TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Translations (a bit long) From:Max Wyss <prodok -at- PRODOK -dot- CH> Date:Fri, 19 Jun 1998 22:45:54 +0200
Hallo Sarah,
With the basis of the cost of a translation we do fully agree. The market
is different in many places, but _I_ do base my price on the source text.
This makes it transparent for the client, and gives a good working basis.
The difference in number of words between source and target language is
taken care of by the price. OK, the market forces do have their big effect
as well...
And yes, when paid by the target word count, the temptation is there for
the translator to improve his miserably low income by being more verbose.
The result is a translated text which is long and mushy and repeats itself
and describes everything with three or more words and makes you fall asleep
after a few sentences...
... Just another Zweiräppler
Max Wyss
PRODOK Engineering AG
Technical documentation and translations, Electronic Publishing
CH-8906 Bonstetten, Switzerland
Fax: +41 1 700 20 37
e-mail: mailto:prodok -at- prodok -dot- ch or 100012 -dot- 44 -at- compuserve -dot- com
Bridging the Knowledge Gap ...
... with Acrobat Forms ... now for belt drive designers at
>Hi folks,
>We have two threads going here on what are substantially similar subjects:
>* Whether to use the source words or the translated words as the basis of
>the per word cost; and
>* Whether the work of the translator is the same as the work of the writer
>and so should be costed in the same way.
>There is very sound logic behind the practise of paying per source word
>for translation. First off, before you begin a translation project, you
>need to know how much it's going to cost you.
>If you are paying per translated word, as opposed to per source word, you
>must either tell the translator that you will pay x amount per word, and
>that they may only use a maximum of 2 (for example) translated words per
>source word. Alternately, if you are translating from a rather verbose
>language into a more succinct one, you have to tell the translator that
>you will pay x amount per word, but that they must use only one translated
>word for each three source words. In both cases, you have to count the
>words both before and after.
>I'm sure there are some people who work on that basis, but the majority of
>us don't. Most of us want the best quality translation possible. We want
>the translator to use their linguistic skills to adapt the language and
>content of our source material to their locale. We don't want the
>translator to have to compromise the translation for the sake of the
>number of words they are allowed to use. Which brings us on to the second
>thread, the work of the translator.
