The phrase “lost in translation” elicits a host of responses, be they memories of language confusion while traveling, quotes from the film of the same name, or general considerations regarding translation, its possibilities, failures, limits.  The most obvious associations for many are comical in nature, reflecting harmless vocabulary lapses or cultural naiveté. And then there are the more everyday instances of linguistic imprecision or confusing inconvenience.  Finally, there are examples with graver results, examples wherein being “lost” predicates terrible discovery.

Free image courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net

One such example is that of Willie Ramirez, a Cuban-American high school baseball star who, in 1980, found himself in a hospital, quadriplegic.  The culprit of this terrible realization was a simple and avoidable translation error: after Willie was rushed to the hospital for intense headaches and fleeting consciousness, a communication rupture between Willie’s doctors and family members occurred, resulting in Willie being treated incorrectly for a self-induced drug overdose, allowing an intracerebellar hemorrhage to fester, unnoticed for two days.

The rupture stemmed from a single word—predictably, a false cognate: intoxicado.  In Cuban Spanish, it is used to describe a person who’s ingested bad food or drink; it is not used like the English intoxicated, which refers exclusively to someone who’s consumed alcohol or drugs.  The words were apparently used to both inquire if Willie had ingested drugs and to state that Willie may have been sick after consuming a bad hamburger at the fast-food chain Wendy’s.

The imperfect memory of both the medical workers and Willie’s family regarding exactly what was said and who said it leave only the word intoxicado as the official record.  Once the hemorrhage was discovered, emergency surgery was performed, but the lasting damage was done.  A resulting lawsuit brought a settlement of $71 million.  The annual salary of a medical interpreter is $40 thousand.

Although the case is improbable and singular, it is nonetheless a terrible reminder of translation’s value and necessity.

Read more on this story here.

In general, globalization is highly beneficial to the translation industry, as the ¨geographic¨ (one of many applicable adjectives) expansion of people/culture/industry is closely linked to the acquisition of new languages or, at least, the need to communicate effectively in foreign languages. Thus, a rising demand for translations and translators.

Free image courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net

It may be said that native English-speaking translators have benefited most from the phenomenon, as the economic prominence of many English-speaking nations has catalyzed a new need for English in various realms; but, as globalization persists, the perceived need for such translators wanes. That is, the advent of so many new English speakers has necessarily resulted in a greater number of translators who, either due to economic circumstances (i.e. location) or a perceived (or admitted) imperfect command of English, charge significantly less for their translation services. Of course, among them are the many with complete English mastery. Although in most cases clients would still prefer native English speakers for obvious reasons, the low cost alternative sometimes trumps all.

How, then, should native English translators, as well as native translators of any language experiencing rapid growth, adjust to these changes? One option is to maintain (or even increase) current translation rates and justify them with the indeed crucial fact that non-native speakers rarely translate as effectively as natives, that language primacy is undeniably superior. In other words, promote these services as a worthy investment, e.g. “if you want to communicate as effectively and authentically as possible, you should invest in the most authentic and effective services available”.

Another option, though, is to adjust to these lowered rates and rethink service promotion. Many native translators have chosen this route, and through various innovative market strategies that above all incorporate the Internet, have emerged successful.

This latter group of course threatens the former, if a client is able to pay less for comparable translations by a native speaker, he or she will obviously do so. In time, then, it seems likely that many traditionalists will follow suit. And perhaps they should, for if the rates were to standardize, native translators would ostensibly reemerge as the preferred option. This could ultimately catalyze a new era of increased rates, and thus a new era of success.

Are you a translator? Did you have to lower your rates due to globalization? Tell us your story!