when I started, and I’ve read how he felt this moved him along so well in his early years. So I believe in this approach (also because I know how beneficial collaboration has been for me as a writer), and will hopefully get there sooner than later.
This was a nice inspiration today. If you have any additional coaching, feel free to send it over.
Very best.
Hi Steve! Nice to e-meet you. I’m a bit allergic to the word ‘coaching’, but as for general advice, maybe I can offer some tips.
I’ve previously ‘matchmade’ two translators who work in a different combination and specialisation to set up an informal revision club. Both are sort of like you or perhaps with an even higher proportion of agency clients, but by regularly meeting online to discuss their respective translations of a chosen text, they’ve managed to benefit from most of the learning aspects of a collaborative revision process. You could also do it so you have different texts, which each translator then hands to the colleague for revision.
As for finding the right partner, yes, it’s tough. It’s also really socially awkward, as the chemistry matters a lot, and we’re often inclined to loom first to our friends – but they might not be the best match… We also need to find people we overlap with in terms of specialisations, too.
I have someone in mind for you, though, as a possible. I’ll send you an email. If interested, I can ask him and perhaps set something up like I did with two Spanish ladies who translate from German. 🙂
Thank you for this piece, Rose. I have a great reviewer for my Brazilian Portuguese work. She is a writer, a poet, and a translator. And she is s teacher at heart – and it was that skill that led me to check into a translation clinic. After one of our projects, she told me my PTBR had a strong ENUS accent. I agree wholeheartedly with you.
Gio
That’s valuable feedback! Indeed, we’ll only get better if we work with people who are better than ourselves – and least in certain areas – and if those people will also tell us what they think.
I paired with a friend in the earlier years, and it wasn’t good. Not only were there massive reliability problems, which led to situations I find very hard to forgive, I had to re-review everything myself. Mistakes would be missed, other mistakes would be added. Lovely person, but just not a great reviewer, or even translator, at that time. I expect they have massively improved by now, as they’ve been reviewed by a very close friend almost constantly for years since. It just doesn’t help us at all if the reviewer simply changes tiny things and says ‘well done’.
Welcome back Rose, it’s always nice to read ANYTHING you write :)!
I absolutely agree with you; when working with direct clients, a reviewer is a must, a reviewer who has equal, if not better, skills than the translator. Even if we take more time to review our work, there are certain mistakes that we just can’t see.
Exactly – and not just mistakes, but potential improvements, too. Full-on mistakes end up getting rarer and rarer, but stylistic improvememts never stop.
Thank you! I agree with everything you said!
Hi Rose, what an interesting point you make! I am a copy-editor, but I often work on texts that have been translated from other languages into English and a lot of your experiences resonate. I used to be afraid of having my work reviewed (or in my case, a colleague proofreading my edit), but now I seek and appreciate it. I am working towards a place (financially) where I will do the edit and then engage my colleague to proof it.
Your openness and general attitude are inspiring.
Hi Rose, I enjoyed this post….definitely got me thinking about the importance of keeping my rates up in order to afford a reviewer for many projects. When I work for translation companies, I assume that they are taking care of final editing or proofing before delivery (or not, depending on how stretched they are). When working with direct clients I always sleep better at night knowing that someone else has my back and has looked through everything I’ve written! Perhaps in a future post you can give some tips on how translators go about finding professional editors?
Hi Alison, and sorry for the late response!
That’s a good point about offering advice on how to find a good editor in a future post, although I might feel like a bit of a fraud answering that one after mine was pretty much handed to me! Do check out Tim Gutteridge and Simon Berrill’s blogs, though – they are in a revision circle, meeting virtually once every few weeks to discuss a piece. That’s a great alternative for people who aren’t quite ready to have everything revised. You know, it might be a good idea for me to host a guest post with them and the third in the circle, Victoria Patience, or perhaps interview them… I’ll have a think!
Simon’s blog: http://www.sjbtranslations.com/blog/
Tim’s blog: http://timgutteridge.co.uk/blog/
finding the right partner, it’s tough
Thank you for the great article, Rose!
I love working with proofreaders more experienced and with more knowledge than me. It’s the best way to keep on improving.
At one moment in my career, I created a simple document in MS Word with frequent mistakes that I make (things that I learned from proofreaders), and I review this document periodically to make sure that I mastered those points and that I won’t make the same mistakes again.
Thank you! I agree with everything you said. Chemistry is important.
My proofreader/editor helps me to polish my writings. Although sometimes he does not change my vocabularies and style, still you feel there is an improvement in the writing.