| 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)
|
|---|
Ty Kendall 
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:03
Hebrew to English
| Scholarly article.....which uses the F-bomb | Sep 17, 2012 |
If I were you, I'd re-evaluate where you get your "academic" knowledge. Not many academic references I remember feature the F-BOMB.
| | | | | I take most of my knowledge from scientific books and experience | Sep 17, 2012 |
Unfortunately some of the books are in a paper form only, and I can't really spend hours searching for quotations. As far as experience goes, I have academic background in Scandinavian languages (Swedish) and I have lived in Scandinavia for at least 18 months (combined). Many Spanish-speaking people say they can understand Portuguese and Italian as well. So, if you believe that this premise is true, then probably spoken Scandinavian languages are mutually intelligible as well.
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:03
Hebrew to English
| This is a reference.... | Sep 17, 2012 |
"some genetically
related languages are so similar to each other in terms of grammar, vocabulary
and pronunciation that speakers of one language can understand the other
language without prior instructions. Speakers of such languages are able to
communicate with each other without a lingua franca or without one speaker
using the language of the other. This type of interaction, which is referred to
with terms such as ‘semicommunication’ (Haugen, 1966) or �... See more "some genetically
related languages are so similar to each other in terms of grammar, vocabulary
and pronunciation that speakers of one language can understand the other
language without prior instructions. Speakers of such languages are able to
communicate with each other without a lingua franca or without one speaker
using the language of the other. This type of interaction, which is referred to
with terms such as ‘semicommunication’ (Haugen, 1966) or ‘receptive multilingualism’
(Braunmüller & Zeevaert, 2001), has many advantages, in any case
on the production side.
The Scandinavian languages, Danish, Norwegian and Swedish, are an
example of languages which are so closely related that they are mutually
intelligible. In the past, a number of studies were carried out in order to get a
precise picture of the actual level of understanding between speakers of these
languages (e.g. Bø, 1978; Börestam, 1987; Maurud, 1976). Recently, an
investigation supported by the Nordic Cultural Fund was carried out to
examine the communicative situation at the beginning of the 21st century (see Delsing & Lundin Åkesson, 2005)."
The Contribution of Linguistic Factors to the Intelligbility of Closely Related Languages.
http://www.let.rug.nl/gooskens/pdf/publ_JMMD_2007.pdf
I hope Lisa can forgive this totally OT post!
[Edited at 2012-09-17 19:27 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:03
Hebrew to English
| No offence, but I think Michele might be the authority here | Sep 17, 2012 |
LilianBoland wrote:
I have academic background [sic] in Scandinavian languages (Swedish) and I have lived in Scandinavia for at least 18 months (combined).
A whole eighteen months?
Many Spanish-speaking people say they can understand Portuguese and Italian as well.
So, if you believe that this premise is true, then probably spoken Scandinavian languages are mutually intelligible as well.
Belief isn't necessary when evidence abounds.
You also can't take one bunch of languages from one group (the Romance branch) and say "well if it's true for this lot, it is probably true for this other lot" (the Nordic branch). It just so happens to be true for the Scandinavian/Nordic branch. From what I understand of the Romance languages - whilst there is some ease of understanding in certain directions, it isn't quite mutual intelligibility (certainly not on the same scale as the Scandinavian languages).
| | |
|
|
|
Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 10:03
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
| OT - Scandinavian | Sep 17, 2012 |
LilianBoland wrote:
Very sorry, Michele, but it is not true about spoken Scandinavian languages.
Well, Lilian, I guess you're the expert.
Have I mentioned that I lived in Scandinavia for 20 years, speak near-native Norwegian, and have a degree from the University of Oslo?
| | | | | Well, Michele, if you lived in different countries, obviously | Sep 17, 2012 |
you learned all three of them. As far as I remember you said you learned Norwegian as an adult. You might be just very talented. So you just probably understand all three of them separately. I hope you did not have Icelandic in mind, or Jutish. If you are referring to understanding simple phrases at a beer table, yes, probably they can communicate, especially that Scandinavians have the reputation of not being very talkative. I am referring to lectures on quantum physics in Norwegian for Swedish... See more you learned all three of them. As far as I remember you said you learned Norwegian as an adult. You might be just very talented. So you just probably understand all three of them separately. I hope you did not have Icelandic in mind, or Jutish. If you are referring to understanding simple phrases at a beer table, yes, probably they can communicate, especially that Scandinavians have the reputation of not being very talkative. I am referring to lectures on quantum physics in Norwegian for Swedish audience, or medical conferences.
[Edited at 2012-09-17 22:56 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Paul Cohen
Greenland
Local time: 16:03
German to English
+ ...
| The upside of not being able to acquire a second native language | Sep 18, 2012 |
Denise Phelps wrote:
"Danish is a butt ugly language really".
Quoted out of context, perhaps, but not totally irrelevant. I take great solace in the knowledge that, no matter how many years I live in a Danish-speaking country, I will never become a native speaker of this butt-ugly language.
| | | | | OT - A Swedish guy and a Norwegian guy walk into a bar... | Sep 18, 2012 |
Actually, in my case we were all standing out in the middle of a field in Germany attending a music festival (no dictionaries or computers in sight), when the Swedish guy and the Norwegian guy began to move their lips and make strange sounds that had nothing to do with English... and before you know it they were nodding and gesturing and actually having a long conversation.
Poor me, no history with Swedish or Norwegian, so I was left out. When I asked when they had learned each othe... See more Actually, in my case we were all standing out in the middle of a field in Germany attending a music festival (no dictionaries or computers in sight), when the Swedish guy and the Norwegian guy began to move their lips and make strange sounds that had nothing to do with English... and before you know it they were nodding and gesturing and actually having a long conversation.
Poor me, no history with Swedish or Norwegian, so I was left out. When I asked when they had learned each others' languages and for how long, I was told they had not. They were each simply speaking their own language, because they could understand each other enough to have the conversation that way. Imagine that!
[Edited at 2012-09-18 08:00 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 19:03
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| On mutual intelligibility | Sep 18, 2012 |
G'day everyone
Here's my contribution to the mudsling sub-tread on mutual intelligibility. I think you get mutual intelligibility and mutual intelligibility.
Two festival goers with similar languages who meet up in a third country at an event are likely to succeed in communicating using lots of words and gestures, if the vocabulary used by each of them is roughly recognisable by the other. That alone does not mean that the languages are "mutually intelligible", althou... See more G'day everyone
Here's my contribution to the mudsling sub-tread on mutual intelligibility. I think you get mutual intelligibility and mutual intelligibility.
Two festival goers with similar languages who meet up in a third country at an event are likely to succeed in communicating using lots of words and gestures, if the vocabulary used by each of them is roughly recognisable by the other. That alone does not mean that the languages are "mutually intelligible", although it may seem that way to an English spectator, for whom all foreign languages sound like gibberish anyway.
I'm not sure if it matters whether you've spend 2 years or 20 years in a country to be able to form a trustable opinion on something in the country. In a sense, the person who spent 2 years has the advantage of having looked at things more from a foreigner's perspective. It also depends on how widely these two people have travelled and whom they met, so you really can't tell which one to trust more.
A television programme that hosts guests speaking another language certainly is a strong case for mutual intelligibility, but... not if they use subtitles for home viewers. Don't forget that live studio audiences often respond on cue, so you can't be sure if they really caught a joke that was told in the other language, or if they were laughing at something that they all misunderstood, or if the sign that says "Laugh loudly" lit up above them (out of camera view). The show's host may well be able to understand the other language even though he speaks his own.
Different bloggers and scientific articles are likely to say different things, so it's essentially a matter of finding a source that you feel comfortable with, and hoping that the guy you're debating the issue with will fall for those arguments as well (sarcasm intended).
I did a quick (though admittedly silly) experiment with Google Translate, to see what would happen if I translated texts from Scandinavian languages into English while telling Google that these texts are actually in the other languages, and then checking how comprehensible the English translation is. I found that New Norse masquerading as either Swedish or Danish is complete gibberish, and that although none of the translations were of acceptable intelligibility, Danish masquerading as either Swedish or Norse comes closest to being vaguely comprehensible.
http://tinyurl.com/9o5k5dp
By the way, I tried the same experiment with Dutch and Afrikaans, which are highly mutually intelligible, and apart from a couple of tell-tale signs it is very difficult to see that the translation was done using the wrong language combination.
How would one solve this issue of whether Scandinavian languages are mutually intelligible? I suppose one could ask translators in these languages, but will all translators give the same answers? I doubt it.
Samuel
[Edited at 2012-09-18 07:23 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:03
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | What if they don't? | Sep 18, 2012 |
Jenny Forbes wrote:
In the case of those declaring multiple native languages, the speech will be deemed native if several other ProZ.com Native Speakers find it to be native (according to their own definitions)."
[my bold]
If they don't, grass on 'em. If staff do nothing then what? Would site staff please care to comment?
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 19:03
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| @Jenny, re ProZ.com's reply | Sep 18, 2012 |
Jenny Forbes wrote:
Yesterday, I asked Proz to define what it means/understands by "native language", so that those of us who think native language claims should be verified can proceed further with our request.
I've just received the following prompt reply, which I quote verbatim and in full...
Well, it's hardly suprising that if ProZ.com is still "busy" refining their native language credential, that the currently published definition would be given if anyone should ask what the definition is. We've all known what the current ProZ.com definition of "native language" is. The problem is that they are still "busy" ironing out the details of how to verify native language, so for the moment their definition isn't really helpful.
I must say that there is something pragmatic about their definition. I assume that in their verification system the judges will not be required to say why they decide whatever they decide, for what matters in the end (it would seem, from ProZ.com's take on the issue) is not the precise definition of it but the general opinion that other native speakeras have about someone.
I wonder if they intended to let candidates be judges only by natives from their own region, of only from the "motherland" region, or from a cross-section of regions in the world. I also wonder to what degree a non-motherland accent or use of local vocabulary would have on the judging.
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:03
Hebrew to English
Samuel Murray wrote:
I'm not sure if it matters whether you've spend 2 years or 20 years in a country to be able to form a trustable opinion on something in the country. In a sense, the person who spent 2 years has the advantage of having looked at things more from a foreigner's perspective. It also depends on how widely these two people have travelled and whom they met, so you really can't tell which one to trust more.
For linguistic matters, I'd be more inclined to trust the veteran, not the tourist. (And also the person with a higher degree from the relevant country and who works in the relevant languages).
In such cases,...when push comes to shove...I'd actually bow to the claims of native speakers (bringing it back to some kind of relevance to the thread)...and I've been told by more than one Swede that they can understand Norwegian/Danish to varying degrees.
although it may seem that way to an English spectator, for whom all foreign languages sound like gibberish anyway.
Only if that "English spectator" is monolingual.
[Edited at 2012-09-18 08:55 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| Of to varying degree, definitely, especially about simple matters. | Sep 18, 2012 |
Even a Polish-speaking person can understand a Russian-speaking person, or Ukrainian, to a certain degree -- try translating a contract, though. If you want to experience it yourself, Ty, learn some Trondersk Norwegian dialect and then call a Swedish office to ask about some legal matters, and see how intelligible the languages are.
[Edited at 2012-09-18 12:16 GMT]
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 19:03
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| | OT - Testimony | Sep 18, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
Two festival goers with similar languages who meet up in a third country at an event are likely to succeed in communicating using lots of words and gestures, if the vocabulary used by each of them is roughly recognisable by the other. That alone does not mean that the languages are "mutually intelligible"
a) In the story I told, there were not "lots of ... gestures". No more gestures than in an ordinary conversation between two people in one another's company.
b) "That alone" does not indicate "mutually intelligible" - but the fact that the participants told the observer that they understood each other and could converse without significant problem seems to weigh heavily in favor of the fact. Unless of course they were lying. 
[Edited at 2012-09-18 16:02 GMT]
| | | | | 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? | 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 
