Re: Translators--who?

[Chris Kowalchuk <chris -at- bdk -dot- net>]

Regarding Max Wyss's post:

Yes, I agree with all your points, generally. A few comments:

> For technical translation (and in some respect, even more for marketing
> stuff), the translator must first be a good writer. Then, the translator
> must understand the topic, and the foreign language knowledge comes only
> third.
>

Very true, and we are asking a lot, aren't we? I suspect such a person
might be easier to find in a tri-lingual country such as Switzerland;
they are relatively rare here in North America.

That is why I stressed the importance of qualifications in my earlier
post: not because a well-rounded, technically-oriented, multilingual
writer could not do a decent translation into his own language without a
certificate, but because around these monolingual parts, you are often
still at the stage of needing to convince people that translation
doesn't basically consist of one-to-one word substitution. Someone who
has studied translation formally (and not just learned another language)
will be acutely aware of the problems of localization, idiom, how to
build a lexicon, how to find and use the language resources that are
available and so forth. Someone who has not, might not be aware of these
issues to the extent required (I wouldn't be, for example). I think it
would be safer, especially for your average monolingual North American
to go with the certified translator, simply because he has little
capacity for judging the quality or the appropriateness of the
translation until after it is fully exposed to his market and the
feedback comes in (or hits the fan, as the case may be).

> Translation memory systems are essentially databases which contain already
> translated material, and make their suggestion to the source text. These
> programs are power tools for the hands of professional translators.
>
Also very true, and I'm sorry I didn't make the distinction. In my
experience (working with translators), a good translator starts a large
project by developing a lexicon in any case. Assisting that process with
a translation memory system must save considerable research time, and
further, doubtless allows you to more easily incorporate past experience
into current projects.


Also, as an unrelated question (new thread maybe?):

I notice your company by-line is "low paper workflows, smart
documents..." I have been reading about this a bit, and am envious of
Europeans generally for being so much farther ahead in their use of
resource-efficient technologies. How low can your paperflow go? <g>
Depends on the context, I'm sure, but are you at the "paperless office"
stage yet. If so, can you tell us, in a general way, how you do such a
thing? Maybe I'm asking too much (or not specifically enough). No
offense will be taken if you choose not to answer.

Chris Kowalchuk