| 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)
|
|---|
Samuel Murray 
Netherlands
Local time: 14:02
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| History of native language on ProZ.com | Jul 18, 2012 |
Charlie Bavington wrote:
It would be extremely interesting to hear, say, Henry's view on what the purpose of the "N" is, what he thought it represented it when he invented it (I'm guessing it was him!), and it's presumed relationship with the working language pairs list, and whether that still holds true today.
Reading up on the history of the native language issue on ProZ.com is interesting. I've been a member pretty much from the start, but there are always services that I didn't use or have forgotten about.
There was once a feature in ProZ.com called "Instant Jobs" in which a client could upload a small text, pay by credit card, and ProZ.com would send the job to a participating translator. One of the ways to ensure quality on Instant Jobs was to assign jobs only to native speakers. Initially, the honesty system was used for declaring one's native language, but after a while (and after specific cases of abuse reported by clients), ProZ.com had to come up with some kind of way to ensure the honesty. So the "ProZ.com Native Speaker certification" programme (PNS) was created, to validate people's native language.
The PNS programme eventually died... and before we propose any new method of validating or verifying native language, we should first look at that programme to see what it looked like.
From the description of the PNS I suspect that (or I wonder if) it was the red pee system that evolved from the PNS system, since they have similarities. If I understand correctly, validation was done verbally. If 3 previously validated native speakers validate your nativeness, then you become validated yourself. The initial "validated" native speakers were selected among known ProZ.com members who (a) were born in the native language's country, (b) still lived in the native language's country, (c) was raised in that language, and (d) had only one native language.
So, only the initial validators had to conform to the four requirements, but after that the only requirement was that three validators had to validate you, in person, presumably informally.
On the one hand, that is fair to people who are truly native speakers but no longer comply with all four those points. On the other hand, this can quickly lead to dilution, with no fail-safes.
I could not figure out when the icons started, but I get the impression that they were around pretty much from the start anyway. I could not figure out if everyone initially had grey icons until they got validated. Initially one could also pay money to be validated (about USD 50.00, it seems), but that generated many complaints. The idea (supported by Staff) that "the first native language that you declare is likely the truth" and therefore would not need to be validated is also present practically from the beginning, in late 2001.
I find no mention of "native language" in the forums prior to 2001 when the PNS was introduced, so I wonder if it was an issue at all, before that date.
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:02
Hebrew to English
| Since we've already had the Nativity, how about the Resurrection.... | Jul 18, 2012 |
I can see that the old PNS system wasn't perfect, but it's a helluva lot better than what happens now.
Maybe it should be resurrected from the grave
..perhaps after being tweaked to iron out a few of the reasons it didn't survive before.
[Edited at 2012-07-18 10:30 GMT]
| | | | S E (X)
Italy
Local time: 14:02
Italian to English
Phil Hand wrote:
The problem is not that Proz filters for native language. The problem is that *agencies* want to filter for native language, and some translators want to get around that filter. Proz is really just an innocent bystander in the middle of this contest.
I would disagree that Proz is an innocent bystander here. My own point has been that by - literally - creating a situation in which a) translators can claim native languages and b) clients can filter by native language, Proz has a certain responsibility (by virtue of claiming to be a site where clients can find *professional* translators) to require that category to actually mean something. Otherwise the site is just complicit in the problem, actively enabling it really.
As I have mentioned before, I imagine that clients using the Proz system to find translators expect that when they filter by native language, they will get a list of real native translators. And receiving the present lists that are anything but, would consequentially think less of Proz.
In my view, the integrity of the site is at stake here, and the site itself plays an active part in its own reputation.
Generally speaking, I don't think that anyone here is concerned about shoddy translators taking their jobs (as has been insinuated by Lilian and Balasubramaniam L. and perhaps others). I would say rather that the concern is the quality of the site itself, which on this issue is perceived to be quite low.
| | | | | What they said | Jul 18, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
Since we've already had the Nativity, how about the Resurrection....
Sorry about the slang, but this absolutely deserves a big
-LOL-
And a "fo shizzle", just to be clear.
Sarah Elizabeth Cree wrote:
I would disagree that Proz is an innocent bystander here. ... In my view, the integrity of the site is at stake here, and the site itself plays an active part in its own reputation. ... I would say rather that the concern is the quality of the site itself, which on this issue is perceived to be quite low.
Sadly, not on this issue alone, but at least here we *might* be able to make a difference.
[Edited at 2012-07-18 13:44 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 08:02
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Indeed, not on this issue alone | Jul 18, 2012 |
Janet Rubin wrote: Sarah Elizabeth Cree wrote:
I would disagree that Proz is an innocent bystander here. ... In my view, the integrity of the site is at stake here, and the site itself plays an active part in its own reputation. ... I would say rather that the concern is the quality of the site itself, which on this issue is perceived to be quite low. Sadly, not on this issue alone, but at least here we *might* be able to make a difference.
Indeed, not on this issue alone (cf., the recent "clarification" regarding the inclusion of translation agencies in the CPN, the ongoing enabling of Kudoz abuse, etc.).
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:02
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
LilianBoland wrote:
I think the problem Lisa, with your jobs being stolen is your profile. You are a highly qualified professional, but your profile is very confusing, and this might be the reason why some of the jobs you are capable of doing go to other people. Some outsourcers may think you are 18 if they go by the picture. Then you are saying that you have lived for 25 years in Brazil and for 10 years in France. Some people may have the impression that you never lived in England. Then your major in translation is Russian, and as far as I remember you translate mostly from Portuguese. I think this might be the real problem that you are confusing some of the outsourcers yourself. This this just to help to find the problem; it is not meant as criticism of any sort.
[Edited at 2012-07-18 08:51 GMT]
Thank you for your concern. I don’t believe I have ever stated that I had a problem with my jobs being stolen. This is not the case at all. You and a few others still do not appear to understand that this is not what this thread is about. It is about misrepresentation, dishonesty and ultimately site credibility.
I can't do much about my profile photo, which was taken less than a year ago. I can assure you I am not eighteen, you’d have to double that and you still wouldn’t be close. I’m also uncertain why any outsourcer would think I’d never lived in the U.K. since that’s where it clearly states I live at present. It also states that is where I did my Dip. Trans. and degree. My B.A. and M.A. were indeed in Russian (the former also contained some options in Spanish), the M.A. in Russian is not mentioned as I no longer offer Russian translations so I didn’t feel it was relevant. I'm not sure why the Russian should cause too much confusion. I’m also not sure where it states that I mostly translate from Portuguese. If you seek clarification, then please feel free to read the bio. on my website (the link is on my profile). Your confusion may arise from the fact that I only declare one native language and your assumption from previous posts was that I was “monolingual” (forgive me if I have misquoted you), had never left my home town and in fact even came from the same town as several other contributors to this thread. None of which are the case. I have asked you a few times on what basis you declare your two native languages and perhaps if we can understand where each other is coming from, we can understand why we have different views on this issue. It’s just a suggestion, I realise you are under no obligation whatsoever to justify anything to me or anyone else on this thread.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:02
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Sorry, I did say a while ago that I was seeking clarification on this - it's taken this long to get an answer.
I was under the impression that grey N icons couldn't be challenged. In fact they can: "To report abuse you must provide evidence, regardless of the icons".
FWIW
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:02
Hebrew to English
| That's good, one less loophole... | Jul 18, 2012 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
Sorry, I did say a while ago that I was seeking clarification on this - it's taken this long to get an answer.
I was under the impression that grey N icons couldn't be challenged. In fact they can: "To report abuse you must provide evidence, regardless of the icons".
FWIW
As long as this interim "snitching system" remains in place, I suppose it's good that someone can't hide behind their grey icon as a get out of jail free card.
| | |
|
|
|
| Pudding and proof | Jul 18, 2012 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
I was under the impression that grey N icons couldn't be challenged. In fact they can: "To report abuse you must provide evidence, regardless of the icons".
FWIW
Has anyone from the site provided any information on what constitutes "evidence"?
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 20:02
Chinese to English
| Non-functional | Jul 19, 2012 |
We should be so lucky. Here's Lucia's latest reply to my test case:
"Thanks for the details, I am looking into it now. I am thoroughly documenting reports of abuse like yours to be able to take action when the first improvements to the Native Speaker Credential system that Jared mentions in the forum can be introduced."
No action to be taken on anyone until we get a new system - and Jared's already said that the new system will be an added-value verification system, tha... See more We should be so lucky. Here's Lucia's latest reply to my test case:
"Thanks for the details, I am looking into it now. I am thoroughly documenting reports of abuse like yours to be able to take action when the first improvements to the Native Speaker Credential system that Jared mentions in the forum can be introduced."
No action to be taken on anyone until we get a new system - and Jared's already said that the new system will be an added-value verification system, that there will be no attempt to purge existing problems.
There is at present no way to deal with an case of misrepresentation on a profile. And no proposal to create a way to deal with it.
[Edited at 2012-07-19 01:12 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:02
Hebrew to English
| So, the "snitching system" is pointless? | Jul 19, 2012 |
Phil Hand wrote:
We should be so lucky. Here's Lucia's latest reply to my test case:
"Thanks for the details, I am looking into it now. I am thoroughly documenting reports of abuse like yours to be able to take action when the first improvements to the Native Speaker Credential system that Jared mentions in the forum can be introduced."
No action to be taken on anyone until we get a new system - and Jared's already said that the new system will be an added-value verification system, that there will be no attempt to purge existing problems.
There is at present no way to deal with an case of misrepresentation on a profile. And no proposal to create a way to deal with it.
[Edited at 2012-07-19 01:12 GMT]
I don't understand how there can be no way to tackle misrepresentation on a profile.
I mean, it's a site rule. How can there be no way to:
a) enforce it
b) take action against those who flout it
They manage to do this with other site rules, why not this one?
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:02
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Clear as mud | Jul 19, 2012 |
So they’re not purging the system but are happy to have cases reported (?). Under the “new system”, “there will be no attempt to purge existing problems” yet they’re “thoroughly documenting reports of abuse like [Phil’s] to be able to take action when the first improvements to the Native Speaker Credential system that Jared mentions in the forum can be introduced." (?) I’d like to know what the proposed “action” would be.
Well, let’s see how my test case goes... See more So they’re not purging the system but are happy to have cases reported (?). Under the “new system”, “there will be no attempt to purge existing problems” yet they’re “thoroughly documenting reports of abuse like [Phil’s] to be able to take action when the first improvements to the Native Speaker Credential system that Jared mentions in the forum can be introduced." (?) I’d like to know what the proposed “action” would be.
Well, let’s see how my test case goes. This is someone who is evidently not an English native speaker, claims credentials that don’t exist, from institutions that don’t exist and is… a Certified Pro. I was invited by staff to come up with an example of someone who didn’t meet “minimum professional standards”, having commented on another forum that the Certified Pro network by its own admission had translators who couldn’t even call themselves “good”. I quote from the FAQs on joining the network:
"How good does a translator / a company have to be to be admitted into the Certified PRO Network? Are only elite translators / companies admitted?
The level screened for inclusion into the network is not "good" or "elite" but "adequate"."
Now an outsourcer reading that will surely be asking themselves what the rest offer if the red Ps are only “adequate”. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Kirsten Bodart
United Kingdom
Local time: 14:02
Dutch to English
+ ...
| Going round in circles | Jul 19, 2012 |
If we are going round in circles and some people keep calling genuine attempts to get to the bottom of this issue, 'irrelevant', because these attempts do not suit their black-and-white approach, then it is evident we are discussing something that is clear on the surface and becomes more difficult as you start to ask more pertinent questions.
As long as you don't know what a 'non-native' mistake is, you can't verify whether there is one. I keep saying it.
Therefore you are ess... See more If we are going round in circles and some people keep calling genuine attempts to get to the bottom of this issue, 'irrelevant', because these attempts do not suit their black-and-white approach, then it is evident we are discussing something that is clear on the surface and becomes more difficult as you start to ask more pertinent questions.
As long as you don't know what a 'non-native' mistake is, you can't verify whether there is one. I keep saying it.
Therefore you are essentially discussing nothing. Bruegel's painting of the blind leading the blind springs inadvertently to mind.
As nobody knows (now picture big question marks on a screen) what they are actually looking for in a non-native, apart from the 'very obvious' cases (a threshold no-one actually agrees about either), it is pretty pointless to start verification or to even ask proz to do so. If we don't know, they don't know or are the moderators intellectual wonders, cleverer even than any top linguist in the world?
What has now been concluded after 60 pages (!), I knew from the first, and I am sure the more discerning and less simplistic amongst us knew it as well.
Besides, once you know what to verify, you have to get an appeal procedure in place (because where there is rejection, there are appeals). Then Proz needs some more staff to be able to deal with this and fees go up. Then it is the question whether anyone would like to pay for this.
As to Conrad (I keep mentioning him): the link did not at all back up the idea that his work would have contained 'Polish-isms' (if that is indeed a word). The article only implied that there was a startling preciseness of language in his work that is Slavic, or maybe French. However, that does not at all mean that his sentence structure is skewed. Far from, in fact, judging by the few things I have seen. Maybe there is some Slavic passion behind it all, that is profoundly un-English (as it has been called), but that is not what we are looking for, is it?
The comments of a member on TC concerning Conrad and other non-native English writers, that they had editors who edited their work would possibly be more relevant in this case, although I have not found any argument on paper to back up that claim.
At any rate Mary Shelley had her work edited by her husband, and she was native. Spouses and friends often expressed their opinion about works, even edited them. We are not talking of re-writing them.
If the Certified Pro badge implies 'adequate' quality, I as an outsourcer would recognise that that badge does not guarantee me quality, so I would accept the fact that I am on the internet. That I can find some gems and could also get siome dung if I am not careful. That, as in all business situations, I have to crack some eggs to make my omelet. And sometimes there will be a rotten egg I haven't noticed and my omelet will be ruined.
If I personally can see there are certain non-certified professionals on this site who are at least as good as those who are, then I am sure outsourcers can see that as well. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:02
Hebrew to English
| Non-native mistakes HAVE been defined | Jul 19, 2012 |
Repeatedly.
You don't have to believe us, go to Google (google scholar if you must) and search for academic literature (usually pedagogically based) about "non-native errors" and "error analysis". It's there for all to see.
And please, stop mentioning Conrad. A handful of decent non-native writers in English no way justifies allowing misrepresentation and deceit on this site. I'm pretty sure Conrad himself wouldn't want his name being used for such justif... See more Repeatedly.
You don't have to believe us, go to Google (google scholar if you must) and search for academic literature (usually pedagogically based) about "non-native errors" and "error analysis". It's there for all to see.
And please, stop mentioning Conrad. A handful of decent non-native writers in English no way justifies allowing misrepresentation and deceit on this site. I'm pretty sure Conrad himself wouldn't want his name being used for such justification, so let's desist with the Conrad-talk.
Anyway, I wouldn't panic too much - it's quite clear from the last few posts that the consequence of misrepresentation on this site is currently - and for the foreseeable future will be: diddly squat.
The liars can sleep easy tonight.
*If there is a silver lining to this rather large and dark cloud, then it's that maybe, just maybe, something will eventually be done to combat it; eventually being the operative word.
[Edited at 2012-07-19 12:41 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Rules that will affect 43% of people in a language pair are too expensive to enforce | Jul 19, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote: Phil Hand wrote:
We should be so lucky. Here's Lucia's latest reply to my test case:
"Thanks for the details, I am looking into it now. I am thoroughly documenting reports of abuse like yours to be able to take action when the first improvements to the Native Speaker Credential system that Jared mentions in the forum can be introduced."
No action to be taken on anyone until we get a new system - and Jared's already said that the new system will be an added-value verification system, that there will be no attempt to purge existing problems.
There is at present no way to deal with an case of misrepresentation on a profile. And no proposal to create a way to deal with it.
[Edited at 2012-07-19 01:12 GMT] I don't understand how there can be no way to tackle misrepresentation on a profile. I mean, it's a site rule. How can there be no way to: a) enforce it b) take action against those who flout it They manage to do this with other site rules, why not this one?
This rule won't be enforced because it may cause large numbers of paying members to stop paying. When 43-45% of people in a language pair are making bogus native language claims, enforcing a rule to make them tell the truth could be very costly (in monetary terms). People have opted to lie to get jobs dishonestly/fool (potential) clients and if they are suddenly forced to 'tell the truth' and post their actual native language and not the one(s) they have wished upon themselves, they may decide that paying for Proz no longer 'pays'. So the lies will continue to be there and even embellished if someone feels that's the best thing to do. Nothing will stop people from revamping/tweaking their profile page in an attempt to give credence to their false claim. Is there any way for Proz to verify all the info and make sure it's true? I think that's impossible. So the lies will continue to be tolerated and people's right to tell them will be officially backed. There are rules that are speedily enforced to stop people from casting doubts or making remarks openly or even via private messages.
So, should native language claims be verified? Yes, if professionalism matters. But will they be? No, apparently. Imo, (yet) another colour-coded 'symbol' will only serve to help make the false claims look 'official', which means the 'symbol' would ultimately be counterproductive.
| | | | | 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? | 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 » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
