Episode\u00a013: Financial Translation Tips and Tricks with Amanda Williams<\/strong><\/h2>\nAngela Benoit: <\/strong>Hello, and welcome to the continuing education series, a podcast produced by the French Language Division of the American Translators Association as a benefit for our members and those interested in joining us. Our series strives to offer educational content about the craft of French-to-English and English-to-French translation and about our division. I\u2019m your host, Angela Benoit, and it is my pleasure today to welcome Amanda Williams of Mirror Image Translations. Amanda is an ATA-certified French-to-English translator. She specializes in corporate communications, accounting, finance, and international trade. And, as a bonus, Amanda and I are recording this podcast together over a cup of tea in beautiful Annecy. Amanda, welcome!<\/p>\nAmanda Williams: <\/strong>Thank you so much for having me!<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Thank you so much for being here! So, we are going to discuss this series of financial terms that all have one thing in common. Their translation is not what a lay person would have expected it to be, and I believe we are going to see just incollable <\/em>Amanda is at financial terminology. Now, before we get started, would you like to tell us a little bit about the universe of a financial translator?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah, so, when Angela first reached out to me to ask me to do this podcast, I started thinking about what I wanted to talk about, and it turns out what I originally had put together was not what you talk about on this podcast.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Uh oh! [laughter].<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>But Angela was super nice and said, \u201cHey! Why don\u2019t we just throw that into the introduction? So, we\u2019re going to start by going over something a little different, and it\u2019s really what I like to call \u201cHow to Do Financial Translation Right.\u201d Instead of pitfalls and tricks, I want to going to talk about how to do it right.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>And that is super important. You do want to do it right. [laughter]<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>How to be better, okay?<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Yes, yes.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>So, just so I don\u2019t waste all that original work I put together.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Oh, no, no, no! It was great! We just had to bring the nerdiness back, but we\u2019ll get there.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Alright, so, I want to talk about some tips. Consistency, as a financial translator, is essential. Sometimes we get so focused on the section we\u2019re doing, and sometimes, you know, if you\u2019re translating a document de r\u00e9f\u00e9rence<\/em> or a document de base<\/em>, or shareholder meeting notices, CSR reports, you know these huge reports that can be five or six hundred pages long, and you\u2019re working on a 50,000-word section, it might seem like you\u2019re doing the whole thing, but you\u2019re not. You\u2019re only doing a small section, and you might be consistent in that one section you\u2019re doing, but you\u2019ve got to think about the whole big picture. So, consistency, both in what you\u2019re working on and the big picture, is just key. And then, also, client terminology is more important than you think. We all have our favorite words, words that we like more than others, but what we like isn\u2019t important. What the client likes is what is important.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Mmhmm.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>So, we have to make sure that, as translators, we understand what our client\u2019s corporate voice and corporate culture is, and that we are accurately transmitting that into what we\u2019re writing. And then, this seems basic, but I cannot tell you how many times I\u2019ve seen the opposite in, you know, reviewing, revising, and just looking at other reports over time. Little things like dialects, not being consistent through a report, not only with spelling but tiny little things like the UK says \u201cas at\u201d with the date, and we say \u201cas of\u201d instead of \u201cas at,\u201d things like that.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Which I tripped over in the preparation of this podcast. I thought it was a typo.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah, you know, I didn\u2019t like it when I first saw it, but I had to get over it. \u201cAs at 31 December,\u201d they just say that, okay.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>There you go.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>But you\u2019ve got to keep those things consistent and keep them in mind, not just for your section, but the entire report, right?<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Mmhmm.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>And, not getting caught up in translating everything exactly how it is in the French. Yes, we\u2019re crunching through a lot of volume, but you still have to translate things like they\u2019re supposed to be translated. You know, we put verbs with the rest of the clause. We don\u2019t break things up as much as they do in French. You know, you rearrange sentences, as needed.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Mmhmm.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>So, it\u2019s important to remember to do those type things even if you\u2019re crunching out 3,000-plus words a day, and, if you don\u2019t have any experience in business, accounting, or finance, then don\u2019t translate about business, accounting, or finance. And we\u2019ll go over that in a little bit more detail later on. [laughter]<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>We\u2019re going to find out exactly how it\u2019s possible to trip up and make mistakes, just for lack of knowledge and lack of experience, and, you know, it\u2019s\u2026 we need great financial translators, but we need those financial translators to go out and gain that experience, I think.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yes, yes.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>In the real world, before they attempt to do the very difficult exercise that we\u2019re going to be doing now. And I get the easy job. I\u2019m so lucky. I\u2019m going to throw out some financial terms, which I did not find. Amanda found them for me. I\u2019m going to throw them into the air, and Amanda\u2019s going to tell us what they mean, and how we translate them, and also how we do not translate them. So, I think our first one is relatively easy. Are we ready to get started?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah, let\u2019s do it.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay, here we go. Let\u2019s talk about \u201cles proc\u00e9dures de contr\u00f4le interne.\u201d<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>It\u2019s funny, because you\u2019d think that the knee-jerk translation would be to translate it as it looks, but it\u2019s not. What I see all the time is that people translate this as \u201cinternal audit procedures,\u201d but you really actually should translate this as \u201cinternal control procedures.\u201d Sarbanes\u2013Oxley is the reason why. And what that means is the SEC started requiring small companies to document their internal control procedures over financial reporting back in 2007. And, so, companies are required now to put together internal control procedures showing that they have control over their financial reporting, and the term \u201cinternal control procedures,\u201d in fact, has kind of leaped over into other domains as well. Back in my prior career as a trade compliance manager, I had to create and implement internal control procedures for customs compliance as well.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Wow.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>So, it is a term that you use in industry, and it\u2019s not, nine times out of ten, it\u2019s not going to be audit, it\u2019s going to be internal control.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>But we think of \u201ccontr\u00f4le\u201d being \u201caudit,\u201d and, generally speaking, it\u2019s not.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>No. Is this because the \u201ccontr\u00f4le,\u201d the control procedures happen inside the company and the audit would be from an external party coming in and auditing?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah, and sometimes companies do internal audits as well, but in this context, they\u2019re talking about control. Like, do you know what\u2019s going on in your company. Do you have procedures in place that show and document how you handle and manage risk, how you handle and manage your reporting, you know, and your finances, things like that.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>And, as translators, we\u2019re told so many times that \u201ccontrol\u201d is not \u201ccontr\u00f4le\u201d and \u201ccontr\u00f4le\u201d is not \u201ccontrol.\u201d<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Right.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>You\u2019re almost tempted to go and find something else just to not use it, and this is the one time.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Right.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>This is the one time.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Tricky!<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Yup, very tricky. Alright, next up. We actually have a small family of terms that go together. Now in preparing for this episode, Amanda mentioned to me the IFRS. And I had to sheepishly go look it up, because I had no idea what she meant. I didn\u2019t want to admit that to her. It stands for \u201cInternational Financial Reporting Standards,\u201d and we\u2019ll put that up on the website for those of you who are interested and going to look it up so you don\u2019t have to scramble for a pen just right now. So, let\u2019s take a look at a few IFRS terms. We\u2019re going to start with \u201csecteur op\u00e9rationnel<\/em>.\u201d What is this, and what do we do with it?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>So, this is just one of those terms, you know, you\u2019re not going to use the word \u201csector,\u201d you\u2019re going to call this an \u201coperating segment.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay then. I would have had no idea.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>It\u2019s what it is.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>I would not have known to look at the IFRS for lack of knowing of their existence. Okay, next up we have \u201cparticipation ne donnant pas de contr\u00f4le.\u201d<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>That\u2019s called a \u201cnoncontrolling interest.\u201d It used to be called a \u201cminority interest,\u201d but a few years ago the IFRS said, \u201cNope, we\u2019ve changed our mind. We don\u2019t want to call it minority interest anymore, we\u2019re going to start calling it \u201cnoncontrolling interest,\u201d so, over the past few years, we\u2019ve had to start pushing clients who have been reluctant to change from \u201cminority interest\u201d to \u201cnoncontrolling interest,\u201d and say, \u201cAlright, guys, IFRS doesn\u2019t want us to use this word anymore. We\u2019re going to have to start using \u201cnoncontrolling interest.\u201d So, little by little, we have to get customers on board with the correct terminology.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>And this is the translator pushing the client to use their own industry-specific terminology.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>That\u2019s amazing.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>If you want to be a good translator, you go, you go\u2026<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>\u2026the extra mileage. You have to know that before your client even knows it.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Right.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>That\u2019s outstanding. The next one, it sounds simple, but wait until you hear the proper way to translate it: \u201cimmobilisation corporelle.\u201d What happens here?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>So, I see this a fair amount of time. The term in translation for \u201cimmobilisation in<\/u>corporelle\u201d is \u201cintangible asset.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>So, one would think that \u201cimmobilisation corporelle\u201d is \u201ctangible asset.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Mmhmm.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>But, the good old IFRS says that this should really be \u201cproperty, plant, and equipment.\u201d That\u2019s the proper accounting term for this word in French.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>And if you are not intimately familiar with the IFRS, you would completely\u2026 that one would fly over my head. I would have not gotten that right in a million years.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>And then, you take an English\u2013French translator, and\u2026 \u201cpropri\u00e9t\u00e9, plante et \u00e9quipement\u2026\u201d? Euh, pardon<\/em>, \u201cpropri\u00e9t\u00e9, usine et \u00e9quipement.\u201d [laughter] You have to be able to figure that one out in either direction. That one\u2019s amazing. I can\u2019t believe I just said \u201cpropri\u00e9t\u00e9 et plante.\u201d And we can\u2019t go back and erase that. It\u2019s immortalized. It\u2019s not immobilized, but it\u2019s immortalized.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Okay.<\/p>\nAB:<\/strong> Our next term is right up there with the \u201ccontr\u00f4l\u00e9\/control\u201d question. We hear it everywhere, to say everything, but in the financial universe, \u201cactivit\u00e9\u201d means something very specific.<\/p>\nAW:<\/strong> Yeah, this one\u2019s fun. And it doesn\u2019t help that French clients really love this word, and I think they prefer just a straight, literal translation into English, but it drives me crazy because we do not use this word in English much. We just don\u2019t. If you go and you look at the annual reports of Facebook, of Pfizer, of Amazon, of Google, of Proctor & Gamble, you\u2019re not going to see the word \u201cactivity\u201d hardly at all because it\u2019s just not something we say. Yet, if you go to the annual reports of a French company that\u2019s been translated into English, you\u2019re going to see it 5,000 times.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Mmhmm.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>This word is usually going to be \u201cbusiness.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Yes.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Sometimes, it can be \u201coperations,\u201d especially in an industrial context, if you\u2019re talking about a company that has manufacturing processes or industrial services, like logistics or something like that, then you very well in some contexts say \u201coperations,\u201d but \u201cbusiness\u201d a lot of times can replace \u201cactivity.\u201d I urge all of you, every time you see \u201cactivit\u00e9\u201d to think, \u201cCould \u2018business\u2019 or \u2018operations\u2019 go here?\u201d And if your client argues about it, try to fight it.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Yeah, yeah. Provide some examples.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>With texts written directly in English, there\u2019s no \u201cactivities\u201d in them at all.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah, I\u2019ve had this fight before, and I have won. It can be done, you guys, I promise.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Amazing. We\u2019ve got another one that sounds simple. What should be aware of when we run into \u201cconformit\u00e9\u201d?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>I see \u201cconformity\u201d all the time, and I don\u2019t get it, you guys, I just don\u2019t. It\u2019s going to be \u201ccompliance.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>\u201cCompliance,\u201d \u201cnoncompliance,\u201d and then, sometimes \u201cen conformit\u00e9 avec\u201d or whatever, that\u2019s going to be \u201cin accordance with,\u201d too, not \u201cin conformity with.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Interesting.<\/p>\nAW\u201d <\/strong>Or \u201cpursuant to.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Mmhmm.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>You know, but yeah. Let\u2019s stay away from the \u201cconformity.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay, no \u201cconformity.\u201d Interestingly, in the other direction, because I translate in the other direction, \u201ccompliance\u201d naturally becomes \u201cconformit\u00e9,\u201d we\u2019d never think twice about it.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>But that\u2019s because we don\u2019t have the option of another strange word hanging out there, like the \u201cconformity\u201d you just mentioned, but yeah, a pitfall in one direction. Great one.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay, so that was part 1 of our episode. Now we\u2019re going to do, we\u2019re going to segue to part 2, and we\u2019re going to turn our attention to some full sentences, as opposed to just terms or expressions. We\u2019re going to look at a French text or French sentence. We\u2019re going to look at how to make a complete mess of the translation, and then we\u2019re going to do things the right way, with Amanda\u2019s help. So, I\u2019m going to start with the first French sentence. Here it is: \u201cLe 31 d\u00e9cembre 2014, elles sont essentiellement compos\u00e9es de cr\u00e9ances de TVA, 3,4\u00a0million d\u2019euros, de charges constat\u00e9es d\u2019avance, 2,7 million d\u2019 euros, et d\u2019avances et acomptes fournisseurs, 6,3\u00a0million euros.\u201d Now, would you like to read the problematic English, or should I go for it?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>I\u2019ll do it.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Let me preface by saying that this was UK English, so we\u2019ve got that lovely little starter \u201cAs at\u2026\u201d \u201cAs at 31 December 2014, they essentially consist of VAT receivables, 3.4 million, charges recorded in advance 2.7 million, and supplier prepayments 6.3 million.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Now, before I got into that, I just want to say that that sounds perfectly fine ot me. [laughter] I don\u2019t see the problem. But I\u2019m a lay person, so I\u2019m going to let Amanda take this one home and tell me exactly how I\u2019m wrong.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Okay, \u201cthe charges recorded in advance\u201d is a literal translation that should not be there, basically. So, the correct way to say this would be, \u201cAs at 31 December 2014, they essentially consist of VAT receivables, 3.4 million, prepaid expenses for 2.7 million, and supplier prepayments for 6.3 million.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>I think this a perfect example of how the expert eye can pick up the problem, and everybody else\u2026<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah.<\/p>\nAB:<\/strong> \u2026is just, I would have never seen that. That\u2019s a great example. Thank you, Amanda.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>You\u2019re welcome.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>On to the next one! The French version is, \u201ctoute re…\u201d oh, excuse me, \u201ctoutes les autres d\u00e9penses sont comptabilis\u00e9es directement en charges d\u00e8s qu\u2019encourues,\u201d and the terrible English\u2014I\u2019ll go for it this time\u2014\u201cAll other expenditure is recorded directly as a charge as soon as incurred.\u201d Okay, what\u2019s wrong here?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>\u201cCharge,\u201d basically.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay.<\/p>\nAW:<\/strong> We have two ways of fixing this. We could either say \u201cAll other expenditure is reported directly as an expense as soon as incurred,\u201d or, you could make it even easier and say \u201cAll other expenditure is expensed as soon as it\u2019s incurred.\u201d<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay. And do you mind me asking what the problem with \u201ccharge\u201d is?<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>So\u2026<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>I\u2019m just curious<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Yeah, this is an income statement thing. So, when you\u2019re in accounting, and you\u2019re running a company\u2019s accounting, every action that the company does is going to be either recorded as income or as an expense.<\/p>\nAB:<\/strong> Okay.<\/p>\nAW:<\/strong> So, basically, they\u2019re not using the correct terminology. So, if you take a company, and you sell it, …<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Mmhmm.<\/p>\nAW:<\/strong> You\u2019ve just made income. So, you would record the sale of that business as income on your income statement. But then let\u2019s say you were sued by a company for a million dollars because you did something terrible.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Oh, no.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Alright. That would be an expense.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>Okay. And you know what, the minute I asked you that question I\u2026 something came to mind. You charge your customers.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Right.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>That\u2019s where that word goes.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Right.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>I was charged this morning when I went shopping.<\/p>\nAW: <\/strong>Right.<\/p>\nAB: <\/strong>But I\u2019m an individual not a company with an income statement.<\/p>\n
![\"Microphone](\"https:\/\/www.ata-divisions.org\/FLD\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/michal-czyz-ALM7RNZuDH8-unsplash.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"The](\"https:\/\/www.ata-divisions.org\/FLD\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/A-Propos-Logo.png\"){kind=logo}
<\/p>\n