ATA, BDÜ, Berlin, Courses, CPD, Craft, ITI, Professional translator, Style, Translation, Translation events, Workshops, Writing skills
Just three weeks ago yesterday, I flew out to Berlin to attend the inaugural Translate Better event, organised jointly by the BDÜ and the ATA as a German interpretation of the successful Translate In series of style workshops for the French-English language pair. Having attended Translate In Cambridge (hosted by the ITI) in 2016. I’d thought for some time that it would be great to have an equivalent event for my other language pair, German > English: an opportunity to meet up with other experienced colleagues and work on improving our translation skills in a specific language direction. As Matt Baird, one of the event organisers, said in his introduction, this was to be all about the craft of translation, not the business. And when you get to a certain stage in your career, that’s exactly what you want to hear.
Much as I enjoy attending translation conferences and the associated networking, I have found in recent years that the actual presentations tend to be a bit samey: marketing yourself, raising your rates, coworking, making social media work for you… Not that these aren’t all entirely valid topics, but there’s a limit to how many times you want to hear a variation on a theme. I’m not saying that I couldn’t improve in these business areas, but, right now, after 34 years as a professional translator, I’d rather concentrate on honing my craft, rather than the nuts and bolts of the business itself.
The course was held at the Landgut Stober hotel, a magnificent country estate some 20 km to the west of Berlin. Unlike the Cambridge event, the workshop included all meals and accommodation at the venue, which had impeccable eco credentials and was set in a beautiful lakeside location – perfect for a morning wake-up swim before class. The fact that we were all on site made for excellent networking opportunities and a very laid-back feel to the few days we were there. The food was delicious and plentiful (always a good sign) – and the weather simply amazing! (Too hot in fact for some of the afternoon sessions with the sun beating through the windows of the seminar rooms, but as a sun-starved English rose, I certainly wasn’t complaining….)
On to the course itself: the workshop was designed to have two parallel tracks, one for native German speakers and one for native English speakers. Numbers were strictly limited to 25 per track, plus trainers/presenters, so we were a fairly select crew. In theory, the tracks were intended to remain separate, but it would actually have been quite nice to have the flexibility to attend the “other direction” occasionally if the subject matter of specific talks in your own language direction didn’t appeal. Naturally, best practice is always to translate into your native language, but it’s astonishing what you can learn from discussions about the opposite direction…. Inevitably, I can only comment on the English track here, but I hope some of my German colleagues will share their impressions elsewhere too – I heard great things about the other side of the room.
Matt Baird from the ATA kicked off the English track with an extremely entertaining session entitled “Making sense of im Sinne von and other German phrases translators love to hate”. Other expressions covered included those notable groan-inducing old chestnuts im Spannungsfeld zwischen, in beiden Fällen, auf verschiedene Ebenen, im Umkehrschluss… We all come across them time and time again, and it’s so tempting to fall back on stock answers – especially when working with CAT tools which might prompt a previously used solution via Autosuggest. In a technical text, that might be all well and good, but in a marketing or more creative sphere we need to think outside the box. By showing us a number of examples where these phrases were used and getting us to guess how they’d been translated (first literally, and then more creatively), we were able to enjoy a satisfying and stimulating brainstorming session, proving once and for all that there’s rarely “one” right answer, but a whole basket of excellent and creative options. As we discovered in Cambridge, English tends to make great use of imagery, so we shouldn’t be afraid of going off at a tangent: im Umkehrschluss, for example, could be translated as the fairly pedestrian conversely OR you could branch out and talk about the flip side of the coin, a double-edged sword or another side to the story. Lots of food for thought here, and an excellent start to the day’s proceedings.
After coffee and an extensive range of savoury snacks, we moved on to the next session, the first of two on “The Art of Writing about Art” by Bronwen Saunders. I was rather apprehensive about this initially, as art is one of those bargepole fields for me – I’d never accept an assignment in this area! Nonetheless, it was actually very interesting to hear about the problems facing translators in this field, not least because German texts tend to be pitched at a highly cultured and educated audience, whereas corresponding English texts are often much simpler and less highfaluting. Bronwen was clearly passionate about her subject and showered us with a comprehensive range of texts and handouts to put us through our paces. She had us examining parallel (but not identical) German and English texts about similar subject matter to establish the differences between English and German style in this field, reviewing three potential translations for a number of German passages and deciding which was the most natural – and more importantly, why – and making sense of complex German sentences with multiple relative and adjectival clauses (although as a patent translator, used to translating sentences covering half a page or more, I found those remarkably straightforward!). All in all, still not a field I’d translate in, but some interesting techniques and fundamental pointers to differences in (and solutions for) English and German writing in general.
After a delicious lunch and some free time to walk around the lake and gather our thoughts, followed by a group photo (which I’ve yet to see – perhaps some of the BDÜ members can tell me whether it’s on the website yet?), we reconvened for the afternoon’s session. Karen Leube, a native US English speaker now living in Germany, talked about “From bullseye to the big picture: pulling back for better medical translation style”. Again, medical translation isn’t really my field, but this was an interesting exercise in stepping back and thinking exactly how we’d say something in English before we even started to translate related texts from German – a trick that can and should be applied to any field. She also addressed the (sadly) ever-present issue of poorly written source material and to what extent we, as translators, should improve the original, even to the extent of restructuring texts to make more logical sense. Something I’d hope we all do, but perhaps we could go even further – with our customer’s approval, of course.
The next day started bright and early with a fascinating joint session on transcreation given in German by Nina Sattler-Hovdar, explaining the differences between transcreation, marketing translation and straight translation. The main purpose of a standard translation is to provide information, not necessarily to provoke a specific reaction. It is strongly linked to the original source text. Transcreation, on the other hand, is much more image-based and/or seeks to arouse an action (or reaction) on the part of the reader/viewer. It is not necessarily linked to the original and is more of a communication in its own right. Marketing translation, a sort of halfway house, may involve rewriting if necessary, but is based loosely on the original. She went on to give lots of examples to illustrate her points AND I learned a new word: I had no idea that texten in German meant copywriting!
I would have loved to stay on for Nina’s continuation session intended for the German native speakers, but the English track passed over to Stephen Powley, a UK-based technical translator, talking about “The Nuts and Bolts of Writing as a Technical Translator”. I was rather disappointed that Stephen chose to adapt a presentation that I’d already attended in London for the ITI London Regional Group, admittedly in greater depth. As a technical translator myself, I felt it was more of an overview of the field, or an excellent introduction, but after 30+ years in the business, perhaps my reaction was only to be expected? It would be interesting to hear what non-technical translators felt; indeed, perhaps the medical or art translators had the same reservations about those sessions? It’s always a difficult ask to present to experienced colleagues, yet that was exactly what this course was all about.
The day continued with Part II of the art translation session, looking at descriptive language and the need to engage with your subject visually, emotionally and intellectually before you can write effectively about it – I did say this really wasn’t my field! However, I did enjoy the impromptu pastiches at the start of the session: Bronwen had asked us to describe a piece of conceptual art as our homework the night before, using any objects of our choosing. I have to confess I was far too busy socialising to even remember our assignment, but several noble souls had come up with the goods – and very good they were too. Much hilarity around the room as colleagues described objects as simple as a half-full water bottle and a sound recording of the single word “Ha!” in convincing conceptual art terms. Maybe you had to be there….
The final session was Matt Bulow’s “Style in the Age of Digitalization”. In direct contrast to the first workshop presentation, Matt seemed to be advocating a more international style, perhaps focusing on non-native English speakers and simplifying the language used. He recommended using technological style tools such as ProWritingAid to check style, highlight inconsistencies, reduce sentence length, winkle out the passive voice and overuse of adverbs, to name but a few examples. Personally, I found it overprescriptive and intrusive, but I can see that it would be useful in certain situations. He also gave us some horrendous English source texts to improve in small groups – always an interesting exercise.
So, was it all worthwhile? Yes, without a doubt: brainstorming with like-minded colleagues is always a valuable exercise, especially when the content is guided by committed and talented translation specialists seeking to make us think outside the box – and they succeeded! I wouldn’t say it was up to the standard of the Translate In series – yet! But this was the first of its kind, and the only way is up. I’ve definitely found myself thinking about my use of words differently since getting home, and these kinds of events always leave you with a renewed passion for the profession. I particularly enjoyed meeting colleagues I’d only met online before, as well as renewing old acquaintances. Translate better? You bet – looking forward to translating even better next time round!
Thanks for writing this up, Claire.
I can confirm that there was no effort on the part of the organizers to exchange best practice or coordinate with the “Translate in…” gang (of which I am a member :-)), so it was very interesting to get your “inside view” of the event.
Conclusion has to be that more of this type of training session is needed — including new language pairs.
My own conviction: everything depends on the trainers, their insights, their passion and their dedication to Rule #6. 😉
Matt Baird said:
Hi Chris, I’m finally able to chime in after spending the month of June blissfully unplugged on a bike tour with my family along the Rhone River (highly recommended for anyone who loves two-wheeled, self-propelled travel – and wine :-).
To set the record straight, I had lunch with Grant Hamilton after his pre-conference seminar at ATA57 in San Fran in order to pick his brain about Translate In. At that point Translate Better was just an idea Karen Leube and I had been kicking around for several years – an idea that was spawned by Translate In, the great reviews we’d heard about it over the years, and the lack of this format in our language combination. Grant gave me great advice and lots of insight. One of the points he drove home was how vital it is to find top notch instructors, which is why we actively searched and recruited our speakers.
I also spoke to a number of past TI attendees for further insight, all of which proved very helpful.
We recently evaluated the feedback surveys (which were overwhelmingly positive) and I think it’s safe to say that TB2018 won’t be the last. Many participants encouraged us to hold it on an annual or biannual basis. So I am extremely pleased with the result of our inaugural event. That said, there is definitely room for improvement. We received some very helpful and constructive criticism from both instructors and speakers.
Interestingly enough, I had planned reach out to you and Grant about grabbing lunch at ATA59 to share our experience at TB and talk more about the format. So watch for an email from me. 🙂
Thanks, Chris. I think I was the only person present who had actually attended a Translate In event, so it was extremely interesting to see the German approach and compare it with what I’d observed in Cambridge. Now of course I didn’t attend the first of the Translate In events, so it’s hard to compare an established and well-oiled machine with a newcomer, still finding its feet, but I was very impressed on the whole. And yes, definitely, we need more of this sort of brainstorming, exchange of experiences and meeting of minds. Oh dear, you’re going to have to tell me what Rule #6 is – last time you commented, you had me guessing with wetware (now stored for future reference, and I was glad to hear you use it again last Saturday 🙂 )
From Seth Godin, but source described here: https://itsyourturnblog.com/rule-number-6-3535ec60e81f
The guts of it is that for an exercise like this the instructors are key.
Ah, thank you – I had found one link mentioning the laws of possibility, but your link explains it better. And I agree, trainers (and their passion) are definitely key. I particularly like the fact that when you’re with a group for a couple of days, even the quietest amongst us feel emboldened to have their say 🙂
Heather McCrae said:
A brilliant report, I enjoyed it very much. And yes, more such workshops would be great. I must speak to my local association!
Thanks, Heather. You were there too, of course, so glad to see my view chimes with yours!
Sounds like an interesting event, Claire, and one that actually made you think about your craft too. I’m relieved to hear that I’m not the only one who finds most translation conference presentations to be rather samey and not very stimulating. I’ve considered attending several events this year but in almost every case have been most unimpressed by the programme on offer. In the end I’ve decided to spend my money on non-translation related travel (if I ever escape from the renovation project) and to finally definitely really truly get around to applying for ITI membership!
Oh, and you’ve got a stray space before a comma (“Again , medical translation…”).
Ooh thanks, Jane – will amend at once! Just shows it doesn’t matter how many times you proof-read… I always write my posts one day, then re-read them several times the next day, but mistakes still get though. Much appreciated!
Good idea to spend your budget on travel (and renovation, of course – it will be worth it in the end!).Networking itself can be useful, but sometimes it seems a long way to go to a conference just for that if the presentations don’t appeal.
And yes, do apply for ITI membership – now that is really worthwhile 🙂
Allison Wright said:
Thank you, Claire, for your detailed account of the individual sessions at Translate Better 2018. Such critiques are helpful for those of us who could not make it, especially when planning what events we attend in the year ahead.
Rule No 6 is a Seth Godin piece of advice, and just to infuriate your wetware, I shall make you click here to find out what it is 🙂 https://wrightonthebutton.com/2017/07/16/rule-no-6/
Thanks Allison; always happy to read your blog 🙂 And no, I definitely won’t take myself too seriously. There’s far more to life than that….
Patricia Will said:
Hi Claire, that does sound a very interesting format. I agree with you that when you have been in the profession a long time (about 35 years in my case!) a lot of the content at conferences doesn’t seem relevant so these kinds of workshops or masterclasses are definitely more appealing to experienced translators. Did you know about the content of the programme when you booked? Often when booking a conference the programme doesn’t come out until a month or two beforehand, but I have usually already booked my flights and accommodation to get the best deals as it is an expensive business to travel from Australia to Europe. So it has happened to me a few times that I have registered and paid for a conference only to be a bit disappointed in the programme when it finally comes out.
I knew it was going to be a dedicated style workshop, and had a rough idea of who was presenting, but no details of the presentations. I think the same applies to the Translate In events for French, but it works very well.
I was sorry to miss the BP conference in Vienna but that was a case in point where we’d been asked to vote on the content beforehand but very few of the presentations I had voted for actually made the cut! That’s why this kind of event aimed at experienced translators is so good, precisely because it’s not rehashing fundamental marketing/business issues.
Thanks for that insight, Patricia — makes very good sense, and is definitely an argument for organizers getting their act together well before the event. Early booking of flights and accomm can make a real difference budget-wise.
Yes, Catharine Cellier-Smart, who is based in Réunion, has just said the same thing on Twitter. When you live so far off the beaten track, attending conferences/workshops represents a significant investment with the added travel costs.
I hope that the comments I’m about to make will be taken in the spirit of a genuine dedication to making such efforts more attractive, effective and career-altering in the most positive of ways.
As I’ve written elsewhere in great detail, the bulk market has been slowly imploding over the last three to five years, a process that has been accelerating in the last 18 months or so with the advent of DeepL and other tools used to re-cycle the best of human translation for free, and as the industry has been subjected to a wave of what could be termed “creative destruction,” in the sense that “good enough” translation that is instantly available and free everywhere has completely redrawn the landscape for the translation industry, accounting for a whopping 99% of all translation that is now done by automation every day, everywhere.
(I recently read that the price of a TV from 1950 to today has dropped 99.8% in real dollar terms while resulting in a dramatically better product — so we’re not the only ones subject to creative destruction, although in our case the better product is still the pricier one.)
It’s my firmly held view that the future belongs to the “Translate in” series, as well as other events that seek to duplicate such efforts in other language pairs.
So with that introduction, I hope you’ll permit me a few observations that I genuinely hope will push the needle in the right direction for all working translators.
While I applaud this effort to duplicate the “Translate in…” series in FrEng that has been ongoing for years (in this case for the German English pair), I confess that I originally read your blog post as the most lukewarm of endorsements.
I just re-read it again, and came to that conclusion with an even stronger sense that you were doing your best to identify ways to praise it.
You were effusive, for example, about the venue, the food, and the social aspects of the event. The lack of such effusive praise for the presentations stood sort of in stark contrast.
Your disappointment was palpable when it came to (most of) the speakers. You wrote that you were “disappointed Steve chose to adapt a presentation I’d already attended” and you felt it was simply “an overview of the field.”
You questioned the utility of the session devoted to art translation as a sort of narrow field.
The first session seemed like a simple overview of “tricky and often mistranslated phrases,” and in generalist, common texts, which has been the focus of many ATA workshops dating back 20 years. I know of at least 30 sessions in a half-dozen language pairs that only touched the top level, and without any expectation of specialization, expert knowledge of a subject area, or on advantageous commercial topics.
Contrast this to the typical “Translate in,” event where they have brought in some of the finest, most expert translators working in the respective SPECIALTY fields. They actually go out and recruit them in a very active sense.
You conclude that you “wouldn’t say that it was up to the standards of the ‘Translate in’ series” and that is sort of the inescapable conclusion one would come to in actually reading your review.
I don’t mean to take anything away from this first, preliminary effort, but I think the energy needs to be focused 100% on finding the very best expert translators working in highly-specialized fields in order to elevate the conference far and above what one encounters at the typical ATA conference, which seems to be the level of the presentations given here, at least in the into-English track (a few birds have whispered into my ear that the into-German track was stronger).
This is the same problem the organizers of the “Translate in” series ran into when they attempted to expand into Spanish, an effort I’ve discussed in public before.
They felt that they couldn’t identify specialized experts working at the very top of specialized fields in a way that was consistent with the standards they had set in FrEng. And for that reason, that track has never taken off.
They chose to back down and wait rather than work more at the ATA-level of workshops that one typically sees, is very generalist in focus and appeal, and appears to be what was presented here.
I had my own reservations when I knew ATA was involved in the German program — this is a very volunteer-driven organization where the speakers — irrespective of actual level of subject-specific mastery — volunteer rather than are actively recruited or sought out by outsiders for their expertise. All speakers go out of their way to give these presentations, so their effort is appreciated, but the purpose of these specific events is to make a strong and distinct break from the past.
So in some sense, I think the way forward might be to invert the pyramid and focus 100% on speaker identification, recruitment and encouragement — the real cornerstone of the “Translate In” series.
Abandoning the volunteer model will free up the organizers to do what we all seek to do, and that’s “raise the bar” above where it sits right now.
And the only way to do that is to find people who are so demonstrably more expert at their highly specialized work than the attendees, that the entire event becomes sort of a massive wake-up call, and it drives people to the inescapable conclusion that there are other ways forward that involve a very high level of subject-matter expertise; exquisite writing skills and the ability to work in tandem with demanding direct clients to deliver value, often in environments where you, the translator, is responsible for driving that train.
As an example, here is the presenter list for the Summer School for Financial Translators to be held in Brussels July 4 – 6:
This is the best future for us and all our colleagues. I think we owe it to them to raise the bar now, and encourage them all to begin the trek up the mountain as the upheavals continue in the industry.
Thank you for writing such an honest, insightful and enjoyable piece.
Matt Baird said:
Kevin, I’d also like you thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. Your points are well taken.
It’s interesting to see how you interpreted certain aspects of Claire’s post and made assumptions about others. For example, what came across to you as a simple overview was far from it. We took a hard look at both common and uncommon phrases in German in communications/marketing contexts and talked about ways to translate them more idiomatically rather than the falling back on the lazy translations we all too often see. The discussion was so lively we only got through about 1/4 of my material. I’ve only missed 2 ATA annual conferences since 2000 and have yet to attend a session like this.
As Nina points out below, we actively sought out and recruited speakers for TB2018. I agree 100% that the instructors make or break an event like this. That’s exactly what Grant Hamilton stressed to me when I met with him at ATA57 in San Fran. With the support of BDÜ and our colleagues at ITI, I was very pleased with the group we brought together – highly passionate people who have demonstrated expertise in their fields. Their energy and excitement was palpable in the classroom.
Was Translate Better perfect? No. Can it get better? Absolutely. But without patting myself on the back, I think we did a heck of a job for our first time at bat. I look forward to taking what we’ve learned and delivering even greater value in the future.
I’m a huge advocate of raising the bar – of being bolder. I’ve climbed that mountain, and TB is absolutely intended to help colleagues in our language pair hone their skills and have the courage to make the trek too.
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts.
Thanks for your detailed comments, Kevin. I’m sorry if I came across as lukewarm about the overall content of the workshop, as that certainly wasn’t my intention. I do think, as I said, that it has some way to go before it reaches the exalted level of the Translate In series, but I can only applaud the BDÜ and ATA-GLD for giving it a go (without any of the presenters or organisers having attended a Translate In event) and at least trying to present a workshop dedicated to one language pair, with a view to concentrating on subject matter expertise and style. The presentations were not all to my taste, admittedly, but I hope that the organisers will take on board my feedback and that of other attendees when organising another such event in future. I’m sure your comments will be very useful too.
As I mentioned in response to Chris’s comment above, I have only attended one of the Translate In events, two years ago, so have no idea of the format or numbers involved in the very first event in the Catskills. I’m assuming that it too has evolved over the years as they found out what worked and what didn’t. Having sufficient numbers to have two tracks for each language direction also helps (I think the Cambridge event had over 100 attendees, so twice as big as this). With two tracks, it is more likely that you will find something more suited to your own specific preferences and expertise. And yes, in an ideal world, a dedicated language AND subject workshop like the financial workshop you mention would be perfect, but in the meantime, this was a great first attempt and a thoroughly enjoyable meeting of minds for German and English translators. I do hope some of the German participants will share their views too, as I’d love to know what went on in the other language direction.
Nina Sattler-Hovdar said:
Thank you, Claire, for taking the time to provide valuable comments on the Translate Better event. And I am very happy to hear that you enjoyed my presentation, even though you weren’t able to attend the continuation. For the future, I think more freedom should be given to choose the track you want to attend. Even if my mini-mini-workshop was geared to into-German professionals, it’s often very enlightening and helpful to work the other way round. I think the organizers were wary that more freedom could have lead to some sessions being overcrowded.
Kevin is right about the need for the trainers to be top-notch experts.
For the record: We were actively sought out by the organizers, as experts in our fields, so this wasn’t a volunteer model like at ATA conferences. As to whether or not I’m an expert in my field I’ll let others speak and personally stick to rule 6 – words of wisdom I learned as a child, way back, not from Seth Godin of course, but from my Norwegian grandfather. 😊
Having said that, being an expert alone isn’t enough. Not every expert is also a good trainer, as we all know from our days in school… So in my view, the selection process should focus on presentation skills above all. Including passion, like Chris wrote, definitely so!
Generally speaking, I also think that highly specialized seminars are the way to go. Yet the BDUE has very many of those (as opposed to the ATA). So the Translate Better seminar was an attempt to create something different and in a different setting, where you get to talk a lot more with others than usually. It’s meant as an opportunity for attendees to meet with experts and colleagues beyond the regular seminars themselves.
I thoroughly enjoyed the experience, the conversations, and the debates.😊
Anyway, I think it would be a very good idea to initiate an exchange of ideas between the Translate In and the Translate Better organizers. I am sure that is in the interest of all. What works well, what hasn’t worked so well in the past?
And now: back to work, preparing for the next interactive seminar, to take place in Dublin this Saturday
Thanks for your detailed reply, Nina: interesting to see how it worked from the presenters’ perspective. And I quite agree about not all expert translators being good presenters. The very nature of translation is such that many of us are on the introverted side of the spectrum, which tends to mean that we’d run a mile rather than standing up and presenting! It doesn’t mean that we’re any less good at our job, merely that we don’t feel comfortable with public speaking – and why should we, after all? It’s not part of the job description….
I think a dialogue between the Translate In team and Translate Better is a great idea. We can all learn from others’ experiences. The most important thing in this case is that we’ve set the ball rolling and hopefully we can build on this promising start to create something really beneficial for the profession.
Angelika Welt-Mooney said:
First things first: It was a real pleasure to meet you in person after so many online exchanges (mostly about culinary delights in your oh so wonderful group, the Foodie Translators). I would worry if you hadn’t mentioned the generally high quality of the food at Landgut Stober.
Now let’s go to the “into-German” sessions. They were all really good, packed with theory, examples that really made us think, and a healthy dose of humour. Plus I had the opportunity to finally experience Christiane Nord and Nina Sattler-Hovdar live. Was I curious and tempted to go to some “into-English” sessions in spite of all the excellent presenters in my slots? Definitely!
When reading your post and some of the comments (Chris Durban’s in particular), I do wonder why events like Translate Better and Translate In – or rather, the people behind them – don’t join forces or at least liaise. We as the participants would certainly benefit from shared expertise and avoidance of past mistakes. Given Translate Better took place for the first time, it was never going to be perfect (but it came close). The premiere was definitely worth applauding as an exciting new format in a BDÜ context, my go-to association for CPD matters.
I can see a future Translate Better in Ireland (just to match the serenity of the landscape) or in the UK. That’s just voicing my very personal wishes as a participant, obviously not taking myself seriously at all…..
Thank you for sharing your impressions!
Thank you, Angelika – it was lovely to meet you in real-life too: another of the huge benefits of this kind of event. I’m glad to hear you confirm that the into German sessions were excellent and look forward to being able to switch tracks at future iterations, if the organisers can make that work. It would be wonderful to have a similar event in an English-speaking country, be it the UK, Ireland, or even over the pond, and for it to become a regular pooling of excellence.
Ruth Boggs, Administrator, German Language Division of the ATA said:
Thank you for writing up such a detailed review, Claire! And thank you to my fellow GLD members who lent their expertise to this project. I’ve attended workshops (Nina) and presentations (Karen, Matt) by all of them before and greatly benefited from their expertise.
I really enjoyed it, Ruth, and hoped my colleagues on the other side of the pond would like to hear about it too. It would be great if we could turn it into an annual event, alternating between Germany (or Austria/Switzerland), the UK and the US, along the lines of the Translate In series for French.
Ruth Boggs, Administrator, German Language Division of the ATA said:
As you know, the GLD has a very enthusiastic and energetic European group, coordinated by Karen Leube, who organizes the popular European Workshop every year (the next to be held in Tübingen in February). And there’s always a need and room for more!
Pingback: Around the web – June 2018 | A Smart Translator's Reunion
Matt Baird said:
Thank you so much for writing this up, Claire! A very honest and accurate look into our first go at this format. After reading this, Ellen’s post, and the feedback surveys, I couldn’t have asked for a “better” response.
My pleasure; I really enjoyed it, as I hope you can tell. I somehow missed out on the feedback surveys (too busy chatting, obviously!), but I hope this will do instead. Very much looking forward to the next instalment, wherever that may be.
Pingback: Out with the old – in with the new | ClaireCoxTranslations