I sometimes hear freelance translators complaining about AI, saying that it just spits up poor translations quickly and cheaply, whereas they, being professional translators, can do things like “terminology research.” This ability is also sometimes cited as a justification for taking higher rates.
This makes me wonder about the nature of (and reasons for) this terminology research. I also wonder whether it is something to brag about, or rather something that is best kept hidden, at least from potential direct clients, a client demographic that—as AI-using translation-brokering agencies move away from purchasing the services of professional translators—might allow some translators to buy some time.
If you have one or more fields of specialization and competence, you should need to do little research when translating in those fields. There is, however, a long-standing resistance by some translators to specialization, perhaps because it is feared that specialization will result in an insufficient amount of work.
It could also be that people believe that they can Google their way out of problems caused by unfamiliarity with the subject matter they have been asked to translate. That view is probably comforting to translators who have neither true field-specific expertise nor clients that can provide enough translation work in a small number of fields in which they could achieve a level of understanding that goes beyond Googling terminology.
What message does boasting about terminology researching send to a client?
If your main clients are translation-brokering agencies, regardless of how they position themselves—for example, as “global providers of language solutions” or some other bloated characterization—you are probably not dealing with somebody at the agency who has much field-specific knowledge. They tell their clients that they have expert translators in any and every field, then purchase translations from freelancers and hope for the best. The client is comforted by being able to tell themselves that their documents are in the hands of experts, the actual expertise of which they are, of course, not provided the opportunity to verify beforehand. Translation tests are not reliable tests of actual understanding.
But if you need to deal with direct clients, you will most likely be directly interacting with people who might wonder about your abilities.
Why do you need to do terminology research, the client might wonder? Is it that the work they need done is beyond your scope of knowledge and understanding? If you need to meet and interface directly with those clients—something very likely with direct clients, particularly Japanese clients for JA-EN translations—they will be able to discover the answer to that question very quickly.
Unlike “project managers,” the people you need to deal with at direct clients are experts in the things they need you to translate. If you don’t have expert knowledge and understanding of the subject matter, the relationship will probably be difficult to establish, and you could be facing a series of gently slammed doors as you ply your translation wares among the direct client demographic.
The “Value” of Agencies
The above situation underscores the problematical value of a broker between translators and translation consumers. The brokers are free to lie about the expertise of “their translators” (although very few actually “have” any translators) and hope for the best in being able to purchase translations for their clients, even using less-than-expert translators who will do their best to “research” their way out of problems caused by insufficient domain-specific knowledge.
What are the outcomes?
It often works, precisely because there is an intermediate broker, which might not provide added value beyond acting as what could be called a distress buffer. The translator is saved from a trial-by-expertise that would happen when facing a translation consumer (direct client), and the client is allowed to tell themselves that an expert is doing their translations.
As most translation-brokering agencies move closer to not having to purchase translation services from professionals, however, the protective brokering arrangement will shortly become a thing of the past, and that change is already well underway.
Agencies will use mostly machine translation, with or without the requisite buzzword AI, and translators hoping to survive will need to face and acquire non-AI using clients. Since that will mean mostly direct clients, the domain-specific knowledge hurdles faced by a translator will grow dramatically, leaving many translators out in the cold and, ironically, perhaps looking back fondly on those brokers who would do their lying for them.