Pages in topic: [1 2] > | New trend: Clients using MT and paying for "proofreading" 投稿者: Hannele Marttila
|
The advent of MT has changed the industry, for translators and agencies alike. Clients are increasingly running MT for their translations and then contacting an agency for a cheap proofread. The problem is that MT is still in its infancy, maybe one day it will perform much better but it is still very poor, especially with some language pairs like Finnish to English. I keep getting job offers for about 3 cents a word for proofread which is obviously an MT post edit, containing a lot of tran... See more The advent of MT has changed the industry, for translators and agencies alike. Clients are increasingly running MT for their translations and then contacting an agency for a cheap proofread. The problem is that MT is still in its infancy, maybe one day it will perform much better but it is still very poor, especially with some language pairs like Finnish to English. I keep getting job offers for about 3 cents a word for proofread which is obviously an MT post edit, containing a lot of translations like "Loans between breeding butter" for "Credit batch run errors". So, for a two hour job I would be paid 24, the equivalent of a salary of a supermarket teller. This is bad news for both translators and agencies. The problem is that there are translators who will do this and agencies that accept this. We can all understand why, but it is the thin end of the wedge. Any views, experiences, ideas? ▲ Collapse | | | Why would a professional translator agree to such low rates? | Jun 17, 2019 |
Professional translators have spent years gaining and developing their skills. They know all about the translation market and what their work is worth. So why would they suddenly start accepting low-paid work? Poor rates have always been around, and it's easy to find someone to do the work. But the quality of the end product will probably be poor. At the end of the day, it depends what the customer wants. They can hire a skilled and experienced translator for professio... See more Professional translators have spent years gaining and developing their skills. They know all about the translation market and what their work is worth. So why would they suddenly start accepting low-paid work? Poor rates have always been around, and it's easy to find someone to do the work. But the quality of the end product will probably be poor. At the end of the day, it depends what the customer wants. They can hire a skilled and experienced translator for professional results, or request a basic translation which may contain errors if they want a budget option. ▲ Collapse | | | Jan Truper ドイツ Local time: 18:34 2016に入会 英語 から ドイツ語
Make it clear that you will not work on machine-generated texts. Or charge an hourly rate.
[Edited at 2019-06-17 11:51 GMT] | | | The reality is bad... | Jun 17, 2019 |
Hello, I was just contacted by an agency a few days ago for a MT post editing project. The client asked for an estimate rate for 36 hours or 18k. I replied for 30 euros taxe free per hour,but the client didn't confirm it. | |
|
|
I've had two clients try this on me. They both claimed they'd had the file translated by a bilingual member of staff. I simply made sure that my hourly rate reflected the time I would need to translate the files, and translated them from scratch, with just a glance at the MT from time to time to see if it had anything worth recycling. I delivered my file plus a file comparing mine and the MT, to show the extent of my "revision" and justify the amount of time I said it would take, and I al... See more I've had two clients try this on me. They both claimed they'd had the file translated by a bilingual member of staff. I simply made sure that my hourly rate reflected the time I would need to translate the files, and translated them from scratch, with just a glance at the MT from time to time to see if it had anything worth recycling. I delivered my file plus a file comparing mine and the MT, to show the extent of my "revision" and justify the amount of time I said it would take, and I also asked whether the client was sure that their staff member was really bilingual ("you know, people will say they are bilingual, and mostly they are perfectly proficient at dealing the odd client who speaks English, but a six-month stint washing dishes in a London pub doesn't turn you into a translator"). They both decided that I would translate from scratch from then on. ▲ Collapse | | | How I handle it | Jun 21, 2019 |
If I am given a poor quality translation to "proofread" - i.e. MT or suspected, or otherwise - I give my estimated fee (per hour) and also my fee for translating it from scratch. A poor quality translation will be more expensive to proofread, than to translate. I do, in fact, charge by the hour for proofreading / revision. | | | conejo 米国 Local time: 11:34 日本語 から 英語 + ... I've seen this too | Aug 11, 2020 |
Honestly "editing" and "proofreading" jobs are highly suspect these days for this reason. I think that MTPE jobs should be disclosed as being MT. And at the beginning it was. But any document that is being presented for editing, these days there is a significant chance that it may be MT... either the translator or agency may be doing that. So I think it's important to actually view the source document before making any promises because the text may be unusable or require complete re-translation. | | | Charge by the hour and the problem will go away | Aug 13, 2020 |
Say $60/hour at least. If at $0.20/word the translation would come to $200, but fixing a poor quality MT would cost $400, I'm sure the client would opt for the cheaper and better quality option. | |
|
|
Simple solution | Aug 13, 2020 |
Just stipulate that you will only accept proofreading/editing jobs that have been translated by a competent human translator. | | |
I get a lot of those job offers. I just ignore them. | | | The all important "effort" | Aug 14, 2020 |
Hannele Marttila wrote: The advent of MT has changed the industry, for translators and agencies alike. Clients are increasingly running MT for their translations and then contacting an agency for a cheap proofread. The problem is that MT is still in its infancy, maybe one day it will perform much better but it is still very poor, especially with some language pairs like Finnish to English. I keep getting job offers for about 3 cents a word for proofread which is obviously an MT post edit, containing a lot of translations like "Loans between breeding butter" for "Credit batch run errors". So, for a two hour job I would be paid 24, the equivalent of a salary of a supermarket teller. This is bad news for both translators and agencies. The problem is that there are translators who will do this and agencies that accept this. We can all understand why, but it is the thin end of the wedge. Any views, experiences, ideas? Very good points are made here. Indeed, charging an hourly rate should be the best option. If the MT output is bad, giving our rate from translating from scratch makes a lot of sense too. However, just stating that we only edit human-translated material seems very risky to me. The industry is giving an ever-increasing role to MT in the translation process. Such decision will likely write you off from many projects. The problem is very much linked to MT output quality and on how the LSP is using it in the workflow. MT quality depends on a number of factors: _Language pair _Domain _How well the MT has been put together Then, we are faced with many LSPs that are not educated at all about MT use in their process and just want to jump in on the trend trying to increase their margins. This is bad because, besides annoying translators it creates new issues. Translation turnaround can be slower than if only human-translated if the MT is poor quality. Since MT will bring unwanted vocabulary, the end product may have inclusion of wrong vocabulary etc. MT use is all about the “effort”. You have to compare the cost VS effort of using MT for a specific end customer in a specific language pair. Serious LSPs will do a few test projects to evaluate which process is best for a regular end customer. Then, they will pick the same process everytime. This means they will have consistent quality and a fast-enough turnaround. Translators themselves should have the same approach upon choosing to use MT or not when they are translating, and which one. It’s a bit what you can find in this discussion here: https://www.proz.com/forum/machine_translation_mt/345577-comparing_mt_engines_which_mt_should_i_choose.html#2863216 In some language pairs it makes no sense at all to use MT (unless maybe for a very greedy LSP). As a translator you may be better served lowering your fuzzy threshold to 40% to get the same result 😉… Be all safe 😊 | | | It's not transation and it's not proofreading | Aug 14, 2020 |
The European Translation Services standard EN15038, which many if not most agencies boast, provides terminology and definitions for services. I imagine what is being requested here is a (bilingual) "revision", not proofreading, which is checking of galley proofs before publication. There's a tendency on these forums to say "Oh, you know what I mean!" when terminology comes up, but if this is a profession at all it should adopt clear definitions for the basic services provided. ... See more The European Translation Services standard EN15038, which many if not most agencies boast, provides terminology and definitions for services. I imagine what is being requested here is a (bilingual) "revision", not proofreading, which is checking of galley proofs before publication. There's a tendency on these forums to say "Oh, you know what I mean!" when terminology comes up, but if this is a profession at all it should adopt clear definitions for the basic services provided. The best reason I can think for demanding adherence to definitions is that there is a huge difference between provision of certain "additional services" under the standard, such as "adaptation" or "rewriting" (which might be suitable in the case of MT) and reviewing/revision. What I tell agencies is that I can a only revise (what is normally meant when agencies request "proofreading") a text that has been properly translated by a professional translator (both terms are also defined under the standard). Otherwise I am providing a different service. If the text I'm called on to revise clearly isn't the work of a professional translator, I normally recommend retranslation (also contemplated under the standard). ▲ Collapse | |
|
|
Hannele Marttila wrote: containing a lot of translations like "Loans between breeding butter" for "Credit batch run errors". I love it! Years ago, when the EU institutions were trying out MT, I got a French European Parliament text on fishing quotas rendered as mish-mash English, which was full of references to "sinners and sinner's families", "professional sinners", " a traditional sinners' village", "small sinners" and "young and aspiring sinners". | | | Value of MT = 0 | Aug 14, 2020 |
I always point out to these clients that since I, with the client's permission, could easily create my own MT version of the document for free or next to nothing, there is no reason for me to grant them any kind of discount just for them taking this 10 second step on my behalf. | | | This depends | Aug 14, 2020 |
LegalTranslatr2 wrote: I always point out to these clients that since I, with the client's permission, could easily create my own MT version of the document for free or next to nothing, there is no reason for me to grant them any kind of discount just for them taking this 10 second step on my behalf. As I pointed out earlier, there are LSPs that know next to nothing about MT. In that case you are perfectly right. However, this doesn't apply to enterprise quality MTs, they can be grouped in two categories: A_Enterprise grade standard MT B_Custom enterprise grade MT The situation with "A" is that, these are MTs that translators will likely not get easy access to (i.e. no CAT connector etc). In this case, you will most likely get an MT prestranslated xliff done on something your LSP has invested in and that you can't easily replicate. "B", Custom MT. This situation is where the LSP has decided a very rationalized approach and made a significant investment. One example would be that the LSP bring their own big clean TMs into an empty MT shell. Then the Custom MT is trained and tuned based on the LSP data. This produces a highly specialized MT that will excel in a specific type of translations. Some LSPs invest in this for one big name end customer. Sometimes, it's the the big brand name that bring their own training material. This approach will help with specific vocabulary and style that is needed for the end customer. You will here again get a pretranslated xliff. But in this case you get higly specialized output, close to what you get with a quality Translation Memory but for every segment. You cannot replicate this. The time spent by the translator editing such text will vary on the MT behavior (quality of training data, volume of training data, quality of programming of the MT). If the MT is finely tuned, your editing (on average) will likely feel like you're editing a 75% match. My bests | | | Pages in topic: [1 2] > | このフォーラムには、モデレータが指定されていません。 To report site rules violations or get help, please contact site staff » New trend: Clients using MT and paying for "proofreading" 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 » |
| TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |