Translator should be credited in academic paper? Thread poster: Mark Daniels
|
|---|
I got to wondering recently, where an academic paper has been translated, should the translator not be credited by the author of the paper, since translation could be considered a kind of co-authorship, especially when the translator has to do a lot of rephrasing in order to make the paper read naturally in the target language?
Lately, with various changes in academic requirements, and more and more people obliged to submit frequent research papers to academic periodicals to maintai... See more I got to wondering recently, where an academic paper has been translated, should the translator not be credited by the author of the paper, since translation could be considered a kind of co-authorship, especially when the translator has to do a lot of rephrasing in order to make the paper read naturally in the target language?
Lately, with various changes in academic requirements, and more and more people obliged to submit frequent research papers to academic periodicals to maintain their academic status, I find myself doing more and more translations of academic papers (or sometimes editing/proofing, though I really try to avoid that).
This is especially because the better academic journals have quite stringent expectations with regard to the quality of English required for publication of papers, and the authors of papers, although they usually know the English terminology of their area of expertise fairly well, have trouble writing papers to a high standard of English.
Honestly, I am not really that bothered as to whether anyone credits me, but I wonder whether the authors of papers could violate academic standards in some way by not disclosing that they did not write the paper in English, and whether I should advise my clients of this in the form of some sort of disclaimer?
Mark
[Edited at 2014-12-23 11:37 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | translator should always be named in academic papers | Dec 23, 2014 |
Hi Mark -- I believe the translator should always be named in academic articles, unless, for some reason, the translator does not want to be named. In contracts with academic authors, I always a include a clause specifying that my name *must* be listed as the translator. I do so for professional reasons that are both personal and collective: as you pointed out, the translator is the "author" of the translation and so deserves credit for that in the same way the author of the source article de... See more Hi Mark -- I believe the translator should always be named in academic articles, unless, for some reason, the translator does not want to be named. In contracts with academic authors, I always a include a clause specifying that my name *must* be listed as the translator. I do so for professional reasons that are both personal and collective: as you pointed out, the translator is the "author" of the translation and so deserves credit for that in the same way the author of the source article deserves credit; I want the reading public to be reminded that translations don't just fall from the sky and get cranked out by machine translators, and by listing my name, the translation community at large benefits; just as the academic author is writing articles to advance his or her career, I am translating such articles to advance mine, and therefore citing my name is indispensable. The rates for academic translations are usually a pittance compared to commercial ones, so having my name cited is a form of compensation I am willing to accept in light of this differential.
Chris Durban, who published "The Prosperous Translator" and contributes prodigiously to on-line discussions, argues that translators should always try to get their name cited, even in commercial texts. She even gets her name cited in financial reports! In her view, attaching one's name boosts the translator's sense of accountability for the quality, as well as boosting the respect that others commissioning the translation will have toward the translation profession.
At least one translators' association, CEATL, enshrines the rights of the translator as author in its statement on legal rights (see http://www.ceatl.eu/translators-rights/legal-status#s2.):
"Why literary translators are authors
"Copyright is based on the idea of originality: any new expression that is different from existing expressions, is considered the inalienable intellectual property of its author and, as such, enjoys automatic protection. Just like musical or dramatic performances, literary translations are in a double copyright situation: on the one hand there is the copyright of the original author, and on the other the copyright of the translator, who is the author of this particular translation, as distinct from all other possible translations of the same text. This is why the translator enjoys exactly the same legal rights as a writer. It also means that literary translation is not just work for hire, but a form of free expression: when signing a contract with a translator, a publisher is actually commissioning an original work that bears the stamp of its author."
Other translator associations, such as IAPTI, extend this paradigm of translator as author to nonliterary translations as well.
Thanks for raising a valuable topic! ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phil Hand 
China
Local time: 17:29
Chinese to English
| Very interesting question | Dec 23, 2014 |
There doesn't seem to be anything about it in the author guidelines for the big science journals. I think if you haven't contributed to the research then it's up to the author's discretion whether to credit you or not. I've been credited in history/cultural studies journals, and I was told on both occasions that it's journal policy to credit translators.
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:29
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Why should you be credited as a translator of an academic paper? Did you write the paper? No. You are only the translator. If you do a good job, no doubt the author of the paper (the person who actually did the work) will recommend you for other, similar, translations. Or they themselves may choose to mention you as the translator. That would be up to them. But you should stay modestly in the background.
Very often these papers are written for use at conferences, where they are del... See more Why should you be credited as a translator of an academic paper? Did you write the paper? No. You are only the translator. If you do a good job, no doubt the author of the paper (the person who actually did the work) will recommend you for other, similar, translations. Or they themselves may choose to mention you as the translator. That would be up to them. But you should stay modestly in the background.
Very often these papers are written for use at conferences, where they are delivered in English, usually with some kind of foreign accent. The conference delegates then have informal discussions with one another, in the course of which it becomes obvious that the paper was a translation done by someone else. Questions may be asked us to who the translator was, and this may generate further work for you if your translation was good and convincing.
[Edited at 2014-12-23 18:15 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Double-edged sword | Dec 23, 2014 |
I have specialised in academic translations for several years, and over that time I must have read hundreds of the 'instructions to authors' given in academic journals. Not one of them has ever mentioned crediting the translator - usually, the only mention of translation is to promote their own in-house translation services. So no, I don't think there is any requirement at all in academic circles for research authors to credit their translator.
On the other hand, although I am very ... See more I have specialised in academic translations for several years, and over that time I must have read hundreds of the 'instructions to authors' given in academic journals. Not one of them has ever mentioned crediting the translator - usually, the only mention of translation is to promote their own in-house translation services. So no, I don't think there is any requirement at all in academic circles for research authors to credit their translator.
On the other hand, although I am very rarely credited, this does not bother me since in my experience, academics can rarely resist tampering with my translation once delivered. I know this because sometimes they come back to me complaining that their article had been rejected by the reviewers because of the poor standard of English, but a quick comparison of the text I delivered and the text they submitted always reveals inept tampering. They add some more findings here and there, revise their conclusions, arbitrarily decide they prefer some other synonym...but do not ask me to do a final revision before submitting the translated article for publication. They always add errors that were not there in the translation I delivered, and I don't want my name associated with their mistakes. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Mark Daniels
Local time: 11:29
Serbian to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Poles apart..! | Dec 24, 2014 |
Interesting responses - thanks, obviously opinions are poles apart even amongst translators!
I would take issue with Tom's outright "no" - there are very good reasons for suggesting that the translator OUGHT perhaps to be credited. Catherine explains below that translators have always striven to have their work recognised as being more than the work of "only the translator" - that is has aspects of authorship. Did I write such-and-such work of literature in English? No, I "only" tra... See more Interesting responses - thanks, obviously opinions are poles apart even amongst translators!
I would take issue with Tom's outright "no" - there are very good reasons for suggesting that the translator OUGHT perhaps to be credited. Catherine explains below that translators have always striven to have their work recognised as being more than the work of "only the translator" - that is has aspects of authorship. Did I write such-and-such work of literature in English? No, I "only" translated it, but I sure as heck want to be credited for it, and why is this any different, even if admittedly a little less creative work goes into translating academic papers? It's just a matter of degrees. I think Tom your view does our profession a disservice - translation is rarely "just" a translation, or else we'll just let the clients use Google Translate and see where that gets them with the journal editors. I am sure this debate has been gone over many times here on the forum and elsewhere.
No, I don't want to take credit for the academic study/research/paper itself, but I feel there might be an argument for authors to DISCLOSE that the paper (in English 90% of the time) was not actually written by them in that language - not to do so is academically disingenuous in my opinion. Never mind the fact that I, and probably all of you, have MANY times offered corrections and suggestions to the paper's author regarding unclear phrasing or even outright mistakes, and have got the author's blessing to make whatever changes were necessary for better clarity, comprehension etc.
There is also a subset of this issue, where authors quote other papers or works that simply have not been published in the target language and thus the translator has to render his or her own translation of this citation. In such a case it is appropriate to add something like "(own translation)" in brackets after the quote, since the bibliography will list the source work, not an English (or whatever) version, which does not even exist. But then if you write "(own translation)", whose "own" translation is it, that of the paper's author..?
Having said all this, I agree (and that is why I asked the question) that no journal I have ever translated papers for has had any requirements relating to disclosure or crediting of the translator...
[Edited at 2014-12-24 08:28 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:29
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Mark Daniels wrote:
......admittedly a little less creative work goes into translating academic papers? It's just a matter of degrees....
Wow. So actually writing an academic paper doesn't require much more effort than it does to translate it? Wow.
Perhaps the translator's name should appear at the top of the paper, and the name of the author should appear in small print at the bottom.
| | | | Mark Daniels
Local time: 11:29
Serbian to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | I don't recall saying that... | Dec 24, 2014 |
Tom in London wrote: Mark Daniels wrote:
......admittedly a little less creative work goes into translating academic papers? It's just a matter of degrees.... Wow. So actually writing an academic paper doesn't require much more effort than it does to translate it? Wow. Perhaps the translator's name should appear at the top of the paper, and the name of the author should appear in small print at the bottom.
Ummm, not sure if we got our wires crossed or what, that there seems to be sarcasm, but I was suggesting nothing of the sort. I was merely trying to say that translating an academic paper was comparable to translating a literary work in the sense that the translator has to use a degree of licence, creativity, interpretation, albeit not as much as with a full-blown novel or whatever.
At no point was I trying to suggest that translating an academic paper was comparable to writing one, I am not sure where you got that from.
Perhaps you can elaborate - why would you (presumably) insist on being credited for a literary translation, but not for an academic one? What is the fundamental difference? Academic work requires MORE accountability and transparency than literary work, an author can write a novel under a nom-de-plume, who cares; a researcher must disclose ALL the sources they have used, sometimes all their possible conflicts of interest - so why not insist on them disclosing that they did not in fact write the English (French, whatever) version of the paper, and that so-and-so was the translator? It can be in small letters at the bottom.
| | |
|
|
|
| more on crediting translator | Dec 28, 2014 |
Denise - you raised the concern that academic clients are especially likely to mess with your translation, thinking they know better, so you don't mind not having your named cited in a badly revised translation.
That's an easy one to deal with. You simply include in your contract with the client a clause stating that, if revisions are made to the translation you submitted, the client must send the text back to you for review, to discuss the changes until you are both satisfied. The... See more Denise - you raised the concern that academic clients are especially likely to mess with your translation, thinking they know better, so you don't mind not having your named cited in a badly revised translation.
That's an easy one to deal with. You simply include in your contract with the client a clause stating that, if revisions are made to the translation you submitted, the client must send the text back to you for review, to discuss the changes until you are both satisfied. Then in another clause, you can define the consequences of what will happen if you cannot come to an agreement about revisions or if the translation is further revised, and badly so, without your approval.
In my contracts, I include these sentences:
In the clause about timely reviews of the translation and proofs, I add: "Since both Client and Translator are professionals, they shall discuss revisions or alternative translation solutions, showing respect for each other’s opinions, and, in the case of differences of opinions, shall do their best to make good faith efforts to reach consensus, with the aim of producing the best possible translation." I use "good faith" language because this kind of negotiation is difficult to define precisely and legalistically. I've also noticed that appealing to the client's good faith and good sense is often more successful at getting them to engage in an adult conversation than legalistic parsing.
In the clause asserting my right to have my name cited as translator, I add: "If, however, substantial alterations are made to the published translation after the submission of the final revised translation that reflected the best consensus between Client and Translator, and if such alterations lead to a marked deterioration in the quality of the translation and are not rectified upon request by the Translator, in such a case the Translator shall have the right to request, in writing, that the Translator’s name be removed from the book and all other citations listed above, to prevent harm to Translator’s professional reputation."
Chris Durban, who, as I mentioned, is adamant about the importance of citing the translator's name (both to remind readers that humans created the translation and to make the translator publicly accountable), recently mentioned a further condition she adds in her contracts, one which I plan to adopt next time. Since money "helps focus attention," she says, her contract states that publishing the translation without her final approval to revisions will result in an additional payment equal to 100% of the agreed-upon fee for the translation itself. Now *that* is "wow"!! ▲ Collapse
| | | | Miguel Ríos
Mexico
Local time: 03:29
English to Spanish
+ ...
| Any recent experiences on credit for academic translation? | Sep 22, 2016 |
Many times I have had to improve papers where half of the sentences in the source text were unclear, ambiguous, were missing information or were just clumsy writing. Clearly, many researchers can't write properly in their native language.
Do I deserve credit for that? Sure, it would be nice. it's not easy and I have to do a lot of research. But then I think that it's just my job. This thread also made me think of the drawbacks. Just today I delivered a paper that still had a couple ... See more Many times I have had to improve papers where half of the sentences in the source text were unclear, ambiguous, were missing information or were just clumsy writing. Clearly, many researchers can't write properly in their native language.
Do I deserve credit for that? Sure, it would be nice. it's not easy and I have to do a lot of research. But then I think that it's just my job. This thread also made me think of the drawbacks. Just today I delivered a paper that still had a couple of fuzzy sentences that I had already mentioned in the first round of comments, but to this moment I don't know if the author is going to let me correct my provisional literal translations, which they absolutely can't overlook.
A couple of times, I have asked clients or researchers if it's ok if I upload a (referenced) translation of some part of their article as a sample translation, and they have either agreed or just not replied. This works for me now. I do have some credit on early translations from when I worked for a university. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 11:29
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| No, that's just editing | Sep 22, 2016 |
Radioajo wrote:
Many times I have had to improve papers where half of the sentences in the source text were unclear, ambiguous, were missing information or were just clumsy writing. ... Do I deserve credit for that?
What you describe is just editing (in this case, invisible editing, because the edited text exists only in the translator's head during the transfer from language A to language B). It is part of the translator's job, so you can only be credited as the translator, even if you had to do a lot of editing as well. You can only be credited as an editor if your edits are used in the print version in the original language.
It's not easy and I have to do a lot of research. But then I think that it's just my job.
I agree with you. Most translation jobs involve a measure of research on the part of the translator. Translators who don't want to do extra research should stick to simple jobs. Translators who believe that their research should be paid for extra should simply charge extra.
| | | |
It does not happen often that I agree with Tom. However, on this topic, I fully support his opinion.
Tom in London wrote:
Why should you be credited as a translator of an academic paper? Did you write the paper? No. You are only the translator. If you do a good job, no doubt the author of the paper (the person who actually did the work) will recommend you for other, similar, translations. Or they themselves may choose to mention you as the translator. That would be up to them. But you should stay modestly in the background.
Academic papers, at least in the medical field, require a team to do the scientific work that forms the basis of the paper. There might be biostatisticians, IT specialists, nurses, medical technicians all contributing to the project. You cannot put them all in the paper. Why should the translator have a right to a "higher level of visibility" than these other specialists who contributed?
| | |
|
|
|
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:29
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Mark Daniels wrote:
..... I am not really that bothered as to whether anyone credits me, but I wonder whether the authors of papers could violate academic standards in some way by not disclosing that they did not write the paper in English, and whether I should advise my clients of this in the form of some sort of disclaimer?
That's their problem. If I were you I would restrict myself to just doing the translation. I do a lot of work similar to what you describe. The people who write these papers may not have a full command of English but they are intelligent people who would not - I think - appreciate me giving them personal advice.
| | | | | Yes, but is it really that important? | Sep 22, 2016 |
Catherine V. Howard wrote: At least one translators' association, CEATL, enshrines the rights of the translator as author in its statement on legal rights (see http://www.ceatl.eu/translators-rights/legal-status#s2.): "Why literary translators are authors "Copyright is based on the idea of originality: any new expression that is different from existing expressions, is considered the inalienable intellectual property of its author and, as such, enjoys automatic protection. Just like musical or dramatic performances, literary translations are in a double copyright situation: on the one hand there is the copyright of the original author, and on the other the copyright of the translator, who is the author of this particular translation, as distinct from all other possible translations of the same text. This is why the translator enjoys exactly the same legal rights as a writer. It also means that literary translation is not just work for hire, but a form of free expression: when signing a contract with a translator, a publisher is actually commissioning an original work that bears the stamp of its author." Other translator associations, such as IAPTI, extend this paradigm of translator as author to nonliterary translations as well.
That seems like an unnecessarily lofty explanation of the issue: Saying that copyright is based on "originality" is like saying that the sales of pop music are based on "quality": I suppose it is true in some sense, but this statement mostly just helps us to miss the point.
And "works for hire" (works carried out by freelancers, but legally considered the work of the client) are an aberration of US copyright/IP law and do not exist in any other Berne Convention country, because they pretty directly contradict the basic tenets of the convention.
Copyright generally protects the formulation of ideas and not ideas themselves: If a scholar steals a colleague's findings and arguments, but articulates them in new sentences, then that is plagiarism and possibly fraud, but it is not a copyright violation. The minimum amount of "originality" required to secure copyright is so low in many countries that a different word would be more appropriate: It is actually fairly difficult to express something in words without it meeting the requirements for copyright.
Translating a literary work clearly involves enough decision-making that the translator and author clearly hold joint copyright in the translation. Translating a birth certificate or a simple contract clearly does not involve enough decision-making to lead to any kind of copyright. Everything in between is a more or less gray area and it depends on the specific case and the specific country involved. (And often the specific judges involved, when disagreements go to trial.)
Most of the things that I translate (all non-fiction) very clearly require enough decision-making that it seems reasonable to assume that they lead to copyright. My achievement and my efforts are in no way comparable to those of my authors, but that is not the point. The point is that I have written something down in a specific way, which could reasonably have been written down in any number of other adequate ways, and that means it is automatically subject to copyright. If it is subject to copyright, then authors/publishers are legally required to credit me as the translator (Berne Convention) unless I give them permission not to do so.
Most of my clients also automatically assume that they should credit me. On the other hand, if they forget or don't want to, I don't really care. I'm not going to start throwing T&C clauses around to make sure it gets done. I happen to also like to get a copy of the given publication, but probably only about 1/4 to 1/3 of my clients actually send one. Again, though, I don't see any reason to make a fuss about it.
So, I guess that my answer is: Yes, but there is no need to make a big deal out of it unless it is a big deal for you personally.
P.S.: Editing (in the sense of substantial editing or copy editing, not in the sense of organizing a publication) only leads to joint copyright in very exceptional cases. However, it is not unusual to credit copy editors in academic publications, although it would look strange if it was only about a single article or contribution.
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Translator should be credited in academic paper? | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
