| Pages in topic: < [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? Thread poster: XXXphxxx (X)
|
|---|
Phil Hand 
China
Local time: 02:07
Chinese to English
| That's not an argument | Jun 23, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
[ your definition of "native" has to do with competence
No shit Sherlock.
Seriously, Samuel. What are you trying to say? You're welcome to make your own suggestion - as indeed you have. If you're trying to persuade me, then you have to make an actual argument, not just this hand-wavy "the concepts are connected".
I'll give you a few reasons why the native speaker concept is a valid and useful one for translators.
1) A translator is a professional writer. We have to produce publishable prose on a daily basis. The vast majority of non-native speakers of a language can't do that.
2) A translator must convey concepts with great precision. Non-natives generally do not have sufficient control of connotations, tone, cultural allusions, etc. to manage this.
3) A corollary to (2): A translator must exclude unwanted concepts/connotations from texts with great precision.
4) A translator must convey the content of the source text in a conventional target-genre language. A native speaker has a far superior ability to assimilate genre conventions in their native language.
5) A translator must avoid translationese. Translators who have strongly grooved language instincts are much more able to do so - and that's native speakers.
None of these are absolute, but taken together they constitute a good reason to prefer native speaker translators as a convention.
If you'd like to disagree or argue against these, I'd be happy to carry on the conversation. But perhaps we could do it in another thread, because that's not the point of this thread.
The point of this thread is: as you yourself pointed out, Proz accepts the native speaker concept as useful. There is abuse of this feature of the site. We'd like to think of ways to stop abuse of this feature. I at least do not wish to change/abolish this feature. That would be a different thread.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:07
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Charlie Bavington wrote: Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
I'd don't even see a need to post materials to the site (apart from anything else this could be copied from somewhere else); the forums and KudoZ are amply sufficient to judge whether or not someone is a native speaker. Many (the majority of?) members do neither, though - there are vast numbers of silent people out there. So if you've lied about your native tongue, all you need to do is stay quiet in public (just keep applying in private for jobs other people don't think you should get) and you'll be laughing, then, is that it?
Bavington! Time to sit up and pay attention
The proposed scheme is for approval of the second "native language". The onus is on the individual to take active measures to prove it.
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 02:07
Chinese to English
Lisa wrote:
This IS the "Proz.com suggestions" forum yet, as noted above, staff have been glaringly absent.
OK, now I feel dumb.
Lisa wrote:
I'd don't even see a need to post materials to the site (apart from anything else this could be copied from somewhere else); the forums and KudoZ are amply sufficient to judge whether or not someone is a native speaker.
I don't see how that would work, though. What about new users? This sounds more like Tom's idea of "challenges" to native status, which I really don't like. Too adversarial, I wouldn't want to pit members against each other.
I think there would have to be a formal, clear mechanism by which second native languages could be accepted. Like you say, it's a bit hard to control, so I'd suggest something similar to a translation test. Proz sends a list of three questions generated from a massive list that we supply to an applicant. Applicant has to write 100 words in response to each and reply within 20 minutes. If they do so, their answers are posted on a dedicated board, and native speakers of the relevant language can click yes or no. After a week (?) anyone with 80% yes gets their second native language.
What do you think?
| | | | | Sorry, miss :-( | Jun 23, 2012 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote: Charlie Bavington wrote: Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
I'd don't even see a need to post materials to the site (apart from anything else this could be copied from somewhere else); the forums and KudoZ are amply sufficient to judge whether or not someone is a native speaker. Many (the majority of?) members do neither, though - there are vast numbers of silent people out there. So if you've lied about your native tongue, all you need to do is stay quiet in public (just keep applying in private for jobs other people don't think you should get) and you'll be laughing, then, is that it? Bavington! Time to sit up and pay attention The proposed scheme is for approval of the second "native language". The onus is on the individual to take active measures to prove it.
I thought we were still talking about validation of native language claims in general. Like them people who swap from being Dutch to being British in the twinkle of an eye, and all that.
I'll go and stand in the corner for a while.
| | |
|
|
|
Phil Hand wrote:
What do you think?
It sounds like a lot of work.
I'm with Tom (not a phrase you'll hear me say a lot ) and think that challenges are the way forward. Assume people are being honest and truthful until we have grounds to think otherwise.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:07
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Frankly open to any suggestion at the moment | Jun 23, 2012 |
Phil Hand wrote:
I think there would have to be a formal, clear mechanism by which second native languages could be accepted. Like you say, it's a bit hard to control, so I'd suggest something similar to a translation test. Proz sends a list of three questions generated from a massive list that we supply to an applicant. Applicant has to write 100 words in response to each and reply within 20 minutes. If they do so, their answers are posted on a dedicated board, and native speakers of the relevant language can click yes or no. After a week (?) anyone with 80% yes gets their second native language.
What do you think?
Sure, that could work and I have nothing intrinsically against it save for the fact that it requires more manpower than a button, which you press anonymously to vote on whether or not that person is a native speaker. Let's face it, one would hope that a fair number would have got knocked out at stage 1 (the "I promise I'm a native speaker and if I'm caught lying there'll be serious consequences" bit). I think we can all spot a non-native a mile off, even if it has to come to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKuHYO9TM5A
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 02:07
Chinese to English
| So you mean... | Jun 23, 2012 |
everyone with two declared native languages would have a "challenge" button for each of them whenever they popped up on Kudoz, and if enough people pressed the challenge button they'd lose native status in that language?
That would mean if people are quiet, they wouldn't necessarily get caught, it's only when they're making a nuisance of themselves that they get stopped...
OK, I guess. I'd rather see something a bit more far-reaching, but you're right, it would be more ... See more everyone with two declared native languages would have a "challenge" button for each of them whenever they popped up on Kudoz, and if enough people pressed the challenge button they'd lose native status in that language?
That would mean if people are quiet, they wouldn't necessarily get caught, it's only when they're making a nuisance of themselves that they get stopped...
OK, I guess. I'd rather see something a bit more far-reaching, but you're right, it would be more work. If a simple button could make a dent in the problem, it's worth a go. ▲ Collapse
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:07
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
I mean one native language for everyone; those who wish to apply for a second would have that greyed out with a "Pending verification" next to it. That remains in place until sufficient votes have been achieved (obviously only one vote allowed per logged-in user); you would also be allowed to vote against. It would be up to the "applicant" to raise their profile, if needed, by posting on forums or answering KudoZ questions to back up their claim.
| | |
|
|
|
| Not sure if you mean me, but... | Jun 23, 2012 |
In my version:
Phil Hand wrote:
everyone with two declared native languages would have a "challenge" button for each of them whenever they popped up on Kudoz, and if enough people pressed the challenge button they'd lose native status in that language?
Almost.
Except it would apply to any declared native language, no matter how many a person has.
And it would also apply to forum posts, and evidence gathered from outside, if applicable (I have, for instance, knowingly reviewed the work of many people on proz, including a contributor to this thread, and if that happened again and it was clear to me the person was not native English, it would be cool to be able to report it).
And they wouldn't automatically lose native status, they'd be challenged to demonstrate that they are in fact natives and their accusers are mistaken.
That would mean if people are quiet, they wouldn't necessarily get caught, it's only when they're making a nuisance of themselves that they get stopped...
Hence my comment to Lisa earlier. And hence my suggestion evidence could be gathered from anywhere.
| | | | Shiya Luo
Local time: 11:07
English to Chinese
+ ...
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
I mean one native language for everyone; those who wish to apply for a second would have that greyed out with a "Pending verification" next to it. That remains in place until sufficient votes have been achieved (obviously only one vote allowed per logged-in user); you would also be allowed to vote against. It would be up to the "applicant" to raise their profile, if needed, by posting on forums or answering KudoZ questions to back up their claim.
Very easy loophole.
Just declare your first language as your second native.
| | | | Shiya Luo
Local time: 11:07
English to Chinese
+ ...
| Thank you for the corrections | Jun 23, 2012 |
B D Finch wrote:
While I find Shiya Luo's contributions interesting and agree with much of what she writes, I cannot agree that her command of English is native level. To support this, I would take the following extract:
"In a nationality point of view, I would not come close to qualify as a native, since I have not obtained permanent resident status in any English speaking country, despite I have not lived in China for more than half of my life.
I received English based bilingual education ever since I was 10 upon moving to Singapore, before that my home education came from my parents where I was learning languages 95% of the time, both English and Chinese."
Corrected version:
From the point of view of nationality, I would not even come close to qualifying as a native, since I have not obtained permanent resident status in any English speaking country, in spite of the fact that I have not lived in China for more than half my life. [NB. Nationality and being a native speaker are not necessarily connected.]
From the age of ten, I had a bilingual, English-based education, after having moved to Singapore. Before that my parents educated me at home and 95% of the time was spent learning languages, both English and Chinese.
I have seen many, many natives with worse writing than me. Does that mean that they have no native language at all?
With some people without any native language, it defeats the entire purpose of declaring a native language in the first place.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:07
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Charlie's red pen | Jun 23, 2012 |
Charlie Bavington wrote:
I have, for instance, knowingly reviewed the work of many people on proz, including a contributor to this thread
What do you mean? I don't know the names of anyone whose work I review.
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:07
Hebrew to English
| Non-argument | Jun 23, 2012 |
Shiya Luo wrote:
I have seen many, many natives with worse writing than me. Does that mean that they have no native language at all?
With some people without any native language, it defeats the entire purpose of declaring a native language in the first place.
This is a non-argument. Semi-literate natives don't tend to become translators or interpreters. Everyone has a native language, whether they are willing to admit it or not. The problem here is that many people have a vested interest in concealing their true native language or flat-out lying. In this case, crime does pay, literally.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 20:07
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| @Phil (also see my suggestion at the bottom) | Jun 23, 2012 |
Phil Hand wrote: Samuel Murray wrote:
your definition of "native" has to do with competence No shit, Sherlock.
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but what you seem to imply is exactly the problem: for some people (like yourself) it is patently obvious that competence is a key aspect of nativeness, and you do not seem to realise that that is not obvious to everyone, because not everyone uses that definition of "native language". Another common definition is that one's native language is one's childhood language, even if one is no longer highly competent in it.
Therefore, if you ask a translator for his "native language", it is important that you find out what he means by it. If he means "childhood language" and he has retained little competence in it, then you can't judge whether he is lying about his native language by testing his competence in it.
I'll give you a few reasons why the ... [competent translator] ... concept is a valid and useful one for translators.
Your five reasons are all very valid (and with the text substitution that I made, I agree with all five of them). But they relate to "native language" only in a circular argument: we can tell if someone is a native speaker if he has a high degree of competence, and then we try to measure degree of competence by asking whether the person is a native speaker.
All five things you mention can be learnt (and more importantly: unless they are learnt, they do not come automatically for anyone).
The point of this thread is: as you yourself pointed out, Proz accepts the native speaker concept as useful. There is abuse of this feature of the site. We'd like to think of ways to stop abuse of this feature. I at least do not wish to change/abolish this feature.
The reason why I advocate a change of the feature (or replacing it with something that accomplishes the same thing) is because I believe the abuse of the feature is inherent to the design of the feature. Changing the design might help eliminate some of the abuses of it... otherwise the solution is nothing more than patching a leaky vessel.
I suspect that many of the abuses are not malicious, but rather stem from a misunderstanding (or alternate definition) of the concept of "native language". I accept, however, that some of the abuses result from not wanting to end up lower in a directory search or being excluded from jobs.
Here is another suggestion for the problem (let me know what you think of it):
On the profile page, in the section of native language, let there be a heading "I regard this language as my native language because:" with a series of checkboxes such as "It is my childhood language", "I am highly competent in it", "I have lived in this country for most of my life", "Prefer not to answer", etc.
Then at least a client who visits the translator's profile page can see if his definition of "native speaker" is the same as the translator's. Translators who want to lie about it will still lie about it, but those who want to be honest can do so without having to give up the status of "native language".
| | | | Shiya Luo
Local time: 11:07
English to Chinese
+ ...
Ty Kendall wrote:
a) I don't think we need to define what a "native language" is. "Credentials" can also be interpreted in many different ways and can mean different things to different people, yet ProZ still verifies these according to their own definition. I see no reason why the same cannot be done for native language.
b) Texts which require an in-depth subject knowledge (usually technical) are an acknowledged exception to the "native only" rule. In many cases it may indeed be preferable to find a non-native with the subject knowledge (although I find it hard to believe that in most arenas there aren't natives with the required knowledge too). I have a sneaking suspicion that $$$ plays a part in such decisions.
a) The way I see it, ProZ verifies them only when most paying members (serious translators) would not be put off and leave the site. Unless we can suggest a solution without angering any paying member, I don't see any action may take in place.
b) Chinese to English translators with a technical background and native in English? They are almost as scarce as female engineers and male kindergarten teachers. In fact even in science and engineering colleges in the US, and probably many other English speaking countries, the lack of native English speakers is shocking. Many technical documents, written in English, from many large corps here in the Silicon Valley, come from non-natives.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [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 Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
