feedback

[magdalena]

I have given my translation samples to two native speakers. Unfortunately, I got two different responses. One of them made the following changes: According to Article xxx of the Civil Code stipulating that .... has been changed to 'which stipulates that', There are no grounds to ascertain that ...changed to 'for ascertaining that' and in order to (do sth) it has to be proven ... has been changed to 'it must be proven'. The second native speaker left these unchanged. As I am trying to improve my writing but feel pretty lost. Any pointers?

 

[Gillnetter]

I have given my translation samples to two native speakers. Unfortunately, I got two different responses. One of them made the following changes: According to Article xxx of the Civil Code stipulating that .... has been changed to 'which stipulates that', There are no grounds to ascertain that ...changed to 'for ascertaining that' and in order to (do sth) it has to be proven ... has been changed to 'it must be proven'. The second native speaker left these unchanged. As I am trying to improve my writing but feel pretty lost. Any pointers?

You are translating legal documents of a sort. In the US, such documents have to be written in a clear and unambiguous way. I believe that your respondents are putting in their personal likes and dislikes. In your sample statements either way would make sense to me.

 

[magdalena]

Thank you! Polish translation agencies swear by native proofreaders and once my text was rejected on the basis that a native proofreader found too many mistakes in it. You can imagine my shock when I got back the same sample checked by two different natives (both well regarded by translation agencies) and the first one found 34 mistakes, while the other one 7 . I thought he must have been just too lenient but as I gather from your response it is not necessary the case. I will send some more examples to find a way out of this maze.