| Страниц в теме: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183] > | Should “native language” claims be verified? Автор темы: XXXphxxx (X)
|
|---|
| I understand... | Jun 24, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote: LilianBoland wrote:
I can't stop wondering what the problem is. There are many rare languages not too many native speakers, born and residing at all times in the country where they were born, could translate from, Chinese and other Asian languages among them. Who should translate then? Seriously, these exceptions have been dealt with. Go back to page 2 or 3. I, for one, am getting a bit weary of saying the same thing again and again.
It´s perfectly understandable that you are tired of repeating the same thing again and again. English is not only not my native language, it´s not even a language I work with and I get the point. Is it that hard?
No offence intended, but I wonder why so many people keep misunderstanding this topic so vehemently, especially they working with English or even claiming to be native speakers. If this topic was to be translated, I wonder how the quality of the results done by all this `English to X / X to English´ translators would be.
[Edited at 2012-06-24 10:28 GMT]
| | | | Oliver Walter 
Великобритания
Local time: 08:31
немецкий => английский
+ ...
Michele Fauble wrote:
If it did not serve a useful purpose, no one would lie about it.
LOL! (yes, I did!) and it's a very valid point.
Oliver
| | | | Ty Kendall
Великобритания
Local time: 08:31
иврит => английский
| Page 13, still no official response despite repeated requests | Jun 24, 2012 |
@Nani
Thanks Nani, it's reassuring to have support from a non-native speaker of English. I think you hit the nail on the head: "it's not even a language I work with".... Unfortunately many others do work with it (and in the wrong direction!) and it is these individuals who only benefit/PROFIT from keeping up the pretense and arguing against any measure which would expose their deception and misrepresentation.
____________________________________________________________... See more @Nani
Thanks Nani, it's reassuring to have support from a non-native speaker of English. I think you hit the nail on the head: "it's not even a language I work with".... Unfortunately many others do work with it (and in the wrong direction!) and it is these individuals who only benefit/PROFIT from keeping up the pretense and arguing against any measure which would expose their deception and misrepresentation.
__________________________________________________________________________
I find it somewhat scandalous that we are now on page 13 and that despite several posters having asked specific questions to ProZ directly, we are still yet to be graced by an acknowledgment, much less a proper response. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Did you read page 1? | Jun 24, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
I find it somewhat scandalous that we are now on page 13 and that despite several posters having asked specific questions to ProZ directly, we are still yet to be graced by an acknowledgment, much less a proper response.
Scandalous? Touch of the Lisas there, old chap. HMRC's attitude to Vodafone's tax arrangments is scandalous; my local council's proposal for outsourcing every single public service it can think of without a tendering procedure or any accountability is scandalous - this is merely..... er, ....entirely predictable, perhaps? No worse than mildly disappointing.
Or perhaps proz have successfully managed my expectations (where "managed" is a euphemism for sucked them right out of me so I have none), whereas you still actually expect something from here.
I do wish you luck, although I fear I am seeing the triumph of hope over experience...
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
Великобритания
Local time: 08:31
иврит => английский
| Haven't been here long enough... | Jun 24, 2012 |
To be quite so jaded with ProZ just yet....although I see the day when that will be the case, sadly. Until that time I reserve the right to spout hyperbole
[Edited at 2012-06-25 13:44 GMT]
| | | | wonita (X)
Китай
Local time: 03:31
Oliver Walter wrote: Michele Fauble wrote:
If it did not serve a useful purpose, no one would lie about it.
LOL! (yes, I did!) and it's a very valid point. Oliver
I've never seen a single translator lying about Chinese being his/her native language, if it is not.
| | | | | In one of my language pairs, this would change everything | Jun 24, 2012 |
Robert Forstag wrote:
...because I think that staff would take the view that the mere existence of such a button would create something of a hostile climate on the site. I myself would tend to agree with such an objection.
In my view, all the talk of buttons, votes, documentation, verification of credentials (what next?, a Council of Elders?) etc. unnecessarily complicates matters. Simply allow individuals to privately alert staff to blatant instances of misrepresentation, and trust (for, in the end, trust we must) that staff will take appropriate action.
This seems the elegant solution, and one hard for staff to reject on the grounds that it is too difficult to implement or that it somehow violates the professional integrity and dignity of site users/members.
In the best-case scenario, we are not dealing with an entity that has exactly shown itself to be highly responsive to suggestions for site improvement. By proferring complicated and unworkable solutions (especially those that would have an adverse commercial impact on the site's bottom line) one simply gives proz.com a legitimate excuse to refuse to take action.
[Edited at 2012-06-23 18:34 GMT]
In one of my language pairs (Nl-En), in which easily 75% of source language natives list English as either 'one' of their native languages or even go so far as to list it as their 'only' native language!!!, this would really upset the applecart. Imagine all those people being forced to revert to their actual native language and no longer be allowed to try to fool clients/colleagues with the notion that their written English is 'native' level.
I am NOT complaining about or objecting to the fact they translate into English (some clients actually prefer Dunglish to native English because it's the English they understand best), but I do strongly object that people are routinely being allowed to LIE on their profile page with bogus claims of being native English speakers/writers.
Imo, it would add to their (and the site's) professional integrity-and credibility- if they were truthful and not creative with the truth.
[Edited at 2012-06-24 14:05 GMT]
| | | | Phil Hand
Китай
Local time: 15:31
китайский => английский
| Bin: that's because into-Chinese work is low paid | Jun 24, 2012 |
But there are many many Chinese translators who claim to be English native, when they are very obviously not.
| | |
|
|
|
| No solution will be perfect | Jun 24, 2012 |
Nani Delgado wrote: Phil Hand wrote: Robert Forstag wrote:
Simply allow individuals to privately alert staff to blatant instances of misrepresentation, and trust (for, in the end, trust we must) that staff will take appropriate action. Well, Robert's suggestion is certainly the one likely to cause the least ripples. Let's get an answer. Jared, please could you tell us if Robert's suggestion is workable? But this would only be obvious if that certain person is not a silent forum member. I mean, non natives claiming to be natives that never participate in KudoZ or the forum would never be caught, but they would still be able to apply for jobs because they lie (or overestimate themselves). Assuming that everybody has one native language (I consider persons with no native language to be a minority and by far not the rule), I think Lisa´s suggestion is the best. This would not mean much work for the site staff. We peers would assume some of the efforts to evaluate the nativeness of a person, when this person applies for a second native language. [Edited at 2012-06-24 09:27 GMT]
As I pointed out previously, no solution will be perfect, but the stark evidence of a collection of incoherent forum and Kudoz posts provides a ready basis for the site to make a judgment call when objections are made, without having to think too hard about each case (and without having to demand documentation, submit individuals to tests, etc.).
The overall professional profile of the site would also benefit from the silence of those fraudsters who choose to perpetuate their dishonesty.
On an unrelated point, I do have to say that my impression is that it is English that tends to get most victimized by bogus native language claims. So this is indeed (as Charlie suggested in a previous post) a matter of self-interest for those of us who truly are native English speakers. I hardly see a reason to apologize for this.
And again (in the hopes of obviating further irrelevant posts) I join with those who have previously pointed out that the issue here isn't offering services into English or any other target language in which one is not native. The issue is falsely claiming a target language as native.
This site implicitly recognized the seriousness of this issue by introducing a procedure for verifying a second native language, and by promising the introduction of some additional verification procedure(s). The time has now come for proz.com to make good on its promise.
[Edited at 2012-06-24 15:07 GMT]
| | | | | Why do you worry so much | Jun 24, 2012 |
The thing I don't understand is why people worry so much what other people consider their native language. I don't think there are too many cheaters here. What would the purpose of cheating be -- to get the job you cannot handle and you won't get paid for? This would be really ridiculous. If you are a good translator, you should not worry that other people will steal your jobs. Some people may want to keep certain languages as native for purely emotional reasons, and this is understandable.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Нидерланды
Local time: 09:31
Член ProZ.com c 2006
английский => африкаанс
+ ...
| OT: The ATA leaflet | Jun 24, 2012 |
Actually this guide is used by both ATA and ITI. On the surface it looks like a good introduction to translation but it realy only introduces various aspects of translation, while making sweeping statements about it.
The page about native language translation's title is "Professional translators work into their native language" but in the body text it actually says that it is okay to use non-native translators if the client is satisfied with the translator's quality, based on previous work. But it also makes a sweeping, biased claim in that page, when it says that if a translator believes that it is okay to translate into a non-native language, then it is very likely that that translator will be ignorant of quality issues in general.
I would think that the opposite applies -- if a translator translates into a non-native language, then he would be *more* aware of quality issues, not less.
To empower translators and interpreters around the world...As ATA President Marian S. Greenfield notes, “If we specialize, translate into our native language, and charge accordingly, we can all harness the global marketplace to find the best clients. http://www.atanet.org/chronicle/feature_article_may2007.php
The context in that article is fair competition, i.e. if all translators stick to a narrow field of potential clients (not broadening their offering), then on average translators will have more jobs (not sure if I agree with that sentiment, but that doesn't matter -- what matters here is that it is not the quality aspect of non-native translation that is at stake but the perceived unfairness of it).
[Edited at 2012-06-24 17:03 GMT]
| | | | Ty Kendall
Великобритания
Local time: 08:31
иврит => английский
| I happen to agree with the "sweeping statements" | Jun 24, 2012 |
The fact that they acknowledge excpetions to the (native only) rule doesn't mean they don't endorse the rule.
I just happen to agree with them on both counts (quality and fairness).
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
Великобритания
Local time: 08:31
иврит => английский
| If you can't beat them, join them? | Jun 24, 2012 |
Maybe we should all list our source languages as "native" en masse and start chasing jobs in this direction. Bet that would ruffle a few feathers
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
Великобритания
Local time: 08:31
португальский => английский
+ ...
Автор темы | In the words of the great Loyd Grossman ;-) | Jun 24, 2012 |
Having deliberated, cogitated and digested, with occasional forays into the essence of “nativeness” and discussions about the pros and cons of translating to/from native languages… am I right in thinking that everyone is perfectly confident about their claims to speak their native language and would therefore not object to having that verified (operating along the principle “nothing to hide”). Any objections?
| | | | Kirsten Bodart
Великобритания
Local time: 09:31
голландский => английский
+ ...
| Time to jump in again; work doesn't wait | Jun 24, 2012 |
Verification would be a good idea, if it was based on an extensive amount of documentation (and I do mean extensive, not a mere 10 pages of text) and by a panel of qualified people. That is not a panel of translators and certainly not (possibly) anonylous users on the internet who happen to be members of a website, that is a panel of academic experts who are acclaimed specialist in the field of linguistics and native language acquisition. Needless to say that Proz is not in a position to procure... See more Verification would be a good idea, if it was based on an extensive amount of documentation (and I do mean extensive, not a mere 10 pages of text) and by a panel of qualified people. That is not a panel of translators and certainly not (possibly) anonylous users on the internet who happen to be members of a website, that is a panel of academic experts who are acclaimed specialist in the field of linguistics and native language acquisition. Needless to say that Proz is not in a position to procure such a panel.
The type of documentation that should be used for such an assessment is then also a subject to discuss. As Shy said, but Samuel too (I believe?), you can't use forum posts and other informal things like that. When I write, I maybe take care, but I don't really go as far as reading them five times like I do a translation (even in my real native language; I assure you all, though, that my husband makes the final draft).
Letting a bunch of peers decide opens the door to all kinds of unprofessional assessment like mobbing (ganging up on certain members which has been the case on these forums and why some members have left them), inexperienced translators assessing more experienced ones, or bogus ones assessing genuine ones.
At any rate, who should be assessing whom? Should there be an experience threshold? Or maybe an expertise threshold? In the Anglo-Saxon world there would be the issue of Canadians assessing if Americans are native in 'English' as well as British English people and expats from Britain who have spent half a century in another part of the world assessing people living in the UK now... We won't talk about the French, Walloons and Québécois. Or the Flemish and the Dutch whch is already a serious issue.
That about native language and a second one where we live.
If I had to make German my second language because I happen to live there, I don't think I would get very far. I have an excellent understanding of it, but I wouldn't attempt to make a translation into it, although I can write a gramatically correct letter (I can't say how 'German' it is).
As someone else said, people in our profession move around.
All those exceptions like Luxembourg, Switzerland, Netherlands and Belgium etc. go to show that there are so many exceptions that it is pointless to have this discussion, because there is no solution to the problem.
If clients prefer 'Dunglish' as Writeaway says, then they will keep preferring it without that translator putting English as their native language on his profile. If agencies want to pay low rates for rare pairs (mainly thinking Asia here), they will inevitably encounter and get non-native translators, even if those do not indicate English on their native list and even if their translations are bad to abysmal.
Don't pretend it is the native tag that is the problem, the real problem here are the cheapskates.
Sometimes I would like to see that discussion on source language, but that's not for this thread. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Страниц в теме: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Should “native language” claims be verified? | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
