Re: Faulty logic

[Max Wyss <prodok -at- PRODOK -dot- CH>]

Sarah,

thanks for the clarification about the point fo the faulty logic.

Is it faulty logic? Is a translation just a commodity, or something you buy
like flour in a supermarket? If that's the idea, I may have a problem with
my professional understanding (and also pride). And then, it does not
really matter whether the source or target word count applies; that's just
a simple technical detail.

This makes me wonder about the reason to be of the translator? Doesn't the
translator bring ideas, concepts, content from one container (culture) to
another? On the other hand, isn't this the same the writer does?

So, the writer gets paid for transforming ideas etc. That's OK with me. But
the translator is paid by word (or even worse, by letter). Why? I know,
"because it is so, has been so, and will be so forever" is what I may hear,
but this is a very weak answer to me.

Just wondering


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

       http://www.prodok.ch/prodok/riemen.html




_____________



>Max,
>Your question was why should translators
>be paid per word when writers aren't. That's
>where the faulty logic applied.
>
>It is common practise in the translation/localisation
>business to cost a translation on the number
>of source words. As for discussions about different
>word count methods (are you listening John Pilla?)
>these apply across the board -- clients and translators
>frequently come up with differing totals for word
>counts for the same material, depending on the
>method being used. The source words are what are
>usually being counted. Word counting is just about
>always done before translation begins so that the
>project can be scoped and costed. I've never actually
>come across a client who word counted after translation
>-- I would imagine that one that went to such lengths
>was a rather unsatisfied and unhappy camper.
>
>>It could be different in the MT world, however.
>
>Yes, in the real world, where language technology
>tools are used, life is a little bit different. LT tools (in
>the main) provide a stable word counting environment,
>for one thing. So both client and translator can work
>from the same blueprint. Clients don't have to
>pay for two or more translations of the same phrase
>and translators can be more consistent in their
>use of phraseology. But that's another days battle...
>
>Best
>Sarah
>sarahc -at- indigo -dot- ie
>