What if your client asks you not to interpret a certain part of his sentence? Thread poster: junelee10293
|
|---|
Hi all,
I am facing a dilemma now in a business meeting for company A and B.
Company A confirmed the readiness of all the raw materials. However, due to miscommunication between A and the supplier, one material later turned out to be not available. The sudden change might concern B, causing it to revoke the contract. As a result, I was informed of the true reason in the meeting but asked to gloss over it and tell B the new material was of better quality.
Any ad... See more Hi all,
I am facing a dilemma now in a business meeting for company A and B.
Company A confirmed the readiness of all the raw materials. However, due to miscommunication between A and the supplier, one material later turned out to be not available. The sudden change might concern B, causing it to revoke the contract. As a result, I was informed of the true reason in the meeting but asked to gloss over it and tell B the new material was of better quality.
Any advice? Shall I just follow what the client asked? If I don't, the client will be gone forever but that means I need to forsake faithfulness to the source text. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
I would never knowingly participate in deceit, and it is not reasonable for the client to ask you to lie, misrepresent and distort. We need to uphold professional ethics. It should be made clear that it is un reasonable and unethical demand that you cannot participate in. If the client later wants to falsify documents, it's their own business.
| | | | Samuel Murray 
Netherlands
Local time: 14:58
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
I'm assuming you're an interpreter. Here's my opinion:
Usually, there is only one interpreter at a meeting even though two parties are meeting. Sometimes, one party is responsible for arranging the interpreter. The other party doesn't hire their own interpreter to be present as well, because they trust that the interpreter will be honest. Your duty, as an interpreter, is to translate the speech of both parties as accurately as possible. Your client can't expect you to lie on th... See more I'm assuming you're an interpreter. Here's my opinion:
Usually, there is only one interpreter at a meeting even though two parties are meeting. Sometimes, one party is responsible for arranging the interpreter. The other party doesn't hire their own interpreter to be present as well, because they trust that the interpreter will be honest. Your duty, as an interpreter, is to translate the speech of both parties as accurately as possible. Your client can't expect you to lie on their behalf. They are free to lie, but they can't expect you to turn their speech into a lie (by translating incorrectly). Remember, even if you know that the client is lying, it's not your duty to tell the other party that your client is lying, so all your client has to do (if they want to lie) is to lie when they speak. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Also a matter of self-preservation | Jan 11, 2023 |
I agree with the previous comments. I would just like to add that you should also be careful. If the lie blows up, company A might be looking for a scape goat and be willing to throw also the translator or interpreter under the bus. I suggest you keep a good record or recording of your work, just in case.
| | |
|
|
|
Joseph Tein
United States
Local time: 05:58
Member (2009)
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Interpreters interpret. | Jan 12, 2023 |
As an interpreter, you don't "tell" anybody anything; you restate what company A says to company B in company B's language. You don't gloss over anything that is said, and you don't tell people that the new material is of better quality unless those are the specific words that your client has spoken. It's up to them what they choose to tell the other company ... then you would be interpreting their lie, whatever they feeling like telling them, but you're just being an interpreter. Asking you ... See more As an interpreter, you don't "tell" anybody anything; you restate what company A says to company B in company B's language. You don't gloss over anything that is said, and you don't tell people that the new material is of better quality unless those are the specific words that your client has spoken. It's up to them what they choose to tell the other company ... then you would be interpreting their lie, whatever they feeling like telling them, but you're just being an interpreter. Asking you to "tell" someone something that it not true is asking you to lie for them. This is obviously unethical. If you interpret, you're simply passing on what company A chooses to tell company B and are not part of the deceit.
Again: it's not our job to explain or 'tell' someone anything; we accurately convey meaning between people who speak different languages. Interpreter codes of ethics always include the rule to "add nothing and omit nothing." Anything else is stepping outside our role.
Also ... I'm confused by the question "what if the client asks you not to interpret part of the sentence?" Why would the client even say anything that they then would not want to have you interpret? Why not just NOT say it in the first place?
Good luck.
(I'm a certified court and medical interpreter.)
[Edited at 2023-01-12 01:20 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 14:58
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
Joseph Tein wrote:
I'm confused by the question "what if the client asks you not to interpret part of the sentence?" Why would the client even say anything that they then would not want to have you interpret? Why not just NOT say it in the first place?
Perhaps this is an instance where the client said something, and then just before the interpreter started translating, the client changed their mind and said "Wait, don't translate that... translate the following instead" and then spoke the new text that he wanted to communicate. Would you, in such a case, do as the client asked? In other words, you're not changing a sentence -- you are allowing the client to "start over" with his turn.
| | | | IrinaN
United States
Local time: 07:58
English to Russian
+ ...
How do you know that at your previous assignment the parties have not been lying through their teeth all day long without informing you?
In fact, someone on the client's side was plain stupid to involve you this way. Don't sink any deeper. Joseph said it already - tell them that they shouldn't be saying anything they don't want to be interpreted. Any other ethics has absolutely nothing to do with anything, there is no... See more How do you know that at your previous assignment the parties have not been lying through their teeth all day long without informing you?
In fact, someone on the client's side was plain stupid to involve you this way. Don't sink any deeper. Joseph said it already - tell them that they shouldn't be saying anything they don't want to be interpreted. Any other ethics has absolutely nothing to do with anything, there is no dilemma, their lie is simply none of your business. The less you think of a burden of global honesty and perfection on your shoulders, the better your relationship with the client will be. Suppress that mother-in-law urge to improve the world. You are not one of them, your voice does not count and is not needed, save for interpretation, you are not there for any decision-making, including ethical decisions. Unless, of course, something will be hurting or offending you directly. No matter how nicely they treat and compliment you, you are not them. Otherwise, you won't last long in the profession:-).
It's hard to figure out the actual setting. Where and how it happened? Behind the scenes?
During the meeting? Why "source text?" Is this "dilemma" still suspended in the air? Do you feel like enlightening the party?
PS - When meeting for the first time, most parties would not conduct or tolerate any extended sidebars while sitting at the same table, yet it can be quite common between long-standing partners. In my world, instances when any side can say "this is not for translation" or "we need a minute to discuss it internally" and nobody would mind happen all the time, but that comes after many years of cooperation and trust. The timeouts are taken to formulate the exact wording or the point of an answer or a proposal, or to double-check something etc. No one would suspect any undercurrents, hidden agendas etc.
And yes, after 24 years, no matter now much they trust and love me, no matter to what extent I became a true member of the space team, I always remember - I'm still not one of them! Don't fool yourself. That is a very important piece of ethics that kept me in the project for all those years.
Edited for autocorrect )))
[Edited at 2023-01-12 16:56 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Daryo
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:58
Serbian to English
+ ...
| Just a small fly in the ointment ... | Jan 13, 2023 |
Angelo Lettere wrote:
I agree with the previous comments. I would just like to add that you should also be careful. If the lie blows up, company A might be looking for a scape goat and be willing to throw also the translator or interpreter under the bus. I suggest you keep a good record or recording of your work, just in case.
I'm seriously tempted to ask have you ever done any interpreting? There is this thing called "confidentiality", and it's not to be taken lightly if you want to last in the profession.
For an interpreter it's technically impossible to "keep a good ... recording of your work" especially in any kind of confidential talks. Although more often than not they would go to great length to keep talks confidential, parties or the organisers might record the meeting, but the interpreter doing it? Absolutely no way!
ALSO
Interpreter's job is to convey "exactly as is" what is said to the other party, or what the other party said to your client during the meeting.
The only source of confusion I ever had is with some speakers who would in the middle of talking to the other party suddenly insert comments meant only for other members of their own team. Apart from that, "rules of engagement" couldn't be simpler:
Anything not meant to be interpreted on the spot for the benefit of the other party, but said between you and your client (be it before, during or after the meeting) is confidential, in the sense that it's not to be repeated to any third party - end of story.
| | |
|
|
|
MollyRose
United States
Local time: 07:58
English to Spanish
+ ...
| if said during the meeting | Jan 13, 2023 |
Hopefully you did a presession, explaining that you would impartially interpret everything that is said exactly the same way that it is said, including the use of first person. That would include side conversations, so if they want to have a private conversation, it would have to be inaudible or in a different room. You will not be adding or omitting anything, nor giving your own opinion. Some interpreters say something like, "Pretend that I am a telephone, but the words come out in the other la... See more Hopefully you did a presession, explaining that you would impartially interpret everything that is said exactly the same way that it is said, including the use of first person. That would include side conversations, so if they want to have a private conversation, it would have to be inaudible or in a different room. You will not be adding or omitting anything, nor giving your own opinion. Some interpreters say something like, "Pretend that I am a telephone, but the words come out in the other language." Then, during the meeting, you would have to interpret everything that you hear.
If they ask you to sight translate something, then you need to be faithful to what is written. If during the meeting they say, "Tell him that I think ..." you would have to say, "Tell him that I think ..." If they say, "Don't translate that last part, but say ..." then you would have to say, "Don't translate that last part, but say ..." in the target language.
This way, it is clear to all parties that you are upholding interpreter's ethics. It is their words that you are speaking, not your own. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Joseph Tein
United States
Local time: 05:58
Member (2009)
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Faithfulness to the "source text" vs. faithfulness to professional interpreter behavior | Jan 13, 2023 |
It's also confusing why you say "source text." There is no text when we're interpreting unless we're asked to sight-translate a written document. Did they ask you to sight-translate something written? And ... to be clear ... when you say "TELL B the new material was of better quality" do you really mean *interpret* what your client A is speaking, or are they asking you to say certain things in your own words? I like the telephone analogy: the information expressed by party A passes through yo... See more It's also confusing why you say "source text." There is no text when we're interpreting unless we're asked to sight-translate a written document. Did they ask you to sight-translate something written? And ... to be clear ... when you say "TELL B the new material was of better quality" do you really mean *interpret* what your client A is speaking, or are they asking you to say certain things in your own words? I like the telephone analogy: the information expressed by party A passes through you and comes out meaning exactly the same, in B's language.
Faithfulness to professional interpreter behavior means, as several people have now written, saying everything, into B's language, that your client A has spoken. Exactly as they say it. Omitting or adding nothing. I think people have made this very clear. Anything you choose to do differently, in order to keep your client's business, is your decision. It would not be ethical. Yes, this client may be "gone forever" if you behave correctly as an ethical, professional interpreter. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Your comment was brought to my attention. Apparently, you have misinterpreted and overinterpreted my short statement by making it about the topic of “breach of confidentiality”. I consider it important for any professional to keep a good memory of their work. There is no breach in confidentiality in doing so, as I never even mentioned involving a third party. It does, however, enable you to confront any of the two existing parties with their own words if necessary. Since when is it unusual t... See more Your comment was brought to my attention. Apparently, you have misinterpreted and overinterpreted my short statement by making it about the topic of “breach of confidentiality”. I consider it important for any professional to keep a good memory of their work. There is no breach in confidentiality in doing so, as I never even mentioned involving a third party. It does, however, enable you to confront any of the two existing parties with their own words if necessary. Since when is it unusual to record an important meeting, make a transcript or even signed minutes of it? If anything, recordings in particular have become even more frequent and common during the pandemic.
I will not analyze your comment any further, as its only remarkable feature is its unwarranted sharp tone. But rudeness does not validate a flawed argument, it rather reflects on the writer.
To not further distract from the original topic, I will leave it at this.
Daryo wrote: Angelo Lettere wrote:
I agree with the previous comments. I would just like to add that you should also be careful. If the lie blows up, company A might be looking for a scape goat and be willing to throw also the translator or interpreter under the bus. I suggest you keep a good record or recording of your work, just in case. I'm seriously tempted to ask have you ever done any interpreting? There is this thing called "confidentiality", and it's not to be taken lightly if you want to last in the profession. For an interpreter it's technically impossible to "keep a good ... recording of your work" especially in any kind of confidential talks. Although more often than not they would go to great length to keep talks confidential, parties or the organisers might record the meeting, but the interpreter doing it? Absolutely no way! ALSO Interpreter's job is to convey "exactly as is" what is said to the other party, or what the other party said to your client during the meeting. The only source of confusion I ever had is with some speakers who would in the middle of talking to the other party suddenly insert comments meant only for other members of their own team. Apart from that, "rules of engagement" couldn't be simpler: Anything not meant to be interpreted on the spot for the benefit of the other party, but said between you and your client (be it before, during or after the meeting) is confidential, in the sense that it's not to be repeated to any third party - end of story. ▲ Collapse
| | | | IrinaN
United States
Local time: 07:58
English to Russian
+ ...
| Stop the planet, I'll get off | Jan 17, 2023 |
Angelo Lettere wrote:
1. It does, however, enable you to confront any of the two existing parties with their own words if necessary...
2. Since when is it unusual to record an important meeting, make a transcript or even signed minutes of it? If anything, recordings in particular have become even more frequent and common during the pandemic.
1. I'd pay to see the interpreter confronting the party with the recordings or transcripts generated without client's knowledge and secretly taken home for safe (?) keeping. Most parties with any professional sense, especially government or law offices, would require even interpreter's scribblings to be submitted before leaving.
2. Recorded by whom? Signed by whom? Have your name been on a signature page of multilateral corporate meeting minutes? At best, you signed "to the best of my knowledge" part on a separate paper. Every recorded meeting is, or should be, preceded by an official announcement to all parties that the recording is about to begin or has begun, and the opposing participants, if any, are given a choice to sign off before the actual meeting starts. Or an authorized person places a recording device on the table for all to see. Client's right to make and keep recordings does not apply to the interpreter. When informed officially of the recording, you, as an interpreter, have a right to claim the recording later and prove your innocence, if required, but this is an entirely different story.
Different countries and even US states have different laws on recording without consent but the differences relate to private conversations only. Company (one-party) business meeting recording is legal as well, but only for the employer and the employees of the same company, not the invited third parties.
Every recording made and kept by an interpreter without client's knowledge is illegal, constitutes breach of confidentiality, information security and every last bit of interpreter ethics. Some clients may equal it to data theft, should you hit them with your secret weapon all of a sudden. How can you prove that no one had ever heard or seen it while in your possession? Is your Corvette safe in your garage? How can you prove zero risk of the same? "I'm a professional, reliable and honest person, my family has no access to any area of the house where I rein, and my mother will testify that I never lost a toy since I was 3?"
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » What if your client asks you not to interpret a certain part of his sentence? | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
