PROFESSIONAL TRANSLATORS SHOULD NOT NEGLECT TO ASSERT THAT THEY ARE PROFESSIONAL TRANSLATORS (WITHOUT BLOWING THEIR OWN TRUMPET, OF COURSE)

Every time I go on my Facebook business account these days I think about how much I’ve rambled on and on about my language skills, my translation skills, even my position as a professional translator, without directly and properly addressing the impact I have on the translation industry of today, including how this industry is viewed by society in general (of course, not everyone wants a translation service every once in a while, you know?); or maybe how I shape it would be a better way to put it. Like everyone else in my position who has their head screwed on I try to respond to offers of work in a wise manner, and a part of it is stating not just my quote but also the conditions, such as when I can have it done by, where appropriate. By default, I seek to do all translation projects I receive ASAP, not just in the interest of my own money i.e. availability for other projects, but also out of respect for any existing deadlines / time constraints that customers have. So it shouldn’t come as much of a surprise to hear that I am totally used to completing projects by deadlines which have been assigned to them by the client rather than by myself – sometimes the deadlines are completely irrevocable ones (i.e. they simply cannot be prolonged under any circumstances); and I can promise you that there have been times when I have juggled more than one project with a deadline at once.

Having said that, while I take quality checking very seriously in translation work that I am doing, there are always times when I need to ask someone who has given me a specific project something: ask them to clarify or verify something in the original, or suggest that they might want to rewrite a given bit in the translation which I otherwise wrote as lucidly and as in educated a manner as I could. With this, I just know that I should be prepared to consider avoiding submitting a piece of work as late (i.e. as close to the deadline) as possible while merely invoking the argument that I’ve taken my time with this work, which is (supposed to be) evidence of diligence, and how people say, “More haste, less speed” for a reason and blah blah blah blah blah. I couldn’t help comparing this to how the translation company 001 Translation specifically state on their website that “A translation to be delivered in 3 to 5 days costs less than a 1-day rush translation” (in the “Our Rates” tab, under “Requested Turnaround Time”), as if to suggest that they are more disposed to completing translation projects within 3-5 days rather than doing them and having them sent back the following day, like I do. Of course, the size of translation projects is a very important factor here, but you could say that I am interested as to how this agency works, and what they do differently from me (or so I believe). I was also quick to note something that this other translation agency, Samtext, have admitted quite openly on their website: “No matter how skilled our translators may be and how thoroughly they are trained to check their work, every text undergoes double proof-reading – in other words, it is proof-read by someone other than the original translator. We do this, despite the extra work it takes, to ensure that the texts you receive are error-free.” I hugely appreciate their understanding, and will likely remember this the next time a customer for whom I’ve done a job insists on getting back to me and seems too critical.

Now, translation agencies indeed have their merits, but I now get back to talking about me, like what I started the previous paragraph with: the thing about being self-employed is that you have total authority as far as your work is concerned. Even if you don’t have as much money to play with as you’d like, it’s a position of control that is seldom if ever underappreciated. You can fire customers as well as those who work for you – even the big CC (www.cardellmedia.co.uk) makes no secret of it. But even I have my share of times when I yearn for the truth i.e. to know exactly what it is that’s holding me back / preventing me from reaching my goals. And, to be honest, I’m not immune to developing habits – something that makes me think: if God exists, what habits might He have or develop?

For all that, though: if someone wants to be taken seriously as a professional translator, then “a love of languages” is but the tip of the iceberg, isn’t it? I know damn well that I’m not the only one who has talked about their interest in the mere act of translation – and so does everyone else – or their talent; but what about me commenting on my interest in the translation INDUSTRY? How many professional translators out there could confidently answer such enquiries as “What do you think of the translation industry?”, “What do you know about the translation industry?” or especially, “What is your interest in the translation industry?”

You know, is there any genuine talking about one’s interest in the translation industry without talking about the translation industry’s overall position in / influence on society in general?
Either way, I don’t think it would be a good idea to base responses to questions like that based on things like stereotypes of translators (although, as I have said before in previous comments, if there are any existing stereotypes of translators, I’ve never heard of them. If you know of any, let me know; I’d love to hear them – I can imagine finding amusement in them whether they’re good or bad or neither). But Jeremy Kyle suffers from obsessive-compulsive disorder – go and look at his Wikipedia article – and that sort of thing seems somewhat close to home for me, and it’s not like I haven’t mentioned atychiphobia in a previous comment on here. But I also want to reiterate here a quote that I recently saw: “It was a mistake that set the world in motion – never be afraid of making a mistake.” I saw it on the Facebook business page of someone (who is also a translator!) that I’m an old friend of – you know who you are.

At any rate, there can be little to no reason to dispute that translators are “more comfortable with words” than “ordinary people”, by which I guess I mean how words and expressions can be interpreted differently (whether this is unwittingly or contrived); but this would also mean that they are more comfortable than most people at explaining such differences and phenomena in a coherent manner. This includes questions of what certain words or expressions are capable of indicating in certain contexts, depending on who uses them, or where exactly they are read, whatever. After all, what do you think is meant by the immortal claim that an understanding of cultural factors and context is essential when it comes to translation work? What I’m trying to say is that high-level linguistic talent alone won’t always cut it if you’re not “awake”. I’m sure that language teachers/academic spend a lot of time on this very subject, and I’m going to end this comment with three “little thoughts” which I view as relevant, as follows:

One
You know when you watch snooker on TV? Well, before the days of colour TV, people did use to watch snooker on black and white TVs, you know. Well, suppose, as an example, that you were watching snooker on a black and white TV and the commentator said something like, “For those of you watching black and white TVs, the pink ball is the one next to the brown one.” You might instantaneously respond to that like “LOL” whether you knew that or not, or whether you were none the wiser after having heard it. But does it really sound so daft if you consider the assumption that the viewer had been watching the game up to that point?

Two
I recently heard of this brain-teaser (well, I don’t call it a “brain-teaser”; more like a “riddle” or a “trick question”) that goes: “If there are 3 apples and you take 2, how many do you have?” Boris Johnson was asked this question and the answer he gave was one – poor sod. For the proper answer is two: if you take two apples, then it is just plain undeniable fact that you then have two apples. Say what you like about Boris’ listening and comprehension faculties, but he might have given the right answer if the question had been put differently, like, “How many do you have in your possession?” But I don’t want to sound eager to ridicule him because I find it fun – I’m not that kind of guy – I imagine that what compelled him to answer “one” rather than “two” was the unmentioned thought of “How many do you have left?” Of course, the answer would not be two if you were already carrying some apples before you took the two apples mentioned in the question. If you were carrying some apples before you picked those two up and were then asked “how many apples do you have?”, that would seem like a proper question in that you would have to do a calculation to arrive at the right answer: add the ones you’re already carrying to these two that you have just picked up. But if you’re not carrying any apples to begin with, then, like I said before, it is just plain undeniable fact that you then have two apples; and to me it is this plain undeniable fact that makes people dismiss the question for what it is – like: “Why would someone ask how many apples you’re carrying when everyone knows that when you pick up two apples, you then have two apples, assuming you’re not carrying any more apples to begin with?”

I’m also reminded of another trick question at this point: the one that goes, “You’re driving a bus carrying a certain number of people from A to B, and drop some people off and/or pick some people up at B and carry on to C, and you drop some people off and/or pick some people up at C and carry on to D… what is the name of the bus driver?” When someone being asked that question says that they do not know the answer – and they may well wonder what that’s got to with all the picking people up/dropping them off business (not least because the question that they are expecting to be asked will be something like, “How many people are there on the bus at the end of it all?”) – they are reminded that the question begins, “You are driving a bus…”; like, “Don’t you know your own name?” To everyone out there who has answered this question, “I don’t know [the name of the bus driver]” and felt hurt at looking stupid as a result of it, I can empathise if you don’t possess a bus driver’s licence in real life.

Three
There are many car driving computer games (like Outrun 2006, which I bought recently) where, before you start a race or whatever it is, you have to choose between automatic or manual transmission. Consider this: if you select “automatic”, does your vehicle actually use an automatic transmission system or does the character that you’re playing as always change the gears manually even if you, the player, don’t?