Paine-ful wisdom – on translators, editors, between them and beyond them

 

[The Odd Couple]

This week, I sent the following email to a trusted project manager (PM) after reviewing the changes her editor had made to my translation: “I reviewed the edits and noticed that the editor found a few minor errors [ones that do not affect understanding], introduced a few minor errors, improved the phrasing in a few places and mainly made preferential changes. The most important thing is that the customer receives the best possible translation.” The translation involved was a two-page bank declaration in convoluted Hebrew (aren’t all bank documents in convoluted language?) on a poor PDF delivered in 24 hours.

This unpleasant interaction between translator and editor, with the PM in between, led me to reconsider the Odd Couple-like nature of the relationship between technical translators and editors. Limited by time constraints, translators must convert a text in the source language, often not very easy to read due to the quality of the PDF, into a Word document in the target document acceptable for use by the customer. This task involves reading the document many times in several forms, including bilingual and monolingual as well as on screen and on paper, all within a short period of time. Not only is it difficult to read the document “freshly” every time without sufficient time gaps, another pair of eyes will always find ways to improve the translation. Thus, the even the most professional translations are not perfect. 

By contrast, the editor’s task is read the monolingual document, comparing it when necessary to the source document, identify any errors and refine the existing text until it shines. They, of course, apply their judgment and opinion of correct language, which may not be identical to the translators’ view. The task is far more focused and involves many less read-throughs. Details matter, as Felix Ungar would say, without consideration of the emotional reaction of the translator that had put so much effort in producing the text. The result is that many translators feel that editors abuse them, as reflected in a typical emotional response: ”This editor had to prove his/her existence.” Clearly, there is generally little love between technical translators and editors.

However, if the goal of the translation process is to produce the most faithful and well-written document for the customer, i.e., to provide value, both the translator and editor are essential to the process. No one pair of eyes can attain that goal regardless of the amount of knowledge and experience. In the best possible world, the PM understands this.  In my case, she will continue to work with me as she has done for many years as I provide a solid translation on or before the deadline, exactly what is required of me. Likewise, she will continue to depend on that editor to improve translations in order to retain her customers. Unfortunately, this global understanding of the goal is far from universal. Still, it is important for translators to keep it in mind when receiving "massacred" versions of their translation. In fact, the words of Thomas Paine ring true: “The real man smiles in trouble, gathers strength from distress, and grows brave by reflection.”