| 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)
|
|---|
| Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member for the following reason: http://www.proz.com/siterules/general/2#2 | | Often, translating out of one's native language is a bad business proposition, | Aug 2, 2012 |
at least to me. If I can translate, say, X words from Spanish to English per hour, I can do at least twice that many number of words in the reverse direction in the same time. Add to that the additional review time necessary to be reasonably (but never 100%) sure that I have eliminated most of the “non-native errors”, and then getting the translation, at my own expense, reviewed by an English native colleague, to eliminate any remaining non-native errors, translating out of my native langua... See more at least to me. If I can translate, say, X words from Spanish to English per hour, I can do at least twice that many number of words in the reverse direction in the same time. Add to that the additional review time necessary to be reasonably (but never 100%) sure that I have eliminated most of the “non-native errors”, and then getting the translation, at my own expense, reviewed by an English native colleague, to eliminate any remaining non-native errors, translating out of my native language is a lousy business proposition, again, at least to me. If I need extra money, I can as well accept those lousy, unprofessional rates often offer through ProZ or other sources, something that I have always refused.
Even in a “tech” area such as law, where certainly I can render an “absolutely” correct translation of a contract clause, many of the documents intend to convince the reader (the decision-maker) of the legal rights of the client. Said reader often is a person who is, or believe to be, a busy person, but who has decision power. A judge can be forgiven when the “content-right, yet “style-wrong”) writing is produced by a “pro se” defendant, but he or she will never be forgiven when the writing is submitted by an attorney: “Counsel, you are in front of an English-speaking court, speak proper English (of course, not necessarily Queen´s English).” Style is never irrelevant, but paramount.
Is it really better that a document be translated by a person who is not a native speaker of the target language, but who has subject matter expertise? Maybe. You be the judge:
Last month, an agency sent me a couple of files, asking me to retranslate (EN>ES) a patent application, which had been prosecuted for about three years in a Spanish speaking country. The application had been finally rejected as ambiguous, wrongly translated, unable to clearly identify the invention and support the claims. The agency sent me also the original translation, for reference only. I was told they did not want that I edit the translation, but to produce a new true and correct translation. I took a look at the original translation. There were not “tech errors”. The translator knew the technical subject. It was also clear to me that he or she knew how to translate patent applications and had done it in the past, in another pair, probably the reversed one.
The translation, though, clearly indicated it had not been done by a native speaker of the target (Spanish) language. Nouns were assigned the wrong grammatical gender. Present participles were used “Anglo style,” with phrases such as “a material containing X is heated to 100 °C” translated as: “un material conteniendo X es calentado a 100 °C.” I leave to the Spanish speakers in this thread to opine re this translation. Those types of errors were everywhere on the application. The style was simply English-like, with word repetitions in a sentence (a no-no in Spanish) all over the map. Finally, the end-result was a collection of ambiguities, violating the basic patent principle that the inventor must clearly indicate what the inventor claims to be his or her invention. Is it really innocuous, harmless to the client, to claim a self-deluded mastery of a language? Is it really harmless to have the end-client prosecute for three years a patent application just to be asked in the end by the examiner to start all over again, after paying for three years to their attorneys and losing three years of patent validity (as a general rule, patents, if granted, are valid 20 years form the filing) just because the translator decided he or she was able to translate out of his or her native language. Again, you be the judge.
Certainly, a misrepresentation of one’s linguistics abilities is not the only misrepresentation in ProZ profiles. Claims as being a specialist in legal translation based on having translated a couple of birth certificates (legal documents after all) come to mind. Or “puffing”, common in used car salesmen but unacceptable in ads by professionals, such as “I am completing a four-year program in…,” meaning “I have just enrolled in the program, in 4 years or a little later, I will have it.”
I have no turf to protect, but I do not want to keep been asked: “What is a “nice” translator as you doing in a place like that (ProZ).” I am sure that ProZ’s management does not like it either.
Greetings,
Luis ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Yes, you are right, Luis, if somebody translated just a few Birth Certificates | Aug 2, 2012 |
that's a total misrepresentation of of being a legal translator. You really need a long-term experience in a law firm, or working freelance for law firms, various courses, studying the legal vocabulary in both the target and the source languages, legal writing classes in the target language, and anything that would help to become a successful legal translator. People who translate very complex legal contracts, translate Birth Certificates from time to time as well.
| | | | | we need a sensible discussion | Aug 2, 2012 |
LilianBoland wrote:
Klingon is a fictitious language, which is equivalent to no language, no real language declared as native. I would not declare German or French, or Spanish. Klingon is just a metaphor for no real language.
I cannot declare a language I have not been speaking other than at certain hearings or conferences, for the last twenty something years, and that I haven't written anything serious in for thirty years, as my only native language. That would be a lie.
Strange reasoning.
You're saying you now still speak the language you used to speak on a daily basis twenty some years ago, but that you do not speak it very often.
Then you use that as your reason not to claim it as your ONLY native language.
Or, turning it around, you mean to say that for the last 20 years, you've been mainly speaking another/a second language on a daily basis, I presume English, and that you hardly ever speak the language of your childhood and formative years. The fact that you've been speaking English for twenty some years is in itself not a sufficient reason to claim English as your native language nor is it a sensible reason to not claim your first language as your ONLY native language.
Your reasoning is, to say the least, incomplete.
Here is how I see it:
language A: language spoken as a child, almost completely stopped using it as an adult
language B: acquired in your late teens or as a young adult and currently used as your main language
The fact that you haven't been speaking language A frequently over the last 20 years but have mainly been speaking language B as an adult (for about 20 years now)
a) doesn't make language B your native language
b) doesn't make language B an additional native language
c) doesn't necessarily mean you can still claim language A as your native language (although you might just be "rusty" in language A)
You might no longer have a native language.
Many colleagues and I have tried to explain what we and IMO the vast majority of people everywhere will consider as one's "native language" and how it is acquired (early in life). Your English language skills might be good but they are not on a par (and can't be) with other native speakers writing in this thread.
My English isn't shabby at all but I will never claim it as my native language. I actually feel good about having German as my native language and, in addition, speak a second language as well as I do and have the privilege of living in an English-speaking culture.
But you keep claiming English as your native language.
Unfortunately, so do many other people who really shouldn't claim it either. Many might not even be on a par with you as far as English language skills are concerned. But that distinction doesn't matter, it doesn't make those who speak English better than others automatically "native speakers."
As I said many times before, the only way to end this problem is by verifying native languages.
The result will show if you can/cannot be considered a native speaker of the language(s) you claim as your native languages - in the sense the vast majority understands "native language".
What we're saying is no-one should claim a language as native language if it is not.
And I believe you should try to warm up to the concept of native language as we understand it because you're pretty much alone with your own definition (or lack of a reasonable definition).
And please don't say things like "I think you should declare the language you feel is your native language" because I'm sure you mean "whatever language you feel is your native language" even if everybody else is telling you that your feeling is simply wrong.
And please, don't try to continuously confuse the native language issue with the issue of "what languages a translator should translate from and into." Even though these issues are related because many believe you should only translate into your native language (unless you collaborate with a native speaker of the target language), that's not the issue at hand.
The issue at hand is "false native language claims" - the point is "truth" equals "professionalism",
"lies" equal "unprofessional behavior", the latter seriously undermining/hurting our image and business.
I am disappointed that you don't seem to want to engage in a sensible discussion.
B
[Edited at 2012-08-03 05:30 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
LilianBoland wrote:
Klingon is a fictitious language, which is equivalent to no language, no real language declared as native. I would not declare German or French, or Spanish. Klingon is just a metaphor for no real language.
I’m not sure if everyone would interpret it this way. If this were really true, then no one would be able to claim Esperanto as their native language either, yet there is such a thing as a native Esperanto speaker.
By the way, if Wikipedia’s entry on Klingon is credible, someone actually tried to bring a native Klingon speaker into existence but failed; so the probability of having one in the future is actually nonzero.
[Edited at 2012-08-02 23:36 GMT]
| | | | | what is misleading | Aug 2, 2012 |
Ambrose Li wrote:
Well, I’m one of those people who decided to put no native language on my profile. Putting my actual native language in there would be more misleading than putting English there. So what can I do? No native language.
Hi Ambrose,
What is misleading is if you were to declare a language as your native language that is in fact not your native language.
It is never misleading if you declare your real native language.
If Chinese is your native language (the language you acquired as a child), then that's your native language. If it is English, it is English. If it's both, it's both (although it would require a very unique upbringing).
I can only surmise what you consider misleading. As a translator, I am sure you use both these languages. You probably have an excellent command of both languages but one is the language you spoke during your formative years and in school (somewhere between ages 2 and 14).
If Chinese is your NL:
There might be good reasons why you translate from Chinese into English (maybe in addition to translating from English into Chinese). In your case, this might be acceptable because of your skills and the fact that you live in Canada and because of how the Chinese< >English market works. You might even collaborate with native English speakers.
It's not misleading if you put the facts out there. It's what you can offer. There are many who can't offer what you can because they don't have the unique advantages you have (location is an English-speaking country, NL is Chinese, command of English is excellent).
I tried to find you in the directory, but my search for NS of Chinese (source language English, target language Chinese) did not show you on any directory pages. I wonder if that's because you didn't declare a native language. That would be a pity.
B
[Edited at 2012-08-03 05:08 GMT]
| | | | Ty Kendall 
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:48
Hebrew to English
| When a fact isn't a fact | Aug 2, 2012 |
LilianBoland wrote:
Many Russian people change their names altogether
They sure do, look at Anna Chapman  ...everyone has their own motivation to anglicize their name
I am sure there aren't many liars on this site -- just people who are being accused of something, unjustly.
Erm, what site are you on?
Maybe I should also change my location, because people may think that I probably speak very good English, if I have been living in New York for the last twenty seven years.
I don't think there's any danger of that....most people here wouldn't jump to such a simplistic and baseless conclusion.
It is very hard to translate form very close languages.
It's even harder to translate from very divergent languages.
Klingon is a fictitious language
False. Klingon is very real. Constructed like so many other conlangs, such as Esperanto. The "universe" which spawned it might be fictional, but the actual language isn't.
It might be even illegal in the US to tell a person what heir screen name should be like
Why is everything you don't like illegal in your universe? (I guarantee you it isn't illegal btw in the real world).
[Edited at 2012-08-03 07:27 GMT]
| | | |
LilianBoland wrote:
Maybe not in Germany, Bernhard, or France, and a few other countries, but teenagers in many European countries speak English better now than their own native languages, and they have more interest in learning English, or reading books in English than in their native tongues.
That's just a very wrong statement: "They speak English better than their own native language"? Ridiculous. Students learn a very limited version of English in school and through their own studies but English is NOT the official language in most secondary and tertiary schooling institutions and students are NOT better in English than in their own native language. Hilarious idea.
The English these youngsters learn is absolutely limited when you compare it with youngsters in English-speaking countries, in every respect.
There is no shift in the "official" languages of non-English-speaking Europe.
LilianBoland wrote:
I don't know how many high schools there are in Europe where the language of instruction is English -- there are some. I have not been to Europe for twenty years. This is what people have been telling me, and what I read.
Who is telling you that? Where are you reading that?
There are a few schools. I give you that. But that doesn't mean that people attending these schools become native speakers of English or start speaking English better than their own non-English native language. Absurd.
I lived in Europe, recently. I lived there for 10 months, 3 years ago. People living in non-English speaking countries are not becoming native speakers of English nor are they increasingly speaking better English than their native language.
And please, don't say now that Poles speak better English than Polish.
You can't be serious.
B
[Edited at 2012-08-03 06:41 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Marina Steinbach
United States
Local time: 05:48
Member (2011)
English to German
| You are absolutely right! | Aug 3, 2012 |
Cetacea wrote:
Not a wiseass at all
You're absolutely right! It was not my intention to insult Michele. I understand "Klogschieter" as defined at dict.cc: http://www.dict.cc/?s=klogschieter
However, some "wise guys" might some day turn out to be "wiseasses" in the end. But how would I know? I'm simply a native German speaker and thus have no clue what so ever!
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:48
Hebrew to English
| Tumbleweed..........? | Aug 3, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote: LilianBoland wrote:
some of you just go by dictionaries, instead of linguistic research. ...point me to the linguistic research where is says that native language is just any language you identify with, regardless of level attained.
I won't hold my breath.
| | | | S E (X)
Italy
Local time: 11:48
Italian to English
| Lilian: you need to read and respond to other people's posts more carefully and more responsibly ... | Aug 3, 2012 |
... your behaviour is bordering on trolling.
LilianBoland wrote:
And, I absolutely agree with Ari -- if anybody from England or Australia prepared US legal documents they would not sound right or "native at all" -- even documents prepared by regular users of AE born here who had nothing to do with law would not sound "native".
Who is 'Ari' and where did he or she write this? If you are referring to Luis Arri Cibils, his post about English Legalese had absolutely nothing to do with people from England or Australia preparing US legal documents.
You have misunderstood his entire post and attributed an argument to him (your personal argument) which he has not even come close to making. I should hope that in your work you read source texts more carefully than this.
LilianBoland wrote:
You could choose any screen name you want -- it is not only that you are ... , Michele, but you don't know the rules either.
Michele's post about site rules and fraud - as is blatantly clear - was not referring to screen names but rather to false native language claims. Again, you have entirely, apparently wilfully, misread a post, falsely attributed an argument to another person and, what's more, accused this same person of being prejudiced!
LilianBoland wrote:
I am sure there aren't many liars on this site -- just people who are being accused of something, unjustly.
Lilian, you have been registered at proz.com for all of 3 months. Unless you were previously registered and active on the site under a different name, you might consider that the people contributing to this thread have been actively involved in this site for a more sustained period of time and through this active involvement have come to recognize a serious problem, one that is harmful to the professional image of the site, and then some.
The issue under discussion in this thread is a recognized problem on the site (as well as in the translation industry overall), namely people who claim native languages that are in fact patently - judging by their written output - not their native languages.
Once again (it is rather shocking that you have still not grasped this point), this is not about whether or not people can translate into non-native languages. And for the most part, with notable exceptions, it is not about 'stealing jobs'. What it is about is professional integrity and honesty.
Your repeated assertion that this thread is about something that it is not is no less unsavoury (to put it mildly) than the instances in which you have falsely attributed words and arguments to others. Misrepresentation of this kind is, if not the very thing itself, extremely close to trolling. Take heed.
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 17:48
Chinese to English
| Well said that woman | Aug 3, 2012 |
Sarah Elizabeth Cree wrote:
Once again (it is rather shocking that you have still not grasped this point), this is not about whether or not people can translate into non-native languages. And for the most part, with notable exceptions, it is not about 'stealing jobs'. What it is about is professional integrity and honesty.
We could almost stipulate all of these claims about what native is and its importance relative to subject knowledge.
What everyone on the other side of the argument needs to ask themselves is: if a (potential) client asks you a direct question about yourself: "are you a native speaker of English?" do you think it's OK to lie to them?
| | |
|
|
|
S E (X)
Italy
Local time: 11:48
Italian to English
| native language, lingua franca, working language | Aug 3, 2012 |
Regarding the repeated insistence from certain quarters that one's 'native language' is/can be that in which one received their university education, or, more specifically, 'the one in which one can write a dissertation': it would seem that this argument is confusing 'native language' with 'working language' and/or perhaps 'lingua franca'.
In the Middle Ages, Provençal was a standard and literary language used at courts throughout parts of Europe - would an Italian troubadour writi... See more Regarding the repeated insistence from certain quarters that one's 'native language' is/can be that in which one received their university education, or, more specifically, 'the one in which one can write a dissertation': it would seem that this argument is confusing 'native language' with 'working language' and/or perhaps 'lingua franca'.
In the Middle Ages, Provençal was a standard and literary language used at courts throughout parts of Europe - would an Italian troubadour writing professionally in Provençal have considered Occitan his native language? For that matter, since Latin was the language of religion and scholarship throughout the Middle Ages, would those using it have declared themselves native Latin speakers? Of course these questions are a bit unfair, because the issue at hand is a modern one, not a medieval one. My point is that, historically, people have worked at the very highest professional levels in languages such as Provençal and Latin without it being or needing to be the case that these languages were considered their 'native languages'.
To put a finer point on it, a 'language that one has mastered for professional purposes' and a 'native language' are two separate, if often overlapping, categories.
Taking the argument to the present day, what is this claim that there is a connection between being able to write a dissertation in, say, English, and being a native English speaker?
In my seven years as a doctoral student at Yale University, and in my time as an MA student at the University of Chicago (a period overall comprising the years between 2001 and 2010), dozens of my colleagues were from non-English speaking countries. They had to take an English proficiency test in their first year of the program (here I am speaking of Yale), and had to write all of their seminar papers and their dissertation in English.
Do my colleagues now claim to be native English speakers? No. Many of these colleagues are now professors at universities and colleges throughout the US. Do they now claim to be native English speakers? No. They are not, so they would not - but then again: it matters not.
Professional competency in a language is not equal to being a native speaker of that language.
And when a person's written output is so riddled (or even just peppered) with non-native mistakes and grammatical constructions that it is clear to native and non-native speakers alike that the writer is not native, however high their level of mastery, it boggles the mind that said person would persist in claiming to be a native!
As so eloquently expressed by Ambrose Li here, where a declaration would be deceptive, the solution is to leave off the declaration. Let your work speak for itself, without resorting to dishonesty and deception. ▲ Collapse
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:48
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Testing English proficiency | Aug 3, 2012 |
I put forward a suggestion from someone who is banned from posting on this forum and cannot therefore contribute to the discussion:
"Why couldn't all English native speakers be invited to prove
their
level of English proficiency in the IELTS exam. Then this
credential ... See more I put forward a suggestion from someone who is banned from posting on this forum and cannot therefore contribute to the discussion:
"Why couldn't all English native speakers be invited to prove
their
level of English proficiency in the IELTS exam. Then this
credential could be verified.
http://www.examenglish.com/IELTS/IELTS_Band_Scores.html " ▲ Collapse
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:48
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Sarah Elizabeth Cree wrote: As so eloquently expressed by Ambrose Li here, where a declaration would be deceptive, the solution is to leave off the declaration. Let your work speak for itself, without resorting to dishonesty and deception.
...from a technical point of view, how does that currently work on the site? How does Ambrose get filtered for jobs when outsourcers are seeking, for example, an English native speaker? What are the implications of not declaring any native language at all? It does take us back to David's suggestion much earlier in the thread and, if I'm not mistaken, the stumbling-block was job/directory filtering.
| | | | | 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? | 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! » |
| | 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 
