| 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)
|
|---|
| Not right next to your credential | Sep 10, 2012 |
Charlie Bavington wrote:
It might be nice to be provided with a specific space to provide links to such professional organisations - I just whizzed through the "edit profile" options to see if, for instance, there was anywhere to add my CIoL "find-a-linguist" URL next to my credential, but I couldn't even find how to edit that credential (maybe you can't, once it's done it's done?).
But maybe you could show it in the "about me" section, the same way I do. For example, I am member of BDÜ (German Translators Association) which, as a matter of fact, prove every single credential you send them before being admitted (or rejected). And as a member one is allowed to use their logo for marketing purposes. So I took the logo, linked it to the directory search of the BDÜ, and that´s it. Maybe too colourful but well, it´s not that bad. 
*Edited to add: ups! Lisa was faster than me. 
[Edited at 2012-09-10 12:57 GMT]
| | | | | Structure and stuff | Sep 10, 2012 |
Yup, I know I could put a link in About Me. Or maybe in the "my website" field or whatever it's called. I'm just a fan of structured data (anal ex programmer and all that). Plus a specific field would mean you could filter or sort on it, and that kind of thing (he says, as if he takes his profile seriously anyway ). Prob'ly drifting a bit OT now, sorry.
| | | | Ty Kendall 
United Kingdom
Local time: 23:01
Hebrew to English
| Never gonna happen | Sep 10, 2012 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
The first thing that proz.com should be doing instead in the light of this discussion, is to stop the practice of allowing outsourcers and agencies to filter translators on the basis of native language.
Well, that's one way to lose ProZ a lot of money. Like it or not, the native language criterion is relevant to many outsourcers, and from what can be inferred from the faqs and other snippets ProZ seems to agree and a sizeable portion of translators here agree too. Notice I said "relevant" and not "an indicator of competence or quality in translation".
This will send out a clear signal that it is no longer considered in this translator community that native language is any indicator of competence or quality in translation.
Nobody is currently saying that anyway. It's merely one relevant factor amongst many.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 23:01
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Even further OT | Sep 10, 2012 |
Charlie Bavington wrote: Yup, I know I could put a link in About Me. Or maybe in the "my website" field or whatever it's called. I'm just a fan of structured data (anal ex programmer and all that). Plus a specific field would mean you could filter or sort on it, and that kind of thing (he says, as if he takes his profile seriously anyway ). Prob'ly drifting a bit OT now, sorry.
You could replace "Download cv" (which doesn't work) in your Wodehouse gem with "here" - subtle but effective (?).
| | |
|
|
|
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
You could replace "Download cv" (which doesn't work) in your Wodehouse gem with "here" - subtle but effective (?).
Reason being I had set my email auto-reply to indicate I was away on holiday & my CV has my address on it. I was burgled while on holiday 3 years ago, and decided to make it bit harder to find my address (although we do in fact get a house-sitter these days).
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 23:01
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Last of the OTs | Sep 10, 2012 |
Charlie Bavington wrote: Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
You could replace "Download cv" (which doesn't work) in your Wodehouse gem with "here" - subtle but effective (?).
Reason being I had set my email auto-reply to indicate I was away on holiday & my CV has my address on it. I was burgled while on holiday 3 years ago, and decided to make it bit harder to find my address (although we do in fact get a house-sitter these days).
Yes, but presumably your F-a-L entry has no address, that could be the link to the CIoL entry.
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 06:01
Chinese to English
| Sorta begs the question, doesn't it? | Sep 10, 2012 |
Kay Barbara wrote:
In the statement I made (of which you only quoted the last part) I was referring specifically to native German speakers - how would they be caught at an earlier stage?
They wouldn't be. I can't quite work out what you're talking about here, Kay. Obviously a native check isn't going to catch out any natives. It's going to catch out those who aren't native but claim to be.
Look, it is a fact universally agreed that a translator in possession of a native language is not necessarily a good translator.
However, there are translators who are not even in possession of a native target language, and yet who claim to possess it. The chances of one of them providing good quality translation are significantly lower.
Those opposed to verification - Kay, Jose, Samuel, Siegfried. You've all talked about other things being more important than native language. But are any of those other things remotely testable? Can they be usefully measured (by a site like Proz - translation quality can be measured by the ATA, IoL, but Proz is not set up to do that).
If not, then are you in favour of Jenny's suggestion - just say, everything on Proz is caveat emptor. Proz offers no support in checking any translator information.
I would think that's a shame.
| | | | | Remotely testable | Sep 10, 2012 |
Phil Hand wrote:
Those opposed to verification - Kay, Jose, Samuel, Siegfried. You've all talked about other things being more important than native language. But are any of those other things remotely testable? Can they be usefully measured (by a site like Proz - translation quality can be measured by the ATA, IoL, but Proz is not set up to do that).
If not, then are you in favour of Jenny's suggestion - just say, everything on Proz is caveat emptor. Proz offers no support in checking any translator information.
I would think that's a shame.
Proz is a meeting place for translators and outsourcers/clients.
It's like an auto fair, where they seal a huge parking lot for people to bring in the cars they want to sell, and receive people wanting to buy cars. Neither the parking lot owner nor the event organizer will be testing any of these cars to ascertain whether each one is any good. Yet thousands of sellers and buyers go there every Sunday, and do business.
Now some external repair shops, and even car insurance companies (as a bonus) may offer that testing, and issue certificates of "good mechanical & body health" for those vehicles.
What's the point in determining a translator's true native language, when all that is wanted is their quality in translation?
I knew a man, deceased for a while already, who was unique in languages. He was a close friend of mine's uncle. In no less than twelve languages, he'd pass as a native speaker of each of them with flying colors, with some praise on his unusual erudition and flawless grammar & pronunciation. He had been born in Russia, and moved to Brazil in his teens. And yet he was a lawyer, not a translator.
So what's the point in testing?
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 23:01
Hebrew to English
| Short and sweet. | Sep 10, 2012 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
What's the point in determining a translator's true native language, when all that is wanted is their quality in translation?
...but we don't know that is all that is wanted. There are a few (at least) reasons someone might want a (real) native speaker. Translation quality is but one.
I knew a man, deceased for a while already, who was unique in languages. He was a close friend of mine's uncle. In no less than twelve languages, he'd pass as a native speaker of each of them with flying colors, with some praise on his unusual erudition and flawless grammar & pronunciation. He had been born in Russia, and moved to Brazil in his teens. And yet he was a lawyer, not a translator.
So what's the point in testing?
Egregious cases.
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 06:01
Chinese to English
| For the 847th time... | Sep 10, 2012 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
What's the point in determining a translator's true native language, when all that is wanted is their quality in translation?
The point in knowing a translator's native language is that quality is inherently unknowable (the service hasn't been performed yet), and so the client is using some proxies to limit their risk.
Proz is a meeting place for translators and outsourcers/clients.
It's like an auto fair, where they seal a huge parking lot for people to bring in the cars they want to sell, and receive people wanting to buy cars. Neither the parking lot owner nor the event organizer will be testing any of these cars to ascertain whether each one is any good. Yet thousands of sellers and buyers go there every Sunday, and do business.
Now some external repair shops, and even car insurance companies (as a bonus) may offer that testing, and issue certificates...
Yes, sure, if that's your conception of what Proz is, then you're right, there's no point in testing anything.
But that conception seems obviously wrong to me.
There are websites on the internet which are exactly what you're describing. The most famous one is probably Craigslist. And you can go on there and look for a translator if you like.
But most clients don't. A lot of clients use Proz, because it has a lot of useful features that car fairs and Craigslist don't have. And last time I looked, more than half the clients in my pair were asking for natives of a specific language, and some of those were using Proz's native language feature to limit the responses.
Clients do not appear to be using Proz like a big anonymous fair. They make careful use of the features. They look carefully at translator profiles. The first advice they give you on here is fill in your profile in full, because clients like to see lots of information. It's not too much of a logical leap to imagine that clients would like that information to be true.
| | | | Kay Barbara
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:01
Member (2008)
English to German
+ ...
Phil Hand wrote: Kay Barbara wrote:
In the statement I made (of which you only quoted the last part) I was referring specifically to native German speakers - how would they be caught at an earlier stage? They wouldn't be. I can't quite work out what you're talking about here, Kay. Obviously a native check isn't going to catch out any natives. It's going to catch out those who aren't native but claim to be.
Let's deal with this first as it really isn't that important:
You incompletely quoted a sentence of mine that contained the word "they" which I used to refer to German native speakers. But then you used "they" to refer to non-natives claiming to be native (something I did not write about as it is not relevant to my case). That's why your confusion arose.
Phil Hand wrote:
Look, it is a fact universally agreed that a translator in possession of a native language is not necessarily a good translator.
However, there are translators who are not even in possession of a native target language, and yet who claim to possess it. The chances of one of them providing good quality translation are significantly lower.
Those opposed to verification - Kay, Jose, Samuel, Siegfried. You've all talked about other things being more important than native language. But are any of those other things remotely testable? Can they be usefully measured (by a site like Proz - translation quality can be measured by the ATA, IoL, but Proz is not set up to do that).
If not, then are you in favour of Jenny's suggestion - just say, everything on Proz is caveat emptor. Proz offers no support in checking any translator information.
I would think that's a shame.
José made a good point, a valid comparison.
And yes: other (in my opinion more relevant) traits/qualifications of a translator are at least as testable as native language claims. Whether you have a panel of peers judging written/oral output regarding native language or assessing the quality of a translation, say, in a specific field (in which a translator claims to be proficient/a specialist) shouldn't really be that different.
When you say "Proz is not set up to do that" when it comes to measuring quality, why is Proz then set up to measure nativeness in a given language? For both assessments Proz would need translators/natives to be the peers (or are you suggesting that Proz staff do this?).
| | | |
Phil Hand wrote: José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Proz is a meeting place for translators and outsourcers/clients.
It's like an auto fair, where they seal a huge parking lot for people to bring in the cars they want to sell, and receive people wanting to buy cars. Neither the parking lot owner nor the event organizer will be testing any of these cars to ascertain whether each one is any good. Yet thousands of sellers and buyers go there every Sunday, and do business.
Now some external repair shops, and even car insurance companies (as a bonus) may offer that testing, and issue certificates... Yes, sure, if that's your conception of what Proz is, then you're right, there's no point in testing anything. But that conception seems obviously wrong to me. There are websites on the internet which are exactly what you're describing. The most famous one is probably Craigslist. And you can go on there and look for a translator if you like. But most clients don't. A lot of clients use Proz, because it has a lot of useful features that car fairs and Craigslist don't have. And last time I looked, more than half the clients in my pair were asking for natives of a specific language, and some of those were using Proz's native language feature to limit the responses. Clients do not appear to be using Proz like a big anonymous fair. They make careful use of the features. They look carefully at translator profiles. The first advice they give you on here is fill in your profile in full, because clients like to see lots of information. It's not too much of a logical leap to imagine that clients would like that information to be true.
There are three possible accountable parties for a translator's claims on their Proz profile:
a) the very translator him/herself;
b) Proz - either on its own, or backed by other entities' certifications (ATA, etc.)
c) the outsourcer's due diligence.
Once a prospect asked me for a sworn translation of his CV. I asked him what would be the point, as long as he was free to include in his CV anything, from the bare truth to his wildest unaccomplished dreams. My sworn translation would guarantee the accuracy of what was in his CV, but in no way the truthfulness of its contents.
The Proz profile is conceptually the same form of expression of a CV, perhaps more focused, and organized differently.
Now, if I stated on my profile that I am (also) a native speaker of Lower Slobovian, no matter how hard they tested me, would Proz be willing to stand liable for that assertion? I doubt it.
IMHO it's a matter of translation honesty and outsourcer education. There is room on the Proz profile - as it is now - to include a picture of the translator with his/her declared native country's flag, as well as a recording of them singing their national anthem.
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 23:01
Hebrew to English
| Yaotl Altan
Mexico
Local time: 16:01
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
+ ...
WE must vote and end this once and for all in order to know if we make changes or not to the profiles in Proz regarding Native languages.
| | | | | I am not opposed to verification | Sep 10, 2012 |
Phil Hand wrote:
Those opposed to verification - Kay, Jose, Samuel, Siegfried. You've all talked about other things being more important than native language. But are any of those other things remotely testable? Can they be usefully measured (by a site like Proz - translation quality can be measured by the ATA, IoL, but Proz is not set up to do that).
If not, then are you in favour of Jenny's suggestion - just say, everything on Proz is caveat emptor. Proz offers no support in checking any translator information.
I would think that's a shame.
a) I am not opposed to verification, in my opinion "being native in X" just does not carry enough information to base any sensible decision on it.
b) In my opinion testing nativeness would require a complete administrative structure that cannot be handled by Proz.
c) Selecting competent translators is the responsibility of the outsourcer, and we have our one procedures how to handle this process. I would never rely on any institution such as Proz or even ATA or BDÜ.
If I wanted to outsource this selection/verification process I would hire a service provider that would allow me to write the script for the process.
The misperception of Proz as a community is in my opinion one of the fundamental problems that triggers the idea that we (the users) should/could do anything to improve/influence it.
Over the years I have seen Proz starting to implement interesting features and than either not following them up or turning them into something completely useless. Why should I trust a company that is mainly interested in profit. That is ok, it is their business. Accepting that Proz is just a business saves you a lot of headache and allows you to use the features that are really strong.
| | | | | 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 » |
| | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
