Calling all language experts… can you identify what language is written on the bottom of this sign?
The photo accompanied a piece in last weekend’s LA Times, about the death of illegal immigrants in the Arizaona desert.
The languages are, in order, English, Spanish Latin American and…. the third is anyone’s guess.
Do you recognise the last language? Leave a comment and let us know.
We are very excited that from the 2nd of August the rest of the North West Police Forces (Mersey, GMP, Cumbria & Lancs) join Cheshire and North Wales Police in outsourcing all their language service requirements to Applied Language Solutions.
We are equally delighted that many experienced and highly-qualified interpreters have applied to work with us on these contracts, adding their expertise to our existing and substantial register of professional linguists.
The planned "greener" headquarters of Greater Manchester Police Force.
This is an open invitation to all professional, highly-qualified interpreters to apply to join us in delivering this service. We have multiple public sector contracts in the North West and we offer our interpreters a constant stream of interesting and rewarding assignments.
This work varies from the NHS, Local Government and Probation Services, through to the Police and Courts. Due to the growing number of customers in the area, we are able to offer large amount of assignments and we are always keen to talk to the cream of the profession. Our interpreters are able to increase their hours, working on many interesting and busy contracts, which can only benefit their experience – while greatly increase their earning potential.
We fully understand that this new approach from the Police forces in sourcing their language professionals has caused some concerns within the profession, and some interpreters have been reluctant to engage with us. Therefore I extend this open invitation to any interpreter or relevant representative group to visit our offices, meet our team and, if they have any questions, we will answer them and address their concerns in full.
Regarding fees, we have put together a reward structure that we believe will be very attractive to all interpreters and will allay any lingering fears that income will be adversely affected by working with us.
To give you an idea of the sheer volume of work we involved, we have several thousand assignments to meet each month and we will always allocate this work to the cream of the interpreting profession. These assignments aren’t just in the North West but cover the entire UK.
If the promise of a constant supply of interesting, challenging and well-rewarded work sounds interesting to you, please do not hesitate to contact ALS on 01457 821 002 (during 9-5 office hours, select option two) or email bilingualpeople@appliedlanguage.com with your details.
As a foreign national studying and working in Britain, that’s probably the sentence I have used the most since I came here. And even as my English is improving, I must admit that I still have to make use of that particular question more often than I’d like to.
Then again, I haven’t really picked places to live where people speak the most easily understandable English either – if there is such a thing. Scotland, Birmingham, and now Manchester are all places I’ve lived in, and all are famous for their ‘unique’ pronunciation (the words of my colleagues, not mine), as I’ve learnt only too well.
One problem here is that we (and by ‘we’ I mean every non-English native, in the hope that I’m not the only one out here with this problem) are just not prepared for all the different kinds of British accents prior to coming to the UK.
"I'm sorry, can you repeat that again please?" Russell Crowe is, I'm told, another "non credible" source of education on "English, or any other" accents.
The variations are just not the “English” we are used to, nor what we (were told to) expect. There is a common misconception among non-English speakers that everyone in the UK speaks Received Pronunciation (RP) or, as it is often referred to, the Queen’s English.
Wait a minute… If the Queen speaks like that, then surely everyone else in England would somehow feel obliged to speak the same way, right?! Of course not, but I had to find that out for myself. The hard way.
One of the major reasons for foreign nationals visiting the UK is that RP is the only accent that English language learners are usually taught, for what would seem like obvious reasons.
In reality, I’ve found only a very small minority actually speak this standard form of English. So, when a foreigner enters a region where the population speaks one of the hundreds of other accents or dialects that appear across the nation (one more or less comprehensible for the non-accustomed ear than the other), they may well start wondering what that language is that they’re hearing.
No wonder then, that as non-native you can easily find yourself in slightly embarrassing situations due to these problems. I remember creating a (huge) line in front of a bus, not being able to understand what the Scottish bus driver was telling me. I probably would still be standing there if someone hadn’t eventually ‘interpreted’ for me… the poor man really only had tried to tell me that the bus fare had been increased. And when more recently a very communicative person with a distinctive Oldham accent tried talking to me during a bus ride (with particular emphasis on the word ‘tried’ here), I had a slight déjà-vu feeling. Let’s just say that this conversation turned out to be very one-sided…
My point is, sometimes it’s not that easy to understand real English, even after you’ve learned the English language. But that’s the case for every foreigner in every country, so who am I to complain?
That said, even the British seem to have problems understanding some of their own dialects sometimes, and that kind of makes me feel a bit better!
I saw this funny video of what English is supposed to sound like to non-English speakers:
We are often asked by potential customers, and users of our services, how we assess the cost and impact of an interpreter not attending an assignment (for whatever reason).
Unfortunately, such occurrences (we call them “Did Not Attend” or DNA for short), however rare, go hand in hand with any work associated with travelling to and from various places of work. With face to face interpreting, even an unavoidable “no-show” will carry a direct cost, however there are also numerous, and less obvious indirect costs – for all parties concerned.
Waiting Game: The costs of interpreter no-shows go beyond initial, more obvious inconveniences
The cost to the non-English speaker
The primary purpose of face to face interpreting is to enable communication for non-English speakers in order for them to easily access front-line services, such as a doctor’s appointment. A patient may have been waiting to see a specialist for a long period of time and if the Interpreter does not attend for any reason, the patient may miss out on their appointment completely, which they will have to then reschedule.
On a more serious note, a DNA occurrence might mean that a patient’s illness may go undiagnosed.
To put this in perspective for a Police assignment, a victim of a crime may not be able to provide a witness statement, which could result in a criminal not being convicted. If you consider the cost of language services to the taxpayer, this would be one cost that simply couldn’t be quantified.
The cost to the customer
There will be a clinical cost to the NHS, for example, if a nuclear medicine appointment cannot go ahead there are huge costs involved.
The NHS also has national targets to hit, and missed appointments will contribute negatively to their results, showing the respective trust or hospital as under-performing. It is worth pointing out that other patients could be seen at this point, which adds to these ‘inefficiencies’.
A DNA for an assignment at a Police station would mean that a potentially dangerous suspect may have to be released. The Police only have 24 hours to interview suspects before being legally obliged to release detainees without charge in most instances, so this cost has a societal impact which again is not quantifiable.
The cost to the Interpreter
An Interpreter’s reputation is built on reliability, both in terms of their language proficiency as well as their record of fulfilling assignments. A DNA can damage an Interpreter’s reputation and should they require references in future, this could be restricted depending on the circumstances of their DNA.
Even before requiring a reference, the customer may request that the interpreter who did not attend their assignment is not used again for the same contract. Additionally, the service provider may choose stop working with the Interpreter. These instances can severely affect an Interpreter’s income.
The Interpreting Service Provider
The old adage is that a language service provider’s name is only as good as the quality of its linguists which, means more often than not, a DNA will damage a service provider’s reputation.
The service provider may also face financial penalties if these are pre-agreed with the customer and, depending on the severity of the DNA from the customer’s perspective, they may also lose a contract due to service level agreements and key performance indicators not being met.
Brits have been labelled as the most work-shy workers in Europe, with one in five Brits feigning illness at least once each year for time off work, according to a recent survey by AON consulting.
Last year, there were over 35 million sick days taken by workers in the UK, an average of 6.4 days per worker every year – the highest rate of any country in Europe. In contrast, the Danes are the most honest workers (or best liars, maybe) in Europe, with just 4% of the Danish workforce admitting to “pulling a sickie”.
But what makes us Brits such a, let’s face it, lazy (and honest) bunch?
Admittedly, not everyone will subscribe to the attitude that sick leave is merely an extension to annual leave, which is maybe my chance to say, smugly of course, that I haven’t had a “sickie” in over five years, but if you’ve ever worked in the UK you’ll probably have known of someone with a suspiciously low immune system.
However, companies can do certain things that, in a way, precondition their workers’ collective mindset on sickies – through a mixture of company policy, working arrangements and employee benefits.
Primarily, we don’t pay sick leave beyond the statutory UK requirements. A tough approach, you might say, but when coupled with a culture based around flexible working, we feel that our environment fosters a more open and honest approach to work – which keeps sick leave (and absences of the spurious kind) to a bare minimum.
Also, ALS employees have one “duvet day” per year, which is there to use on the day when you just don’t want to show up for work (not a regular occurrence here, I promise you). Some might view that having a duvet day is a bit of a cop out, and fair point, but when coupled with my next point, the benefits become clearer.
Our employees are also issued with a laptop, which they take home with them every night. This means, of course, that if you are too ill to come into work, there’s a chance you could still work from home – so why take sick leave when you can still work, right? Right.
It must be pointed out that this option is scarcely used at ALS and, when combined everything else, it contributes to our sick record being just under one sick day per UK employee, per year.
When put in contrast to the national average, or even the best performing British Council’s average of 6.25 days per employee per year (the worst performing council recorded an eye-watering 12.61 days), it can put HR management policies in perspective. Hence why we don’t mind publishing our “sickie” figures, or our approach to sick leave, for that matter.
ALS Head of Operations, Sarah Wilson (and the keeper of all our sickie records), had this to say: “Having a low “sickie” rate is something a company can of course be proud of. However, when people do ‘soldier on’ admirably and come in to work despite being clearly ill, that can have an adverse affect on everyone else, so a sensible approach is needed. You have to send people home if they’re ill, which also means, rightly, giving people the benefit of the doubt when they do call in sick.”
Among the best, and worst, excuses we have found on the web that workers give for taking time off through “illness” are:
Taking the mickey: Stephen Ireland
“My Grandmother (relative) died.” Ironically, nothing to do with illness, but this remains one of the most popular (false) excuses, shockingly – and one that Manchester City’s Stephen Ireland (who ironically isn’t ‘British’) gave when he didn’t show up for National duty for Ireland in 2007.
After he was (very easily) caught out, from being in the public eye, a club statement later read “Stephen has also apologised. To both his Grandmothers.”
“Migraine” If you want to be believed, it is advised (not by us), that you don’t use this excuse. It’s unimaginative and you could be seen to be able to work through it.
“Suddenly ill (the day after a World Cup game)” Not advised. UK employers were warned, briefly, during England’s (briefer) tenure in this year’s World Cup, to expect a flurry of employees suddenly catching a hangov… sorry, the dreaded lurgy after England games. ALS allowed employees to watch the match of their country and make up the time later – with zero absences through illness reported afterwards. Many staff members in our UK office were of course sick, to our stomachs, after England’s glorious exit from the competition, but not through genuine illness.
“I forgot to come back to work after lunch” This one was, allegedly, actually given. Yes, in real life.
“I’m having a vision problem” Vague. But probably a brazen excuse given by someone who literally can’t see themselves coming into work today.
“I’m feeling a bit …euuurrrgh” Said in a very pathetic, wishy-washy way.
“The road outside my house is too busy to cross” All day, apparently.
“I’m hungover/still too drunk to work” Honest, if anything. “I’m not coming in. It’s 8am and I only stopped drinking 20 minutes ago, shorry” is one I’ve heard a few times from old University friends. Use this one at your own risk.
What are the most imaginative “sickie” excuses you’ve heard?
Leave a comment and let us know.
SEO Localization is more than translating keywords
SEO Localization is about optimizing the multilingual side of search. So when your Spanish, French, or German prospect, for example, is searching for what you have worked so hard to produce and communicate on your website – they can find you at the top of the heap of other related options.
Employing the right keywords in each language is essential and will make a huge difference to your natural rankings and PPC results in local markets. Using straight translations of your English keywords will not readily produce the correct set of keywords for your local market.
Taken to an extreme, when mistranslated, your “keywords” can help reduce Google’s relevancy score for your entire site. Much international business growth today happens because of the power of search, so you need to be sure your website is optimized for the markets you are selling to.
Why shouldn’t you just translate your keywords?
Here’s why: Words have multiple meaning, as can product names and service descriptions. If you ponder the word for word translation in any given language I’m sure you can imagine .
If you were to consider using “Windshield repair” as a keyword from your English language website, the correct straight translation into French would be “réparation pare-brise”. However, it may not be the best keyword to use on your French site. By using the Google Keyword Suggestion tool, you will see that this translation has a lower local search volume than some of the alternative suggestions such as, “auto pare brise” or “moto pare brise”. If you were trying to attract more traffic to your French web site, we would advise you to use one of these alternative French keywords since they produce a higher local search volume as well as having a similar meaning.
You would also want to make sure the name of the web page, URL, meta data and any other related text contains the right keywords for optimum Google indexing and ranking.
For your UK English version, you would also have to adapt your keyword to “Windscreen Repair” instead of “Windshield Repair”, since this term, and many other terms for car parts, have different English names in the UK and US markets. Since Google gives your site an overall relevancy score for each keyword, if you are using keywords on your French sites and UK site which aren’t optimized it will bring down your overall score.
To see how Applied Language can help you optimize your multilingual websites, we offer a Multilingual SEO Audit for $1,000 per market, where we take 25 of your most lucrative keywords and give you back actionable recommendations which will help you eliminate wasteful ad spending and improve SEO on your local language web sites. Contact me directly for details.
There are approximately 1.67 billion internet users worldwide (Miniwatts Marketing Group). Given the apparent dominance of English on the web, I was surprised therefore to learn that of these 1.67 billion users, only 30% actually have English as their first language.
Research shows that buyers are 10 times more likely to buy from a site which is in their own language and companies are becoming increasingly aware of the necessity of having a multilingual website in order to compete in the global marketplace. However, many find that once they’ve invested in getting their website translated, their product doesn’t prove to be as popular overseas as they had hoped.
Sound familiar? You may have experienced this yourself and it might be down to the fact that there’s no real market for your product or services outside of the UK but it’s more likely to be because potential customers aren’t finding your website easily, and this is usually because you haven’t thought about your multilingual SEO strategy.
In Google, more than 60% of web searchers will click on one of the top three listings.
It is therefore crucial for a website to rank as highly as possible on the first page of search engine results and by choosing the right keywords, you’ll see a great improvement in your rankings which will in turn result in more traffic to your website. When it comes to multilingual web pages however, things get a bit trickier.
Through experience, I’ve come to realise that a successful global multilingual SEO campaign is not about simply translating your English keywords into the relevant languages and hoping for the best. When it comes to internet search, each language and culture has very different search patterns. Online shoppers in the UK and France may be searching for the same product or service but what may prove to be a popular and lucrative keyword in English may not have desired effect when translated directly into French.
In order for your global campaign to be a hit, you need to take the time to research local competition and user behaviour in each of the markets you are trying to crack, creating localised keyword lists based on your findings. You also need to be aware that whilst Google remains king of the search engines, many country-specific search engines are growing in popularity since they offer better country-based search options and results. In some countries, such as China (Baidu) and Russia (Yandex), these local search engines have actually surpassed Google in terms of popularity.
I mention this because in order to obtain those vital top rankings in local search engines, your site must conform to their algorithms and these algorithms vary from search engine to search engine. The easiest way to produce search engine friendly content is to start right from the start and build your site from the ground up, bearing in mind your global SEO campaign and ensuring that your site’s web architecture and coding strategy conform to the algorithms of the local search engine in question but for many companies with existing multilingual websites, it’s too late for that.
Whether you’re starting from scratch or dealing with an existing site, the most effective way to develop your SEO strategy and understand just how a particular local search engine ticks is by employing native speakers in your target countries who have a good knowledge of online marketing and SEO best practises in their cultures. Finding qualified in-country specialists can often prove to be a challenge, particularly when you are dealing with numerous languages but it really will pay off in the long term. Enlisting the help of a specialist multilingual SEO company can often prove beneficial as they will have the necessary resources and experience to help, saving you a lot of time and effort.
When it comes to multilingual SEO, this is just the tip of the iceberg. There are plenty of other factors to consider for a successful international SEO strategy, including the possibility of buying a local domain (as some search engines express regional favouritism) and multilingual link building campaigns but we’ll save all that for another time…
I read with interest a recent Telegraph article regarding the decision of the Hungarian government to grant passports to up to 500,000 ethnic Hungarians living in Croatia, Serbia and the Ukraine.
This will, by Proxy, grant these “new” EU citizens the freedom to move around Europe and to work in the UK, Republic of Ireland or Sweden (the other EU states have restrictions on workers from the 2004 influx states). Many of these new citizens are, apparently, planning to work in Britain.
This is the sort of geopolitical change that means a lot to us here at Applied Language Solutions.
If we suddenly notice an increase in Hungarian (or indeed Serbo-Croat or Ukrainian), we’ll be able to activate our resourcing plan to cope with these languages. We prefer to tell our clients that a “new” language is coming their way and we have resources in place, rather than just react to a new situation. Proactivity, in old money.
It did get me thinking though… what if every nation did what Hungary has just done? As a Belfast boy, the thought of everyone of Irish descent suddenly arriving back on our little island might cause it to sink.
Similarly, if everyone of British heritage returned to Blighty it could suddenly be a little over-crowded. Of course, the 1948 British Nationality Act, which passed through Parliament with hardly a word of debate, gave full British Citizenship to all 800 million people in the British Commonwealth.
Although the Act was heavily amended between 1962 and 1971 it was as late as 1983 when it was finally repealed.
The thinking behind the original act was that no one living in the old Empire would ever want to come to the UK, with its shattered post-war economy and drab weather, compared to the sunny Caribbean, oil-rich Nigeria, vibrant newly-independent India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and East Pakistan (later Bangladesh) and indeed the “British California” of Australia.
Clement Attlee’s government from 1948 might have been a little surprised at the subsequent waves of immigration since then, but maybe that most radical and reforming administration would feel gratified that a newly-Hungarian Ukrainian thinks immediately of making his way to work in Britain.
Perhaps in this time of recession and emergency austerity budgets, we should be a little more proud that the UK is seen as a country where hard work can bring success – and the enshrined British sense of fair play still holds true.
James Bond and Saintly legend, Sir Roger Moore, has recently had a pop at TV for the apparent demise among the acting profession of the RP Accent (received pronunciation) or “Queen’s English”, as it’s often called.
For Queen('s English) and country: Jolly old not-so-jolly Roger Moore
Sir Bond is ever so miffed at this and claims that more actors are being denied work because their spiffing accents are, well, too posh for those cantankerous casting directors.
He goes on to say that his daughter, Deborah, has been turned down for acting work in as she “is not regional in her speech”, and goes on to cite TV as the main culprit. Shows like Holby City and Casualty that peddle the proletariat “Estuary English” are apparently the offenders in chief.
Hang on. Estuary? That phrase sounds like it implies “dirty English” to me, but it was actually coined by Liverpool born Phonetician, John C. Wells.
Anyway, I find this moan frightfully spurious indeed. Actors are required (supposed) to switch their accents whenever the role requires, after all.
Now, I don’t want to witness the demise of the traditional English accent, nor do I want to unduly have a dig at Sir Roger, but I’d never have sat through Snatch if everybody in it sounded like Leslie Phillips. You see, regional accents should be celebrated, regardless of how common or confusing they may seem to some people.
Conversely, I would have actually made it through Pirates of the Caribbean if Johnny Depp could do a real “Landan” accent …me old mayte.
I wonder what Sir Ian McKellen (or Magneto and Gandalf in Hollywood parlance) would make of Sir Roger’s recent rant. After all, he speaks awfully good Queen’s, yet when he appeared on Corrie (Coronation Street, the longest running soap opera in the world), he did so with a thick northen (Yorkshire) accent, liiike.
You could argue that television (and the entire acting profession) has simply caught up with real life and as such, has all but ditched Sir Roger’s beloved “west end” accents in favour those who can do more suitable, cooler and (say it quietly) more credible accents.
Do you think the Queen’s English is “real English”, as Sir Roger Does, or do you think such snobbery is poppycock (nonsense)? Leave a comment.
A new EU directive adopted by the European Parliament aims to ensure fairer trials for their non-native speaking “accused” in EU member states – by providing language services such as translation and interpreting.
Eventually it will mean that all EU member states will be required to provide access to an interpreter and translated materials for any non-national who is accused of a crime – if they can’t understand the local language.
It must be said that this news isn’t really “news” to us in the UK. The obligation to ensure all non-English speakers can fully understand the crime they are accused of committing is enshrined in four separate statutes, and has been in place for years.
However this law does come at an obvious cost and, as we know only too well, language services that are courtesy of the public purse can be subject to considerable scruitiny.
That said, I wonder if the UK Government’s recent move to deny entry to the UK to anyone who marries a British citizen, but can’t speak English, is cost-related. The argument that such a move is quite hypocritical of us as a nation is a very interesting one (to me). But that’s not the point here.
Anyway, as our European neighbours gear up for large-scale commitments to language services, how can they best manage that transition, minimising the challenges of cost and potential disgruntlement?
Firstly, I would anticipate that the scale of the cost, and how well the services work, will directly correlate to the intensity of any criticism that may follow. The main issues then are to minimise cost, while maximising value. Sounds easy, right?
Well, no. However, there are a few things that can be done in the three years before all member states must put this directive into working practice. They are:
1) Make use of Translation Memory. Now.
Translation Memory (TM) is basically a database of everything you have ever had translated, which, when used properly can be hugely beneficial in saving time and money.
It works by aligning your new source text with previous translations that have been carried out.(demonstrated below). The linguist performing your translation – using your TM – approves the various matches, so you don’t have pay for another full translation, just the matches at a reduced rate. This makes the whole process quicker and cheaper each time you have any translations carried out.
In addition, because you’re using the same set of phrases and terms, TM improves consistency and therefore the final quality of your translations. Furthermore, TM remains your intellectual property, so if you ever switch supplier you can still get the benefits.
By starting to build up, TM’s, glossaries, key phrases and terminology – now – the respective member states (and subsequent departments) could minimise their translation spend as soon as the translation directive is enforced. This, would be in addition to being ahead of the curve, as the industry incporporates more and more technology into the service delivery chain.
2) Don’t be held to ransom on cost.
What could seem, let’s face it, from me as a blatant “ooh, me, me, me” – I should point out that ALS prides quality over cost, yet works to charge the absolute minimum possible rates for all our services (something to which many of our customers agree). …I had to say that before I continue.
The thing to remember is that, despite the many myths that surround our industry (and many of those are actively perpetrated by some operators), language services don’t need to be expensive – as if your choices are either “cheap” or “expensive”. If your supplier is using translation technology correctly, then their prices shouldn’t be towards either extreme.
Also, many customers don’t realise they actually have the right to expect their provider to work with them to find solutions that are cost effective. For both parties.
They do!
3) Minimise the paper chain.
Historically, our industry – as we’ve said before – has been very slow to adapt to new, smarter ways to work – particularly within the public sector. This has been the by-product of having larger, more “comfortable” language service suppliers being able to count on the majority of the work from big accounts – without needing to be innovative with things like online portals, or incorporating technology into new, cost-effective services and processes.
But times have changed (we believe, thanks to companies like us).
This has resulted in many companies with large-scale translation needs, unknowingly overspending on translation services for years – only to realise, a little too late, what they could have saved, had their translation processes been a little more open to scrutiny. Before making the switch to a more competitive supplier, of course.
Having access to things like online service request portals, post-edited machine translation and instant telephone interpreting can all speed up the delivery process and help to reduce costs.
Also, other “novel” things like consolidated invoicing and transparent online management reporting can show, clearly, where savings can be made.
4) Compare suppliers. Often.
Some suppliers are set up to compete on cost, but money isn’t everything after all, and so if you end up having a court case thrown out due to a bad (cheap) legal translation, that cost – however cheap – is wasted.
Likewise, others might be “focused on quality” and will charge eye-watering rates, but either way, there is no sense in choosing a supplier based on traditional criteria and leaving yourself stuck with the repercussions later on.
By comparing suppliers on the value of their services – not just the cost – and by analysing who has been innovative in reducing waste in the delivery chain and improving ease of access to their services, EU member states can really reap the benefits of language services.
So, that’s my penny’s worth. How will the new EU translation directive affect your country?
Do you think that, since Europeans are generally “more betterer” at foreign languages than we Brits are (ahem), there will be a great need to outsource services to the same scale the UK does?