In some organisations a list of questions from the translator is read negatively: it looks as if the translator does not know the subject. This reading misses where the question comes from.
The ambiguity is in the source
Texts written inside an organisation do not write down the things that organisation knows. The missing information is not in the text because it is self-evident to the person writing. The person looking from the outside is the first to see this.
A translator who asks no questions produces assumptions
The ambiguity does not go away; it only becomes invisible. The translator chooses one interpretation and that interpretation settles into the text. If it is wrong, nobody knows where it went wrong.
Questions improve the source text too
Some of the questions that come in point to real ambiguities in the source text. When this information is given back to the organisation, not only the translation but the original text is put right as well.
The number of questions falls over time
On the first jobs there are many questions; the context is unknown and the decisions on terms have not yet been made. In a relationship continued with the same team this number drops noticeably. If it does not drop, there is something that needs looking into.
Counter-view: questions take time
The job stops while an answer is awaited, and this is a real cost. Yet the alternative cost is greater: correcting a text that has moved ahead on a wrong assumption is always more expensive than answering the question.
Questions are asked in a batch
When each question is sent separately, both sides are worn out. Collecting the questions and sending them in a single list both makes answering easier and creates the record.
The answers go on record
An answer given verbally is used once. A written answer is worked into the terminology list or the style guide and the same question is not asked again.
If the contact person is undefined, the question gets lost
If it is not clear who is to be asked, the list goes round and comes back unanswered. In that case the translator goes back to assumption again; the system has made asking questions impossible in practice.
The nature of the question is informative too
A question about a term is normal. If a basic question arrives about what the text is saying, this may show that the matching of translator to job needs to be reviewed. This is why the content of the questions is tracked.
The timing of the question matters too
A question asked at the start of the job affects the plan; the same question asked one day before delivery turns into a crisis. Scanning the source text early makes sure the questions come up at the right moment.
A question left unanswered is flagged
Some questions cannot be answered in time and the job still has to move forward. At that point the interpretation chosen is stated openly on delivery; an ambiguity closed in silence settles into the text.
If the same question comes twice
A question being asked again shows that the answer was not recorded or that the record could not be reached. This repetition is not carelessness but a direct sign that the record-keeping arrangement is not working.
Takeaway
A list of questions is not a symptom of inadequacy but proof that the text has been read. The right arrangement is not to prevent questions from coming, but to make sure that they are asked in a batch, that they reach a defined contact person and that the answer is recorded permanently.