home : translation : reviews

Reviews

The review process presents many challenges. Reviewers are typically not language experts and don't always understand the nuances of translation work.

It is important to agree at the start of the project what type of review will be conducted and how the reviewers' comments will be processed. It is also necessary to determine at which point in the project a review should be conducted.

When the client is aware of the type of challenges which typically arise during the review process, informed decisions which expedite the review process can be made both at the start of and during the course of a project. Some things to consider include:

What type of review would be productive?

Internal reviews
An internal review is the process by which native speakers of the target language employed by the client review the document. This process can help determine if the translator has made vocabulary choices consistent with terminology as it is specifically used by the client. For example, "case number" may mean the number assigned to a person or family which tracks with them throughout a system. This meaning may not be readily understood when a translator sees the term "case number". A translator may believe a case number refers only to the document at hand.

To aid the internal review process, it is helpful to target words at the beginning of the translation project which may have specific, client related, meanings. It may also be helpful to have the translator translate these words up front and have these translations reviewed internally so that suggested changes can be incorporated at the start of the translation process.

Community reviews
Community reviews are performed by members of the target community. The purpose of a community review should be well established at the start of a project. If the purpose of the review is to determine whether or not the meaning and intent of a document are understandable to the target audience, the first question which must be asked is: "Is this document understandable to a similar target audience in English?"

Understandability
Some documents are not very understandable to the target audience. For example, a document listing statutes or legalities of some kind is typically written in difficult to negotiate language. This language is used for a specific purpose and the translator should not alter it in order to "explain" the text or make it "more understandable". Consider how often the target audience has questions, concerns or needs help with negotiating documents written in English. This same need will be occur with target audiences in other languages.

Terminology
A useful purpose for community reviews is to determine if there are terms used within the translation which are equal to but differ from the commonly used terminology of the target population.

Another useful purpose for a community review involves using reviewers of the same target language from different countries. This process may reveal that a particular convention is not held in common by all speakers of the target language. For example, in most Arabic speaking countries numerals are written in the Arabic script. However, Sudanese speakers of Arabic are not familiar with numerals in script because they typically write numerals as they are used in English (1,2,3). Armed with this knowledge, a decision can be made to use numerals as they appear in English because they would be understandable to all Arabic speakers even though that is not the convention in most Arabic speaking countries.

Agree on the review process

It will be necessary to decide who is responsible for the review process, the client or the agency. How many persons should review the documents and how many times the documents should be checked by the reviewers must also be determined.

It should also be established at which point in the translation process a review will be performed. It is less costly to make suggested changes to the text before the formatting process is accomplished. However, it is sometimes easier for reviewers to compare the translated document with the original document after formatting. This decision should be made after the client and the agency have carefully weighed the options.

A timetable for reviews must be outlined at the beginning of the project. The amount of time allocated for the review process needs to be established. Reviewers need to know when to expect the material for review and exactly how much time they have to complete their work. Once the reviews are complete, time must be allowed for evaluating reviewer comments and implementing suggestions where appropriate.

Reviewers need to have a clear understanding of expectations regarding the review process. The instructions given to reviewers are often "let us know if this translation is understandable to the target audience." This type of instruction is too vague and opens the door for problems with the review process.

Written instructions, including a checklist for reviewers, are recommended. Reviewers should be instructed to look for errors in grammar, spelling, or usage. They should be asked to watch for inadvertent omissions, improper word breaks or text placement, and translation choices. They should be strongly cautioned against suggesting changes for stylistic reasons.

How should reviewers' comments be handled?

Comments from reviewers will reflect the individuality of the reviewer. They may range from rewriting the document to suit their own individual style to editing a few words to no comment at all. When reviewers suggest that the document is "all wrong" or "poorly translated", the reviewer's comments must be evaluated carefully. It is unlikely that a reliable translation agency will submit a document which is "all wrong". Reviewers may make good suggestions which are not "corrections" but simply alternative translation choices.

It often happens that, because reviewers are not translators or language experts, the suggestions that they offer are not viable for various reasons. These reasons may be:

• The reviewer did not understand the original text accurately.
• The reviewer wants to expand the text to include information not in the original document.
• The reviewer suggests terminology changes which will subtly change the meaning of the text, making it incorrect. This often occurs when the reviewer is thinking in terms of simplifying a document. For example, a reviewer suggested changing "confidential" to "secret" and "immunization" to "shot". These changes alter the meaning of the sentence because these word pairs are not equivalent.
• The reviewer has a specific cultural, political, religious, or other point of view.

Other possibilities which should be taken into consideration
when processing reviewers' comments include:

• Reviewers may feel that if they don't "find something" it will appear that they haven't done their job. They may suggest changes which aren't strictly necessary in order to show that they have worked carefully with the document.
• Reviewers often suggest stylistic changes even when cautioned that this is not necessary or appropriate. Individuals can have very strong ideas about what "sounds best". Consider how often something is written in English and a colleague suggests stylistic changes based on personal preference.
  
• There are language related issues which are challenging to negotiate. For languages where there is no established terminology for translating specific words or concepts different individuals will likely invent differing versions to express the word or idea in their own language.
• Some languages have not been established in written form until relatively recently. These languages don't always have consistent spelling from dictionary to dictionary.
• Languages evolve and change. In some cases, there can be sharp disagreement as to whether the English word spelled phonetically in the target language should be used or whether a traditional or a newly created word in the target language should be used. This becomes difficult to decide based on what the target population is currently using and is a good issue for feedback from the community reviewers.
• Languages acquire words from other languages. In languages like Hmong and Somali, there is disagreement as to whether Lao words should be used in Hmong and Arabic or Italian words should be used in Somali. These words have been incorporated into the target languages and may be used commonly by the target population but purists may object to their usage in written text.

It is suggested that reviewers' comments be evaluated by the original translator and that the original translator should incorporate changes where appropriate and decline to incorporate inappropriate changes. The original translator must document why he or she chooses not to make changes and confer with the client as necessary.

When reviewers' comments are lengthy and for the most part unnecessary, it becomes difficult to negotiate how much time should be spent by the original translator documenting whether or not the changes should be incorporated. It is also necessary to establish limits to the review process. If more than one round of reviews will be expected, this should be established at the front end of a project.

Next : Glossaries

6260 Highway 65 NE, Suite 308; Minneapolis MN 55432
tel:763.572.9711; fax:763.571.3467; best@betmar.com

©2003 betmar languages, all rights reserved.