| 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)
|
|---|
XXXphxxx (X) 
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:05
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | An excellent example... | Jul 3, 2012 |
BeaDeer wrote:
It is all right to be proud of your new language and your ability to speak it without an accent, but advertising oneself as a native speaker? Such behaviour goes against the concept of a professional community. It diminishes the reputation of the portal and hurts the credibility of other translators, those who are not in any way in the dark about who they are, what are their skills and what upholding professional standards means...
... Non-natives are not necessarily incompetent translators into their second or third language, in their chosen fields. Some are very good, even excellent, but I have never seen any of these translators to not be aware of the limits in these languages and have also never seen them lie about their native language in order to get an assignment.
[Edited at 2012-07-03 08:39 GMT]
of a person who writes excellent English, conveys ideas clearly and yet makes no claims whatsoever to be a native English speaker.
Proz should put in place a mechanism that will encourage professional conduct and contribute positively to the image of the site. This is associated with costs, but I do not see any other way.
It has been mooted, perhaps in a private PM, that some might even volunteer their efforts to review submissions for native status, such is their desire to clean up the site. It's just a thought, I realise that many people have very understandable reservations about doing voluntary work for a commercial site. There would also be the issue of selecting the "panel of judges".
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 01:05
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
Ty Kendall wrote:
I just want to dispel any belief that someone can call themselves a native speaker just because they've been bombarded with English advertising most their lives...
No-one is saying that. The point is precisely that saturation leads to a false high opinion of one's English ability. No-one here said that saturation leads to quality.
Nani Delgado wrote:
The problem comes (apart from the ones who deliberately lie) when people overestimate themselves and think that their English (or any other language) is at native level when in fact they are far far far far away from that.
Exactly right.
==
Ty Kendall wrote:
There's a big difference between living in a country with a few starbucks and (usually badly written) English slogans on buses whilst all the time being surrounded by another language and actually living in an English speaking country. Exposure is one thing, quality of exposure is another.
I wonder if the same can't be said of someone who lives in a part of English or in a part of town where the "quality" of the English is also far removed from the type of English that would generally be the norm of English. Which is actually what Lilian was getting at in a not so distant previous post.
| | | |
Phil Hand wrote:
I have one response for Charlie - you said "why would it take the pressure off the Proz staff" to make native verification a paid for service? The answer is because they can hire more people if it's paid for. This might make it prohibitively expensive, and thus a pointless measure.
Wondered if that might have been it - you should've said so! I think you'd need to do some maths to see how your suggestion looks - and remember that there is not only the raw number of people being checked, but also the many and various languages potentially involved, and the likelihood of, er, native-level speakers of those languages in Ukraine and Argentina (where I believe proz prefers to employ its staff?).
Hence my preference for some kind of community-based system. I just think you'd be more likely to get site acceptance the less the workload or effort generally is for proz.
I'm starting to think that there might be no effective way of clearing out the existing set of misrepresenters.
No easy way. People have been allowed to lie about themselves* on this site for, what, 10 years? It's entrenched. Some will see it as a threat to their livelihood, or a portion of it. You've only got to read the hysterical over-reaction in here to the very idea to imagine how well it will go down with the liars if it ever comes to pass.
*on the common assumption that the "N" refers to an attribute of the profile owner personally, and not the level of services potentially available through (if not by) that individual. Allowing people to claim "N" for work that is outsourced, proofread by their husbands, etc., while making it absolutely crystal clear** that this is what "N" means would also improve the overall honesty level.
** wording along the lines of "N" does not mean that the individual who owns this profile is necessarily a native speaker, merely that they claim to have professional access to a native speaker, and that the site is utterly unable to prove the veracity of any such claim.
In other words, reduce the problem by reducing the importance of the "N" badge. There may be other ways. Removing it. Removing it as a filter for job responses.
So did I, but his unnecessary and inaccurate subsequent comments about guardians put me right off, and I haven't been back to the thread since he made them.
| | | | | Hear, and indeed hear! | Jul 3, 2012 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote: BeaDeer wrote:
It is all right to be proud of your new language and your ability to speak it without an accent, but advertising oneself as a native speaker? ......etc [excellent example] of a person who writes excellent English, conveys ideas clearly and yet makes no claims whatsoever to be a native English speaker.
And judicious use of the carriage return as well
(Failure in which often strikes me as being broadly the online forum equivalent of green ink in the old days.)
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:05
Hebrew to English
| Non-native English is not a native variety of English | Jul 3, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote: I wonder if the same can't be said of someone who lives in a part of English or in a part of town where the "quality" of the English is also far removed from the type of English that would generally be the norm of English. Which is actually what Lilian was getting at in a not so distant previous post.
But my point was that there's an abyss between varieties of native English and non-native English.
Non-native English is not just another variety of English like Cockney or Geordie. It's apples and oranges. Attempts to conflate the two are just silly in my opinion.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 01:05
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| How about correcting me when I'm wrong? | Jul 3, 2012 |
Charlie Bavington wrote:
So did I, but his unnecessary and inaccurate subsequent comments about guardians put me right off, and I haven't been back to the thread since he made them.
How about telling me how my opinion about guardians is wrong? I wrote:
The parent/guardian sounds workable, but I get the impression that a guardian would be rather less likely to have had such a great influence on a child's language as a parent or siblings would have (whether the parent is biological, married-to, foster). The point of the question is, after all, "influence".
Perhaps a "guardian" in the UK is not the same as a "guardian" is in my country of origin. Where I come from, a guardian plays a mostly administrative role in a child's life. A parent (whether a biological parent, adopted parent or foster-parent) would have a much more significant influence on a child than a guardian. Right? Or not?
| | | | | British English is not really American English | Jul 3, 2012 |
This is the truth, and this is how it is viewed when you apply for a job at a newspaper in the US, for example. I have a friend who has a degree in English from England, and her parents are English, and she can only handle a foreign correspondence division at one of the local papers, although she would prefer to do something else, maybe after a few years of getting used to American English she will be able to do it. As sad as it may sound, British English is not American English for editing, or ... See more This is the truth, and this is how it is viewed when you apply for a job at a newspaper in the US, for example. I have a friend who has a degree in English from England, and her parents are English, and she can only handle a foreign correspondence division at one of the local papers, although she would prefer to do something else, maybe after a few years of getting used to American English she will be able to do it. As sad as it may sound, British English is not American English for editing, or publishing purposes. I just think this discussion is not leading anywhere. The system is probably as good as it could be. I don't believe any of the " lying people" got too many jobs. If they got them, and they continue getting them from the same clients, it just means their language is very good, and they were unjustly barred from bidding. I don't think people should lie, absolutely not, but I don't really see any solution other than trying to raise the ethics of some participants -- members and clients, who also should not post degrading rates, what some tend to do, and their ridiculous budgets. Please have some respect for professional people.
With all of my respect, this thread has become totally pointless. My only clear impression from the thread is that native speakers, of British English, especially ( in this thread) don't like their language "messed up by other people". How is it related to translation? You don't even know who the target audience is for many translation jobs. It may be international audience for whom more neutral English, grammatical and proper, but without too many idioms is much more suitable. Have you heard about Simplified English? Just for space research purposes. I agree you may not want your variety of English messed up, but this has nothing to do with this site. It might have to do with British editors.
[Edited at 2012-07-03 10:05 GMT]
[Edited at 2012-07-03 11:16 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Because I'm not an obsessive nit-picker... | Jul 3, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote: Charlie Bavington wrote:
So did I, but his unnecessary and inaccurate subsequent comments about guardians put me right off, and I haven't been back to the thread since he made them. How about telling me how my opinion about guardians is wrong?
... and I've got better things to do with my time than attempt to correct every single thing I see on the internet that I disagree with. Plus I was spitting feathers and that is never the best frame of mind to address such issues.
| | |
|
|
|
Kirsten Bodart
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:05
Dutch to English
+ ...
| No time to quote everyone | Jul 3, 2012 |
About children acquiring language skills through their parents who are not native speakers of that language:
Ten years ago, my university professor of General Linguistics pointed to a study done on children who were deaf from birth and whose parents had to communicate with them in sign language. Although the parents had only learnt this language as an adult (for obvious reasons), the children displayed a much better command of it and used more elaborate gestures and concepts than th... See more About children acquiring language skills through their parents who are not native speakers of that language:
Ten years ago, my university professor of General Linguistics pointed to a study done on children who were deaf from birth and whose parents had to communicate with them in sign language. Although the parents had only learnt this language as an adult (for obvious reasons), the children displayed a much better command of it and used more elaborate gestures and concepts than their parents and teachers. So, extrapolating on linguistic knowledge, this would suggest that children in a position similar to what Samuel has illustrated, would be native English speakers, even if they came in contact with people speaking English as L2.
On non-native mistakes:
In my view, and that is my husband's opinion as well - he teaches translators and interpreters for the EU - 'did went' and the tenses are grammar mistakes. It is the wrong use of grammar. Admittedly, the difference between 'I went to the shop this morning,' and 'I have been to the shop (today)' is difficult to learn for non-native speakers. It took me personally 5 years of constant exposure to learn this. It is a change in the way you think; you can't change your train of thought in the middle of the sentence. You can in Dutch (put a 'yesterday' after the main clause to further explain your statement).
Also the difference between 'I'll put the washing in the machine,' and 'I am going to put the washing in the machine this evening' is difficult. I don't think I make too many of those mistakes anymore.
I expect this is similar to the proper use of the subjonctif présent in French, although the English tenses are more obvious and therefore more disturbing.
'J'ai manger', then, is a grammar mistake. I learned how to spell and conjugate French verbs in the 'participe passé' in my second year (age 12) or even first (age 11).
If we can believe Michele, I think there might then be an argument for non-natives translating into French next...
In short, my husband and I agree that tenses are difficult to learn, but they are a grammar issue. If you can't use the tenses properly, you don't know English properly. It is only a non-native error in the sense that the non-natives in this case are still learning the language (and therefore should not claim they are native; if they do they should at least be able to write a gramatically correct text, as that is what clients expect). A non-native who is near native would only make tense mistakes if the boundary between tenses is very obscure and has to do with a different perception of a certain situation in language X and language Y. I can't think of any examples right away, but there are some. The obvious mistake of 'Yesterday I have gone to the shop,' would not occur anymore.
He also agreed that the wrong use of prepositions for example, would be a good indication of a person's nativeness, as this is not subject to rules whatsoever, but has to do with 'knowing it' or 'feeling it' (depending on whether the verb or expression has a fixed prep. rather than a variety of choices with a slightly different meaning).
When I am tired or have been in Belgium, I have been known to say, 'I am sitting in the couch,' because that's how it is in Flemish Dutch (the Dutch would also say 'on'). That is evidently because my system of thinking has changed and I am in Dutch mode instead of English mode.
As to cursing:
That would depend on the mode I'm in. It's not always the same.
As to 'native', I know that would be offensive to some people and recalls spears and poison darts and things , but it's for abbreviation and ease only. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Kirsten Bodart
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:05
Dutch to English
+ ...
Flemish people would say, 'What has bitten you?' (that's not a disguised insult, by the way, just an attempt to ease the animosity between you to, whatever is behind it).
I thought guardians were people who have the administrative and legal responsibility over people when they are minors or (I think) when they are unable to take care of their affairs. Children in care facilities also have guadians, but of course those are not as much in the picture as foster guardians who are of cou... See more Flemish people would say, 'What has bitten you?' (that's not a disguised insult, by the way, just an attempt to ease the animosity between you to, whatever is behind it).
I thought guardians were people who have the administrative and legal responsibility over people when they are minors or (I think) when they are unable to take care of their affairs. Children in care facilities also have guadians, but of course those are not as much in the picture as foster guardians who are of course closer to their object.
'Voogd' in Dutch (as you know Afrikaans, you can probably do something with this word, Samuel)
Although historically the term was also applied to whomever was 'taking care' of a child and raised it, despite its parents still being alive for example. Jane Eyre has a guardian in her uncaring aunt, but Helen in The Tenant of Wildfell Hall as well (in her aunt and uncle). Jane Eyre never sees her aunt in 10 years, where Helen lives with her aunt and uncle, because her father couldn't care less.
[Edited at 2012-07-03 11:08 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:05
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
We won’t get anywhere at this rate. While I'm sure there are some out there who enjoy reading your input to this discussion these remain procrastinations and digressions (i.e. off-topic). Please feel free to start your own thread if you would like to continue expounding your views. If you want to discuss the topic in this thread then all we need to know from you is if you agree with the following:
1) There are a number of people making erroneous claims about their native languages... See more We won’t get anywhere at this rate. While I'm sure there are some out there who enjoy reading your input to this discussion these remain procrastinations and digressions (i.e. off-topic). Please feel free to start your own thread if you would like to continue expounding your views. If you want to discuss the topic in this thread then all we need to know from you is if you agree with the following:
1) There are a number of people making erroneous claims about their native languages and this should be stopped.
2) In most cases one would be able to spot a non-native speaker of one’s own language at a hundred paces.
Therefore, let’s just say that a panel of native-speakers were all unanimously to agree that a particular person is not a native speaker, that person’s claim should be removed. Do you agree? Let’s not focus too much on the mechanics but on the principles. Also, try if you can, just for a moment, to take your eye off the exceptions. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Samuel, you are right | Jul 3, 2012 |
Samuel, you are absolutely right that guardian may mean different things, especially in legal language, in different English-speaking countries. Legal language is a separate language within a language. Most people who are not lawyers,paralegals, or legal interpreters, don't understand what more complicated legal papers say, at least in the United States. You have a guardian et litem in American legal language, just as an example.
| | |
|
|
|
| Nobody likes to see their native language messed up by others | Jul 3, 2012 |
LilianBoland wrote:
T My only clear impression from the thread is that native speakers, of British English, especially ( in this thread) don't like their language "messed up by other people".
[Edited at 2012-07-03 10:05 GMT]
[Edited at 2012-07-03 11:16 GMT]
No one likes to see their native language messed up. No matter what the native language is.
The point is that that sort of 'sensitivity' is something one only 'feels' for one's (real, genuine, authentic etc.) native language. It's like swearing. I say things in French I would never say in English. Saying it in French doesn't bother me (can't say the same for the native Fr speakers when I see the shocked look on their faces.......).
No one wants to pull out an instruction booklet or tourist guide or any other document enclosed with a purchase and see how their language has been massacred by someone who was able to fool themselves (and others) that they could write in that language.
English just happens to enjoy 'most favoured language' status when it comes to picking a language to bludgeon. The illusion that there are 'no rules' and so there is no way to be wrong urges people to give it a go and to make fraudulent claims of being an English native speaker.
This forum is simply an attempt to stop ALL fraudulent native language claims on Proz profiles.
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 00:05
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| There are many errors exclusive to non-native speakers of a language | Jul 3, 2012 |
Kirsten Bodart wrote:
'J'ai manger', then, is a grammar mistake.
Indeed it is a common French grammar mistake, made by both native and non-native speakers. It's precisely why I gave up tutoring French kids in English - I really don't have the skills to teach them their own grammar as well.
But why is this a mistake made by native speakers? That's easy! It sounds identical to "j'ai mangé". French kids (and non-native speakers) have to be taught which one to write, just as English (and American, etc) kids have to grapple with the bizarre spelling vs pronunciation of through, though, trough, etc.
How about another, more pertinent example? Has anyone ever heard of a French native speaker saying or writing "j'ai allé"? I somehow doubt it. I'm not sure I even wrote it myself as I think before I write in a foreign language and then check it; however, I do remember saying it a few times 15 years ago. The same applies to "je suis chaude" in place of "j'ai chaud" - an adult native speaker simply wouldn't say that by mistake. And the same applies to "I did went". That's not a mistake any adult native speaker would ever make, in speech or writing. There are a few glaring errors of English that show a lack of education, such as "we was" (OUCH! ) but I hope to goodness those speakers aren't members of this site (please put me right if there's some variant of English where this is acceptable - it certainly wasn't where I was brought up).
As for your example about deaf children, well of course they "spoke" it better than their parents. They learnt it from birth and I'm absolutely sure they also learnt from other (highly skilled) users and by watching professionally-signed speaking on TV etc.
Sheila
| | | | | I agree with Lisa's first part but not with the second one | Jul 3, 2012 |
We don't really know what people can tell and what they cannot tell. This might become similar to witch-hunting, or spying on people which would be really something negative on a democratic site like this one. This was a method used by certain not so democratic governments and many people may have bad associations -- the Stalin's informants, the Water Gate. Otherwise, the only other thing that comes to mind will be kindergarden.
| | | | | 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 » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
