| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | A Proz.com member delivered a machine translated project Thread poster: Fernando Larrazabal
|
|---|
| Other ghosts | Feb 14, 2009 |
Bizukeigo wrote:
I really cannot understand why some people still insist on blaming the outsourcer(s).
1.- I mentioned before that the rate was fair for this taks, actually higher than 0.10¢.
2.- This translator was not asked to use Trados or any other CAT program.
3.- She had at least 48 hours to translate around 3600 words.
3.- The translator didn't have to wait 30, 45 or 60 days to be paid.
We didn't care about the translator? We treated her badly?
As I said before:
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote previously:
So maybe there was some communication failure there.
From what you say, there definitely was some communication failure!
Considering the conditions you described above, any sober, sound-minded translator, would have given you first-class service, not automatic translation.
So she might have misunderstood you completely, mistook your job for another one, or was under the influence of something I wouldn't take nor recommend. This is insane.
I edited a complete disaster in translation, an entire book, PT-EN. The distressed publisher barely speaks enough English to buy a burger in Miami, so he said that the translator had "an impressive CV". Her job was much worse than machine translation, but she was the one who wrote that CV. Nobody knows how many "monsterpieces" of hers had to be fixed before publication, and how many slipped untouched.
The difference is that your translator had good WWA ratings from other people on Proz, which is worth investigating. Start by checking the dates such endorsements were given. If they are relatively close together in time, this may indicate some kind of a campaign in setting up a "tribe" - as described in this thread - and thereafter fabricating a good reputation.
If this actually happened, the communication failure was caused by false information having been given to you. You based your decision on unreliable data.
The plot thickens. I begin to see other ghosts now.
| | | | QUOI 
Chinese to English
+ ...
| Let it go (speaking from my own experience) | Feb 14, 2009 |
Just because a person is a Proz member who has endorsed ProZ.com's Professional Guidelines doesn't necessarily mean s/he is a quality translator with ethical work practice.
We all sometimes get sucked in by marketing hypes. So this time the widget doesn't work as fantastically as shown on TV. Ask yourself "what can I do?". Your options are quite limited and whinging is not one of them.
Bizukeigo wrote:
Text test?
The translator was not going to be “smart” enough to send a machine translation for a test.
I don't think a 300-word sample test will really show a translator's quality. I wouldn't outsource 50k words to somebody I haven’t work with before but this job contained around 3600 words.
The rate was not cheap, above average.
Request the money back? Of course, we did that.
But why should the translator give us the money back if it was just a matter of style?
In this case, rather than the money, the important fact was that somebody had been caught red-handed committing a crime and refused to accept it. Does it say something about the human condition?
The translator doesn’t claim to follow ProZ.com Professional Guidelines but has positive feedback and WWA from outsourcers.
Getting direct feedback from the WWA outsourcers. We expected the translator to consider what would happen if we told our experience to the companies she works/has worked for before.
The payment was so quick because I happened to be doing some transfer on the PayPal account when the translated file arrived. I can expect to get a translation that needs to be reviewed and corrected but not an outright cheat as this one was coming from someone with a university degree on translation and allegedly good references.
I originally wrote "A Proz member ..." as the title but changed it at the last moment. In fact, it got the expect effect: more members thought the topic was including them. My apologies.
[Edited at 2009-02-14 13:04 GMT]
| | | | | Off-topic here - payment terms | Feb 14, 2009 |
Rod Walters wrote:
I find the attitudes here a bit hard to fathom sometimes, especially the mania for early payment. I accept payment up to 2 months after I finish a job, and I send a polite reminder if payment is not made within that time. This is quite normal for reputable service providers in Japan, and it gives the customer plenty of breathing space to look at the work done. Of course the cost of the service itself may be rather higher, but the results are a very safe bet.
Rod,
I beg to differ sharply here. I fail to see any reason for translators waiting 60 days to get paid.
If the customer wants to breathe and leisurely look at the work done at their own pace, they should do it at their own expense. Maybe two months later they'll send an e-mail to the agency saying "You must refund us the amount of US 3 cents, as we found one wrong hyphenation on page 117, a missing dieresis on page 342, and one typically Aussie term on page 527."
As I see it, it doesn't take longer than one hour to skim through a 500-page translation and see if it can be generally deemed "acceptable" or not. If it cannot, just point out a few examples of the type of flaws noticed there, and return it for proofreading.
If it is "acceptable", considering different time zones, it could take:
1 day for translator to deliver to agency
1 day for agency to deliver to end-client
1 day for end-client to do that one-hour checking
2 days for end-client to pay agency
2 days for agency to pay translator
2 days weekend
That's 9 days. Add ~50% for contingencies, mishaps, incompetent staff, whatever, and it's two weeks. For an absolutely failproof system, use an additional safety factor of 2, double that, add a couple of days, and make it a whole month!
I see just too many translation agencies around living on the interest-free cash generated by demanding payment from the end-client up-front with the order, or COD, and then waiting 2+ months to pay their translators. They actually plan to pay this translator with the money they get from the next incoming job then. If their translations jobs intake goes thin, they won't be able to pay on time, if ever. As simple as that.
The only means translators have to prevent payment terms from getting longer and longer, until they overgrow a whole year, is to starve these agencies who want interest-free "loans" from them. Just say No!... if payment terms are beyond 30 days.
Translators must become aware that when they accept payment terms longer then that, after the first 30 days are gone, ther role as translators will be over, and thereon they will become interest-free money-lenders. Okay, people do it now and then for close relatives and friends in financial trouble, but not as a permanent "service" to complete strangers like translation agencies and their end-clients.
Note: Of course there will be clients/agencies with whom there is a continuous workflow. For these there must be some continuous account management in place, so that the average payment term will be whatever they agree to, but not longer than 30 days.
I often see jobs on Proz involving at most USD 10-20 at most, and payment is stated in 60 days by check (so add the time it will take in the mail, plus the time it will take to clear). Such amounts are not worth writing down reminders to follow up for so long. I wouldn't give that credit to any prospect who had less than $ 20 worth in their pocket at any time.
Rod Walters wrote:
The Blue Board and other features on this site seem totally unreliable to me, at least as far as Japanese is concerned. You trust them at your peril.
... like any other credit information. Anyone's finances may suffer ups and downs from time to time. If you browse some BB records, you'll see "bad" agencies that went "good", just as "good" agencies that went "bad". Of course, some have managed to remain in financial grandeur for life, and others never moved out from the shady side of the street.
The Blue Board will always contain information about the past. The future is unpredictable.
| | | | | It was proofread | Feb 14, 2009 |
Derek Gill Franßen wrote:
I agree that the translator should probably not be paid for the work, if it really was faulty and the translator refused to rectify the mistakes. Things like that happen occasionally (which is why agencies usually have the work proofread).
I may be mistaken, but from what I have understood of the situation, the work was proofread:
Bizukeigo wrote:
When the file was proofread the next day we found it was a simple machine translation and using a low quality software: family names translated, file names capitalized and translated and so on.
We showed the translator the proofread file and she argued it was just a matter of style.
Apparently, Bizukeigo didn't send the work to the client without proofreading it. The translation was proofread, they found the mistakes, confronted the translator and she gave unacceptable arguments (not weak ones), in her defense. Bizukeigo's mistakes were relying on the translator's WWA and paying for the work before proofreading, when our unprofessional translator already had the money in her pockets.
| | |
|
|
|
Taking into consideration that one of the reasons to select that "translator" for this particular task was based on the WWA entries and the positive feedback from several outsourcers, would it be acceptable to present the case to those outsourcers and other people having professional relationships with this person?
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 20:51
French to German
+ ...
| Actions? It is worth trying! | Feb 14, 2009 |
As I previously wrote it
ScottishWildCat wrote:
Therefore my 1st question would be: can you ask the satisfied clients of this colleague about a direct feedback? And, in a second step, about some proof regarding this feedback?
I agree with those who say such translations are not acceptable, but I personally would dig a little bit deeper.
Laurent K.
[Edited at 2009-02-13 09:51 GMT]
[Edited at 2009-02-14 14:23 GMT]
| | | | | There's nothing wrong with drinking coffee, I suppose | Feb 14, 2009 |
Bizukeigo wrote:
Taking into consideration that one of the reasons to select that "translator" for this particular task was based on the WWA entries and the positive feedback from several outsourcers, would it be acceptable to present the case to those outsourcers and other people having professional relationships with this person?
Well *shrug* nobody can prevent you from drinking a cup of coffee with some of your peers and friends and sharing experiences on this occasion, including personal business experiences.
Also, if you write courteous letters to the collegues that gave the WWA endorsements and enquire about circumstances and such, nobody can blame you for that.
You will probably be on the safe side as long as you state no more than verifiable facts and strictly stick to that. But I am not a lawyer.
Note that you must decide for yourself whether that line of action would be in your best interest, and to what extent it would give you advantage. Anyone you tell your story to will be free to draw their own conclusions.
Peter
| | | | | OP did nothing wrong, but this is still being exagerrated (IMHO). | Feb 14, 2009 |
Celia Recarey wrote:
Derek Gill Franßen wrote:
I agree that the translator should probably not be paid for the work, if it really was faulty and the translator refused to rectify the mistakes. Things like that happen occasionally (which is why agencies usually have the work proofread).
I may be mistaken, but from what I have understood of the situation, the work was proofread:
Bizukeigo wrote:
When the file was proofread the next day we found it was a simple machine translation and using a low quality software: family names translated, file names capitalized and translated and so on.
We showed the translator the proofread file and she argued it was just a matter of style.
Apparently, Bizukeigo didn't send the work to the client without proofreading it. The translation was proofread, they found the mistakes, confronted the translator and she gave unacceptable arguments (not weak ones), in her defense. Bizukeigo's mistakes were relying on the translator's WWA and paying for the work before proofreading, when our unprofessional translator already had the money in her pockets.
It seems to me that in almost all of the cases, in which the purchaser receives a faulty item, the buyer has already paid for the item; that is not terribly rare or strange.
I didn't really look at the details of what Bizkeigo did, but I see nothing wrong with Bizukeigo's actions. In fact, it does appear that Bizukeigo did what most agencies would (should) do when they receive a translation: It was proofread and then the translator was confronted. As far as I can tell, the translator refused to rectify (let alone acknowledge) the errors.
Something like this could happen to anyone, even to an agency with strong vetting procedures in place. Past performance is always just an indication of, but not a guarantee for future performance. It is unfortunate, but it does not seem even remotely indicative of the translators here nor of the WWA system in general.
If everything presented here were true (only one side of the story) and I were an agency, then I would demand my money back, have it done by someone else, and then consider claiming the extra costs from the first translator. But that is, in my eyes, normal procedure when one receives a faulty product.
[Edited at 2009-02-14 16:17 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| I completey agree with José. | Feb 14, 2009 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Rod Walters wrote:
I find the attitudes here a bit hard to fathom sometimes, especially the mania for early payment. I accept payment up to 2 months after I finish a job, and I send a polite reminder if payment is not made within that time. This is quite normal for reputable service providers in Japan, and it gives the customer plenty of breathing space to look at the work done. Of course the cost of the service itself may be rather higher, but the results are a very safe bet.
Rod,
I beg to differ sharply here. I fail to see any reason for translators waiting 60 days to get paid.
If the customer wants to breathe and leisurely look at the work done at their own pace, they should do it at their own expense. Maybe two months later they'll send an e-mail to the agency saying "You must refund us the amount of US 3 cents, as we found one wrong hyphenation on page 117, a missing dieresis on page 342, and one typically Aussie term on page 527."
As I see it, it doesn't take longer than one hour to skim through a 500-page translation and see if it can be generally deemed "acceptable" or not. If it cannot, just point out a few examples of the type of flaws noticed there, and return it for proofreading.
If it is "acceptable", considering different time zones, it could take:
1 day for translator to deliver to agency
1 day for agency to deliver to end-client
1 day for end-client to do that one-hour checking
2 days for end-client to pay agency
2 days for agency to pay translator
2 days weekend
That's 9 days. Add ~50% for contingencies, mishaps, incompetent staff, whatever, and it's two weeks. For an absolutely failproof system, use an additional safety factor of 2, double that, add a couple of days, and make it a whole month!
I see just too many translation agencies around living on the interest-free cash generated by demanding payment from the end-client up-front with the order, or COD, and then waiting 2+ months to pay their translators. They actually plan to pay this translator with the money they get from the next incoming job then. If their translations jobs intake goes thin, they won't be able to pay on time, if ever. As simple as that.
The only means translators have to prevent payment terms from getting longer and longer, until they overgrow a whole year, is to starve these agencies who want interest-free "loans" from them. Just say No!... if payment terms are beyond 30 days.
Translators must become aware that when they accept payment terms longer then that, after the first 30 days are gone, ther role as translators will be over, and thereon they will become interest-free money-lenders. Okay, people do it now and then for close relatives and friends in financial trouble, but not as a permanent "service" to complete strangers like translation agencies and their end-clients.
Note: Of course there will be clients/agencies with whom there is a continuous workflow. For these there must be some continuous account management in place, so that the average payment term will be whatever they agree to, but not longer than 30 days.
I often see jobs on Proz involving at most USD 10-20 at most, and payment is stated in 60 days by check (so add the time it will take in the mail, plus the time it will take to clear). Such amounts are not worth writing down reminders to follow up for so long. I wouldn't give that credit to any prospect who had less than $ 20 worth in their pocket at any time.
Rod Walters wrote:
The Blue Board and other features on this site seem totally unreliable to me, at least as far as Japanese is concerned. You trust them at your peril.
... like any other credit information. Anyone's finances may suffer ups and downs from time to time. If you browse some BB records, you'll see "bad" agencies that went "good", just as "good" agencies that went "bad". Of course, some have managed to remain in financial grandeur for life, and others never moved out from the shady side of the street.
The Blue Board will always contain information about the past. The future is unpredictable.
I re-read this post several times trying to find something I disagree with... unsuccessfully. I agree 100% with José.
[Edited at 2009-02-14 17:10 GMT]
| | | | | Did the translators cite terms and conditions? | Feb 14, 2009 |
I've only recently given terms and conditions serious thought after seeing some worrying issues raised on threads here, such as those on liability and insurance.
My terms and conditions have been very minimal, just an explanation of price, delivery and payment terms in the email communication. Whenever I've sent the completed work, I've always asked the client to come back to me if there are any queries, and, if relevant, have highlighted any translations where there was ambiguity i... See more I've only recently given terms and conditions serious thought after seeing some worrying issues raised on threads here, such as those on liability and insurance.
My terms and conditions have been very minimal, just an explanation of price, delivery and payment terms in the email communication. Whenever I've sent the completed work, I've always asked the client to come back to me if there are any queries, and, if relevant, have highlighted any translations where there was ambiguity in the source text or I wasn't 100% certain my translation choice was the most appropriate. On occasion, I've then made changes. I don't think my approach is unusual.
From other discussions on terms and conditions it seems some translators specify they will conduct a review free of charge, while also limiting liability to the cost of the translation. This is the approach I've started to take in providing my quotes.
So regardless of how this translation was done it seems to me surprising that the translator has not offered a review. This is not a long translation so it should not be too onerous to make the corrections.
Were any terms and conditions cited at the outset?
If not, did the translator endorse the Proz.com Professional Guidelines? These state, amongst other things, that translators will:
"take any and all steps necessary to ensure consistent delivery of work of a high professional standard
"accept responsibility for the quality of work they deliver, even when that work has been subcontracted"
I wonder if you asked for a review before asking for a refund? Would it still be relevant to do so? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Rod Walters
Japan
Local time: 04:51
Japanese to English
| Business norms | Feb 15, 2009 |
José,
Your arguments are all well and good, but in Japan, service providers have typically accepted 1-month or 2-month billing cycles. It may seem unfair to some people and they may get upset about it, but I've never found it an issue worth bothering with. (Truth be told, if I happened not to get paid for a job - which has never occurred - I'd be inclined just to forget about it, get on with the next job, and not work for that client again. In terms of money coming in, that would ... See more José,
Your arguments are all well and good, but in Japan, service providers have typically accepted 1-month or 2-month billing cycles. It may seem unfair to some people and they may get upset about it, but I've never found it an issue worth bothering with. (Truth be told, if I happened not to get paid for a job - which has never occurred - I'd be inclined just to forget about it, get on with the next job, and not work for that client again. In terms of money coming in, that would be the smart way of maximizing it.)
Now in the Japanese context, if Bizukeigo had followed the business norms of Japan, instead of adopting novel procedures like paying by Paypal immediately, they wouldn't be in the situation they find themselves now.
The point is, if there are service providers who are prepared to work within national norms, with the various quid pro quos that entails, service consumers will enjoy greater peace of mind if they employ their services, rather than those of a Paypal fly-by-night. A financial standing that can withstand the loss of income from one job or even six or seven is a far more credible guarantee than a number on an online Board. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 20:51
French to German
+ ...
| Quality and other requirements | Feb 15, 2009 |
As the translator seems to refer to the GT&C of the Société Française des Traducteurs - SFT (the hint thereof being the mention of nuances of style, aka stylistic differences according to article 10 of said GT&C), it may be interesting to note that article 15 of these specifies that any dispute can be settled by the Arbitration Commission of the SFT.
But this would presuppose that the translator in question is actually a member of the SFT.
Link to the EN vers... See more As the translator seems to refer to the GT&C of the Société Française des Traducteurs - SFT (the hint thereof being the mention of nuances of style, aka stylistic differences according to article 10 of said GT&C), it may be interesting to note that article 15 of these specifies that any dispute can be settled by the Arbitration Commission of the SFT.
But this would presuppose that the translator in question is actually a member of the SFT.
Link to the EN version of these GT&C (downloadable PDF document): http://www.sft.fr/clients/sft/telechargements/file_front/47bf16e44ce5b.pdf
HTH
Laurent K. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| stylistic differences | Feb 15, 2009 |
ScottishWildCat wrote:
As the translator seems to refer to the GT&C of the Société Française des Traducteurs - SFT (the hint thereof being the mention of nuances of style, aka stylistic differences according to article 10 of said GT&C), it may be interesting to note that article 15 of these specifies that any dispute can be settled by the Arbitration Commission of the SFT.
But this would presuppose that the translator in question is actually a member of the SFT.
...
If the translator is not a member of the SFT, we would gladly show them this job to support a change in the standards of quality.
The actual (sic) words from the 'translator' were:
---
Having gone through the corrections of your proof reader I would like to state the following:
* There were indeed some minor mistakes. As the deadline for the translation was very demanding I did not have the time to review everything in detail.
* 90% of the corrections are a matter of style and as you surely styles can be different so in fact these are NO errors by common standards
* When clients complain about quality it is common practise to give the translator the chance to rework before hiring a proof reader
* You know very well that the market price for the work I did is at least 3 times higher so you can't expect perfect quality that even a software specialist could not guarantuee.
----
I guess "rework" would involve running the text through a different MT engine and must humbly acknowledge that only software experts know that family and file names do not need to be translated.
Market price. I also accept that I didn't know that the running rate for (standard texts) EN to FR translations is, at least, 0.21 EUR.
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 20:51
French to German
+ ...
| Observations from an EN>FR translator/SFT member: me | Feb 15, 2009 |
Bizukeigo wrote:
I guess "rework" would involve running the text through a different MT engine and must humbly acknowledge that only software experts know that family and file names do not need to be translated.
Market price. I also accept that I didn't know that the running rate for (standard texts) EN to FR translations is, at least, 0.21 EUR.
Dear Bizukeigo,
such replies are not acceptable in my eyes as the examples you gave us are clearly MTed and were sent to you unedited. All the colleagues who have participated in this forum agree upon that.
Having to translate + proofread 3,600 words within 48 hours for the kind of text you said is not a Herculean task.
The rates for EN>FR as per the 2008 SFT survey range from (if my memory serves me well) from 0.09 euros to 0.40 euros per source word, the average being some 0.15 - all prices without VAT where applicable.
So 0.21 euros would be an over-average price, which must be "justified" at least by some of the following factors: rush job, rare specialism, extra terminology search, illegible source document, only to mention some of them. IOW, if the colleague in question did not feel comfortable with the translation/deadline/etc., they should not have accepted it at 0.07 euros... if at all.
Furthermore, all details regarding the job are usually agreed upon by both parties before the translator starts working.
I will not draw conclusions from these facts, they speak for themselves.
Best regards.
Laurent K.
[Edited at 2009-02-15 20:36 GMT]
| | | | Zoe Green
Italy
Local time: 20:51
Spanish to English
+ ...
| This is unprofessional | Feb 15, 2009 |
"You know very well that the market price for the work I did is at least 3 times higher so you can't expect perfect quality that even a software specialist could not guarantuee."
Apart from the fact that several of the errors made would seem to be avoidable by anyone with half a brain, when a translator accepts a job at a stated rate, he or she should then do the job to the highest quality standard possible. Once the job has been accepted, the rate doesn't matter - the translation ... See more "You know very well that the market price for the work I did is at least 3 times higher so you can't expect perfect quality that even a software specialist could not guarantuee."
Apart from the fact that several of the errors made would seem to be avoidable by anyone with half a brain, when a translator accepts a job at a stated rate, he or she should then do the job to the highest quality standard possible. Once the job has been accepted, the rate doesn't matter - the translation should be treated with as much care and attention as a translation for which a rate twice or three times as high has been agreed.
I put as much care into my voluntary translations as I do into jobs for my highest paying clients. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » A Proz.com member delivered a machine translated project | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
| | Pastey | Your smart companion app
Pastey is an innovative desktop application that bridges the gap between human expertise and artificial intelligence. With intuitive keyboard shortcuts, Pastey transforms your source text into AI-powered draft translations.
Find out more » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
