| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Translating *from* mother tongue Thread poster: Gregory Lassale
|
|---|
jyuan_us 
United States
Local time: 10:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| Thank you for your comment, with which I totally agree | Oct 22, 2018 |
Kay-Viktor Stegemann wrote:
The problem is that many Asian agencies (I have seen this in Chinese, Korean, and Japanese clients) believe they can do the English version themselves (or let it be made by a non-native speaker). And this English version is then used as a base for translation into other languages (like German).
However, while what you have described is a hard fact, there could be another side of the story. The problem may have been rooted in the fact that these agencies didn't use the right translators. Some translators produce equally bad translations even when they work into their native languages. Sometimes I have to make 30 to 50 changes per 1000 words to make it acceptable when "proofreading" the work of some translators who translate into their native tongue.[Edited at 2018-10-22 17:15 GMT]
[Edited at 2018-10-22 17:28 GMT]
| | | | Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 07:51
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
| Source language comprehension | Oct 22, 2018 |
Native/native-equivalent/near-native comprehension of the source language is needed to translate questionnaire responses.
When I translate questionnaire responses, I often find myself shaking my head and wondering how a translator who doesn't know the source language as well as I do could possibly understand this.
[Edited at 2018-10-23 16:06 GMT]
| | | | Dan Lucas
United Kingdom
Local time: 15:51
Member (2014)
Japanese to English
| Apples to oranges | Oct 22, 2018 |
jyuan_us wrote:
Some translators produce equally bad translations even when they work into their native languages. Sometimes I have to make 30 to 50 changes per 1000 words to make it acceptable when "proofreading" the work of some translators who translate into their native tongue.
You're not comparing like with like. A bad translator is a bad translator. The argument being made implicitly by most other people in this thread is that in a comparison between a good "native" and a good "non-native" translator, 95 times out of 100 (or more), the former will produce a better translation.
I do agree with you that in some cases other factors could and should take priority over a smooth and idiomatic translation.
Regards,
Dan
| | | | jyuan_us
United States
Local time: 10:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| You are right, but what I described is just a possibility that cannot be simply ruled out | Oct 22, 2018 |
Dan Lucas wrote: jyuan_us wrote:
Some translators produce equally bad translations even when they work into their native languages. Sometimes I have to make 30 to 50 changes per 1000 words to make it acceptable when "proofreading" the work of some translators who translate into their native tongue. You're not comparing like with like. A bad translator is a bad translator. The argument being made implicitly by most other people in this thread is that in a comparison between a good "native" and a good "non-native" translator, 95 times out of 100 (or more), the former will produce a better translation. I do agree with you that in some cases other factors could and should take priority over a smooth and idiomatic translation. Regards, Dan
I don't think it matters that much if I've compared an apple with a banana or whatever in this case. I was just pointing out a possibility. It is highly likely that the texts Kay-Viktor Stegemann mentioned had been translated by those non-native translators who were less than qualified.
In a ideal world, there will be a lot of "good native" and "good "non-native" translators but in reality, a lot of "bad" natives and non-natives are being used.
[Edited at 2018-10-23 01:33 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
jyuan_us
United States
Local time: 10:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| I saw logic fallacies in your post, too | Oct 22, 2018 |
Dan Lucas wrote: jyuan_us wrote:
Some translators produce equally bad translations even when they work into their native languages. Sometimes I have to make 30 to 50 changes per 1000 words to make it acceptable when "proofreading" the work of some translators who translate into their native tongue. You're not comparing like with like. A bad translator is a bad translator. The argument being made implicitly by most other people in this thread is that in a comparison between a good "native" and a good "non-native" translator, 95 times out of 100 (or more), the former will produce a better translation. I do agree with you that in some cases other factors could and should take priority over a smooth and idiomatic translation. Regards, Dan
Firstly, I didn't "compare" a native to a non-native. I in fact didn't compare anything. Someone just imposed his views on me.
Secondly, your comparison of a "good" non-native speaker to a "good" native speaker in the aspects of translation quality favorable to the latter is unfair to the former. Although you didn't state these aspects explicitly, they are implied. These aspects may include the mastery of nuances in the target language by the translator and/or their ability to be idiomatic in the target language.
[Edited at 2018-10-23 01:06 GMT]
| | | | jyuan_us
United States
Local time: 10:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| That's very true | Oct 22, 2018 |
Michele Fauble wrote:
Native/native-equivalent/near-native comprehension of the source language is needed to translate questionnaire responses. If you don't understand it, you can't translate it, and when I translate questionnaires, I often find myself shaking my head and wondering how a translator who doesn't know the language as well as I do could possibly understand this.
I see the issue this way: when it comes to survey response translation, it will do a lot more harms to the client if a sentence is translated beautifully but incorrectly than it is translated less idiomatically but correctly.
| | | | Dan Lucas
United Kingdom
Local time: 15:51
Member (2014)
Japanese to English
jyuan_us wrote:
Secondly, you were making a comparison but your comparison of the quality of the translations done by a "good" non-native speaker to that by a "good" native speaker is unfair to the former.
How? Why? That's the choice available to the client. They don't have to pick a rubbish "native" and a superlative "non-native" - that would be a false dichotomy.
Dan
| | | | jyuan_us
United States
Local time: 10:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| In some language pairs, there are not enough target native linguists | Oct 22, 2018 |
For some subject matters in these language pairs, it is hardly possible to find a suitable target language native linguist. The agency is then forced to use a source language naive linguist. The use of a source language naive linguist who is within the top 10% of the crowd would be much different to the use of someone out of that range. If the agency has chosen to use those within the top 10%, Kay-Viktor Stegemann might not have seen the phenomenon he had described.
My point here i... See more For some subject matters in these language pairs, it is hardly possible to find a suitable target language native linguist. The agency is then forced to use a source language naive linguist. The use of a source language naive linguist who is within the top 10% of the crowd would be much different to the use of someone out of that range. If the agency has chosen to use those within the top 10%, Kay-Viktor Stegemann might not have seen the phenomenon he had described.
My point here is that the erratic translations Kay-Viktor Stegemann has seen might have been created by the wrong non-target-native translators. How would you know for sure that these agencies will not use the wrong target language native translators, even if they follow a principle of using only target language native translators?
[Note: I arbitrarily picked “10%” to illustrate my point.]
[Edited at 2018-10-23 07:07 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
jyuan_us
United States
Local time: 10:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| The specifics of the project circumstance need to be borne in mind | Oct 22, 2018 |
Let's suppose you are a claims administrator of a health plan and you are processing a claim submitted by a member of yours who used health care services while he was visiting China. You need to understand his medical records, which are in Chinese.
Would you use a healthcare professional native in Chinese who has a good mastery of the English language, or a healthcare professional native in English who has a good mastery of the Chinese language?
I know your answer will ... See more Let's suppose you are a claims administrator of a health plan and you are processing a claim submitted by a member of yours who used health care services while he was visiting China. You need to understand his medical records, which are in Chinese.
Would you use a healthcare professional native in Chinese who has a good mastery of the English language, or a healthcare professional native in English who has a good mastery of the Chinese language?
I know your answer will be the latter. However, the latter would be much harder to find, or would be much more expensive than the former.
Fact is most claims administrators would go for the former.
[Edited at 2018-10-23 01:01 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Lian Pang
Netherlands
Local time: 16:51
Member (2018)
English to Chinese
+ ...
Just putting it here for reference
"Subject to Principle 2 Clauses 5 and 8 below, members shall translate only into a
language that is either (i) their mother tongue or language of habitual use, or (ii) one in
which they have satisfied the Institute that they have equal competence. They shall
translate only from those languages in which they can demonstrate they have the
requisite skills. "
Just inform your client that it's not your first langua... See more Just putting it here for reference
"Subject to Principle 2 Clauses 5 and 8 below, members shall translate only into a
language that is either (i) their mother tongue or language of habitual use, or (ii) one in
which they have satisfied the Institute that they have equal competence. They shall
translate only from those languages in which they can demonstrate they have the
requisite skills. "
Just inform your client that it's not your first language, be honest, and if they agree - why not? ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Japanese extravagance in translation | Oct 24, 2018 |
Dan Lucas wrote:
Japan has a long and inglorious tradition of using Japanese speakers to translate into other languages, which is probably why it has such a poor reputation for English despite being a highly developed country and an economic superpower. I suspect that this is at least in part due to a deep-rooted belief in some quarters that foreigners just cannot understand the Japanese language.
This is certainly true, not only for English. There are also many Japanese translators whom happily translate into Italian or revise mother-tongue translations with an incredible amount of carelessness (I'm not speaking of errors, but writing style, most of the time transforming good translations into dreadful literal translations, a thing the typical Japanese translator is very fond of). While this is an act of presumption—Italian is a very difficult language even for the best Japanese-Italian translator, and sometime for Italians too—on the other hand it says a lot about the lack of professionalism of many Japanese translation companies who allow and/or consciously propagate this sad state of things for their economical benefit only. Many of such translations verge on ridicule, and most surprisingly they often appear in important documents.
But, strange as it may appear, seen from the Japanese side this can be explained "rationally": in general, compared to non-Japanese translators, by mastering a wider range of kanji characters with no or little difficulty (reading of particularly difficult or unusual characters or combinations of characters in various contexts) the Japanese native speaker is likely to produce a more reliable translation (technically speaking), is much quicker when doing researches on a given topic and, last but not least, or perhaps most important of all, costs less—sometimes much less—than non-Japanese translators whom needing much longer to attain the same cannot but cost more.
Of course, involving a native Italian speaker to edit such poorly written translations would end up costing considerably more than employing the latter from the start, hence such pearls of linguistic beauty find their way to the end user without him realizing how badly his money was spent.
[Edited at 2018-10-24 06:59 GMT]
| | | | jyuan_us
United States
Local time: 10:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| I think you can translate into English very well | Oct 24, 2018 |
Mario Cerutti wrote: Dan Lucas wrote:
Japan has a long and inglorious tradition of using Japanese speakers to translate into other languages, which is probably why it has such a poor reputation for English despite being a highly developed country and an economic superpower. I suspect that this is at least in part due to a deep-rooted belief in some quarters that foreigners just cannot understand the Japanese language.
This is certainly true, not only for English. There are also many Japanese translators whom happily translate into Italian or revise mother-tongue translations with an incredible amount of carelessness (I'm not speaking of errors, but writing style, most of the time transforming good translations into dreadful literal translations, a thing the typical Japanese translator is very fond of). While this is an act of presumption—Italian is a very difficult language even for the best Japanese-Italian translator, and sometime for Italians too—on the other hand it says a lot about the lack of professionalism of many Japanese translation companies who allow and/or consciously propagate this sad state of things for their economical benefit only. Many of such translations verge on ridicule, and most surprisingly they often appear in important documents. But, strange as it may appear, seen from the Japanese side this can be explained "rationally": in general, compared to non-Japanese translators, by mastering a wider range of kanji characters with no or little difficulty (reading of particularly difficult or unusual characters or combinations of characters in various contexts) the Japanese native speaker is likely to produce a more reliable translation (technically speaking), is much quicker when doing researches on a given topic and, last but not least, or perhaps most important of all, costs less—sometimes much less—than non-Japanese translators whom needing much longer to attain the same cannot but cost more. Of course, involving a native Italian speaker to edit such poorly written translations would end up costing considerably more than employing the latter from the start, hence such pearls of linguistic beauty find their way to the end user without him realizing how badly his money was spent. [Edited at 2018-10-24 06:59 GMT]
even though it doesn't seem to be your native tongue. Your writing in English could be better than many native English college grads in America.
| | |
|
|
|
jyuan_us wrote:
even though it doesn't seem to be your native tongue. Your writing in English could be better than many native English college grads in America.
I'm Italian. Writing in English is something I like, but I only do it as an exercise to try to learn the language better (and thus be able to translate better from English). But, it takes me really too long.
Sometimes I'm asked by Japanese customers to translate into English from Italian or Japanese. Besides accepting only relatively easy subjects, I always warn them that my English is not at native tongue level and, moreover, it would cost them more because of the longer time it would take to me. Sometimes they accept and do the native tongue check themselves (most of the time employing a Japanese reviewer), but often they don't, and even seem resentful because they believe that since I normally translate from English for them I should also be able to translate in the opposite direction with only some extra effort (!).
I take your words as a compliment, thanks. But if what you say about English college grads is true it's depressing, although they wouldn't be alone because from what I see also the level of Italian college grads (and beyond) has become rather embarrassing.
[Edited at 2018-10-25 04:38 GMT]
| | | | Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 07:51
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
| Better English | Oct 25, 2018 |
jyuan_us wrote: Mario Cerutti wrote: Dan Lucas wrote:
Japan has a long and inglorious tradition of using Japanese speakers to translate into other languages, which is probably why it has such a poor reputation for English despite being a highly developed country and an economic superpower. I suspect that this is at least in part due to a deep-rooted belief in some quarters that foreigners just cannot understand the Japanese language.
This is certainly true, not only for English. There are also many Japanese translators whom happily translate into Italian or revise mother-tongue translations with an incredible amount of carelessness (I'm not speaking of errors, but writing style, most of the time transforming good translations into dreadful literal translations, a thing the typical Japanese translator is very fond of). While this is an act of presumption—Italian is a very difficult language even for the best Japanese-Italian translator, and sometime for Italians too—on the other hand it says a lot about the lack of professionalism of many Japanese translation companies who allow and/or consciously propagate this sad state of things for their economical benefit only. Many of such translations verge on ridicule, and most surprisingly they often appear in important documents. But, strange as it may appear, seen from the Japanese side this can be explained "rationally": in general, compared to non-Japanese translators, by mastering a wider range of kanji characters with no or little difficulty (reading of particularly difficult or unusual characters or combinations of characters in various contexts) the Japanese native speaker is likely to produce a more reliable translation (technically speaking), is much quicker when doing researches on a given topic and, last but not least, or perhaps most important of all, costs less—sometimes much less—than non-Japanese translators whom needing much longer to attain the same cannot but cost more. Of course, involving a native Italian speaker to edit such poorly written translations would end up costing considerably more than employing the latter from the start, hence such pearls of linguistic beauty find their way to the end user without him realizing how badly his money was spent. [Edited at 2018-10-24 06:59 GMT] I think you can translate into English very well even though it doesn't seem to be your native tongue. Your writing in English could be better than many native English college grads in America.
Really? You didn't spot any of the errors? Not even the two incorrect uses of 'whom'?
[Edited at 2018-10-25 20:17 GMT]
| | | | jyuan_us
United States
Local time: 10:51
Member (2005)
English to Chinese
+ ...
| I never said his post is error-free | Oct 25, 2018 |
Michele Fauble wrote: jyuan_us wrote:
even though it doesn't seem to be your native tongue. Your writing in English could be better than many native English college grads in America. Really? You didn't spot any of the errors? Not even the two incorrect uses of 'whom'?
I never said his writing is flawless. I even wrote "even though it doesn't seem to be your native tongue". There could be more errors in addition to the 2 incorrect uses of 'whom' you have pointed out, but his writing is still very good.
[Edited at 2018-10-25 17:30 GMT]
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Translating *from* mother tongue | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
