“Yes.”
The lawyer paused.
“Do you believe you can interpret neutrally tomorrow?”
The waitress did not rush.
“That depends on what you mean by neutral.”
The lawyer’s eyes narrowed with interest.
“Explain.”
“I can render his words accurately.”
“I can preserve tone where professionally appropriate.”
“I can identify ambiguities.”
“I can avoid editorializing.”
“I cannot promise I will feel nothing about him.”
“No ethical standard requires you to feel nothing.”
“Good.”
The lawyer nodded.
“Would you prefer reassignment?”
The waitress considered the money.
Then rejected that thought.
She considered pride.
Rejected that too.
She thought about the documents.
The mismatched phrases.
“No.”
“I think continuity matters.”
“I already reviewed the terminology.”
The lawyer agreed.
“One condition.”
“What?”
“Tomorrow’s interpretation will be recorded.”
“That protects everyone.”
“Agreed.”
“Second condition.”
“You said one.”
“I’m counsel.”
“I lie professionally in small numbers.”
The waitress almost smiled.
The lawyer continued.
“If you see discrepancies between source materials, you flag them as translation issues.”
“You do not investigate.”
“Understood.”
“Good.”
The call ended.
The waitress remained seated.
Investigate.
Her mother’s voice returned.
If somebody’s crooked?
Translate their crookedness accurately.
She could do that.
Probably.
The millionaire’s evening was less calm.
He returned to his hotel suite and fired two people.
Neither deserved it.
His communications director because video might exist.
His executive assistant because the check photograph existed.
The assistant stared at him.
“You told her to take the picture.”
“I told no one anything.”
“The chairman’s counsel photographed it.”
“Then why didn’t you stop her?”
The assistant looked exhausted.
“Because I do not control opposing counsel’s phone.”
The millionaire turned toward the windows.
Below, Chicago glittered.
The assistant remained near the door.
“Do you want tomorrow’s materials?”
“I want them changed.”
“Which?”
“Mandarin version.”
The assistant froze.
“What changes?”
“Nothing substantive.”
“That sentence usually means substantive.”
The millionaire turned.
“Operational consolidation language.”
“What about it?”
“Make it softer.”
The assistant stared.
“It already says optimization.”
“Exactly.”
“English says facility rationalization.”
“So?”
“That isn’t the same thing.”
“Close enough.”
“It affects interpretation of planned closures.”
The millionaire’s eyes narrowed.
“You suddenly an attorney?”
“No.”
“Then send the revised files.”
The assistant hesitated.
“You want the English changed too?”
“No.”