| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] > | Methods for verifying "native language" claims Thread poster: psicutrinius
|
|---|
rabbas wrote:
I am not suggesting a test, because as you say we cannot ensure that it is their produciton. But in their usage of the language when, for example, posting on proz.com etc..
And what if they are not active on the site, don't participate in the forums or KudoZ?
| | | |
Katalin Horváth McClure wrote:
I have not read all the postings in this thread, but I have a short question.
If the test for "native" credential is basically a piece of writing, how can it be ensured (in a practical way) that it is actually written by the person being evaluated for the credential?
I couldn't agree more. Any 'test' done via the www is open to abuse. Imo there is no way to ensure honesty in any aspect of this problem. I fear those determined to lie have won. However people do recognise non-native blunders in their own native language. Poor writing by natives has a different set of mistakes. The more the fake natives write on this site, the more they show how native they are not..... But they are secure in their right to make a bogus claim, especially if they limit themselves to claiming a single language.
After all these pages, I see no hope of sorting out this problem. Instead I see on the home page list of 'new members' that when new people join in one of my language pairs in particular, they are routinely listing two native languages, their own and mine. Seems to be 'the thing to do'.
| | | | | practical improvements are certainly possible | Aug 11, 2012 |
writeaway wrote: Katalin Horváth McClure wrote:
I have not read all the postings in this thread, but I have a short question.
If the test for "native" credential is basically a piece of writing, how can it be ensured (in a practical way) that it is actually written by the person being evaluated for the credential? I couldn't agree more. Any 'test' done via the www is open to abuse. Imo there is no way to ensure honesty in any aspect of this problem. I fear those determined to lie have won. However people do recognise non-native blunders in their own native language. Poor writing by natives has a different set of mistakes. The more the fake natives write on this site, the more they show how native they are not..... But they are secure in their right to make a bogus claim, especially if they limit themselves to claiming a single language. After all these pages, I see no hope of sorting out this problem. Instead I see on the home page list of 'new members' that when new people join in one of my language pairs in particular, they are routinely listing two native languages, their own and mine. Seems to be 'the thing to do'.
They are listing two native languages because that's what's possible. People always do what's possible. If you're only allowed to declare one native language (at a time), then it's a little bit different. You can only claim ONE.
With two unverified languages, nobody is being verified because it's not YET possible.
If it were possible, I argue, fewer people would declare two native languages to start with, and fewer people would lie (granted, my theory, but if you know you will have to verify these languages before peers, you might think it's not a very good idea to lie about it.)
Regarding the argument that the liars have won: as far as the status quo is concerned, you're right. But that's what a lot of people are trying to change and we shouldn't give up.
Facts:
a) everbody has at least one native language (unless they lost the proficiency of that language) and
b) it can be determined fairly easily what that language is, by checking
1) where you are born
2) where and when you went to school
3) where you have lived up to this point.
4) adding sworn statement and e-signature
Suggestions:
Will there be liars? Yes.
Will there be as many liars as before? No.
Will there be consequences for liars who are found out? Yes. They will be banned from the site.
If it turns out that someone zipped back and forth between different countries in his/her formative years, or learned two or more languages "simultaneously" during their formative years, then let them declare a SINGLE native language and have it verified based on a questionnaire with the condition that it must be re-verified before peers if they decide, in the future, to add another language as native language. That goes for those also who want to declare more than one native language at the same time.
Method of verification before peers (suggestions):
1) in person, at a powwow, by talking to native language peers.
2) in person, at a powwow, by writing a sample essay and submitting it to Proz.com for verification (Proz.com will give it to recognized native language peers). Essay will be reviewed by native language peers chosen by Proz.com.
3) online, with unique usernames and passwords, by writing an essay in real time, adding sworn statement and e-signature.
4) If the applicant has been active in the forums of the claimed native language, have his/her contributions evaluated by verified native language peers.
If the majority here thinks that 3) is unaccepatable and that even single-native-language speakers ought to be verified, so be it.
But to simply give up and keep the status quo is not acceptable to me. And I'm convinced things will indeed change soon.
Regarding having EVERONE verified by peers:
The problem with this is that no one could display a verified native language credential until it is verified but you can't really deny a true native speaker to apply for native language jobs, be listed as such in the directory and in the profiles. I mean you can but we already have too many SINGLE native language speakers and taking these rights away from them seems unnecessary and not a good policy for anyone.
So, you would either have no language displayed until after verification, or you get an "unverified" icon. Don't know how true language speakers feel about that.
I for one would not want to give up my "verified" icon. I'd be willing to re-verify though by one of the methods I propose or possibly other methods.
In case a "re-verified" speaker is found to be "non-native", he would lose his/her VNS credential in that language and would not be allowed the rights that come with it.
I don't think that's what we should aim for for now. We should get rid of the "unlimited unverified native language status" for two or more languages.
Whereas declaration and verification of a single native language should still be possible without verification before/by peers, no one should be allowed to simply remain as "unverified" native language speaker of two or more languages "forever" with all the rights that come with it. Verification of two or more languages before peers must be mandatory, after a relatively short grace period.
Before the end of the grace period, you can change your mind and only apply to verify (before peers) ONE native language instead. But you have to prove it before peers because you had claimed/declared two native languages before.
If a person only had one single "verified" native language credential and then wants to claim another one, both would have to be (re-)verified before peers.
I don't think these postings here are in vain. They will all help to make improvements. That's my humble opinion.
B
[Edited at 2012-08-12 02:13 GMT]
| | | | | Back to the original question of "HOW" - use an actual authority | Aug 12, 2012 |
I want to throw an idea out here.
Since ProZ.com is not a linguistic authority by any means, I am not sure it could actually "verify" or "certify" any sort of language ability/proficiency without incurring liability risks.
Wouldn't it be a logical approach to use an actual certification authority and accept their judgement instead of trying to reinvent the wheel?
(This is the same idea that is used to verify other credentials - ProZ checks the certificates provided by 3r... See more I want to throw an idea out here.
Since ProZ.com is not a linguistic authority by any means, I am not sure it could actually "verify" or "certify" any sort of language ability/proficiency without incurring liability risks.
Wouldn't it be a logical approach to use an actual certification authority and accept their judgement instead of trying to reinvent the wheel?
(This is the same idea that is used to verify other credentials - ProZ checks the certificates provided by 3rd party entities, and accepts their judgement, end of discussion.)
I am thinking about the ILR scale, please see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ILR_scale
Level 5 indicates native or bilingual proficiency.
This website details the history of the scale, and the various areas where it can be used, such as reading, speaking, listening, writing, translation performance, interpretation performance, competence in intercultural communication, as well as definitions for the levels:
http://www.govtilr.org/Skills/IRL%20Scale%20History.htm
Remember, these levels and definitions are used (among others) for US government, defense and intelligence jobs, so I doubt they would be phony. It seems to me they have much more teeth than whatever ProZ.com could come up with, especially because it would be hard for ProZ.com to assume responsibility for the correctness of the results.
If there is a third-party agency, company, institute, etc. that performs proficiency testing including up to Level 5 of the ILR scale, maybe ProZ should accept test results from them. I think an outside, independent assessment has a better chance of ensuring fair and objective testing, plus it removes any liability worries that ProZ.com may have by "verifying"/"certifying" anything, because the liability lies with the actual testing entity.
I searched and found that ACTFL performs ILR-conforming testing, in fact I know some ProZ members who actually work for this company as testers.
http://www.actfl.org
What I am not sure is whether they conduct tests for Level 5, but that question is something that a phonecall could easily resolve.
Third party testing would not be free (although I believe any reliable testing would incur costs), but perhaps ProZ could have an arrangement for discounts if there are a large number of people willing to be tested).
There may be other entities to consider.
Katalin
[Edited at 2012-08-12 17:18 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| I only enjoy translating into my mother tongue | Aug 12, 2012 |
I really don't care if my second language is of a native level or not (which, judging by your comments, it could well be).
I only enjoy translating into my native language; translating into Spanish is just work. I don't like having to reset dictionaries, Word, etc. into a different language. Both my mobile and my PC are in English and they help me to feel more connected with my mother tongue and the life I lived thirty-odd years ago. The good ol' days?
Spanish is the l... See more I really don't care if my second language is of a native level or not (which, judging by your comments, it could well be).
I only enjoy translating into my native language; translating into Spanish is just work. I don't like having to reset dictionaries, Word, etc. into a different language. Both my mobile and my PC are in English and they help me to feel more connected with my mother tongue and the life I lived thirty-odd years ago. The good ol' days?
Spanish is the language I speak every day but English is 'my' language: the language that my family (husband, daughters and grandchildren) don't share with me. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | You cannot use forum posts and probably even | Aug 12, 2012 |
Kudoz answers for any other purposes than the things were originally meant for -- exchange of opinions, and helping people with their vocabulary questions. This is not only unethical, but in many countries illegal -- unauthorized use of written material.
| | | | | nobody is forcing you to submit to it | Aug 13, 2012 |
LilianBoland wrote:
Kudoz answers for any other purposes than the things were originally meant for -- exchange of opinions, and helping people with their vocabulary questions. This is not only unethical, but in many countries illegal -- unauthorized use of written material.
1) It would be "Proz.com-"internal" (you will probably have to become a member)
2) Verification of two or more languages is optional (and will be, in the future, based on Jared's comments in the other thread).
3) The value of the native language credential is also limited to Proz.com (internal credential) and carries no weight outside Proz.com, meaning you won't be able to say "because you have a verified native language credential from Proz.com", it serves as proof outside Proz.com. with respect to what your native language(s) is/are.
If Proz.com installs, as one option, verification of two or more native languages through native peer reviews of your forum contributions, it will certainly be based on an agreement with you: Example: Applicant X agrees to verification of his/her forum posts by eligible native language peers for the purpose of verification of applicant's native language(s) ...".
And remember, as a Proz.com member, you agree to rules and policies stipulated by Proz.com.
You can be sure there's nothing illegal about it.
B
[Edited at 2012-08-14 01:43 GMT]
| | | | | Thank you, Bernhard. This is wonderful that nobody will be forced to do anything | Aug 13, 2012 |
and people can keep their real native languages in the unverified form. No one can still use any forum entries, or perhaps even any Kudoz answers, to certify anybody's native language -- unless this particular individual agrees to it -- not just the members as a whole.
I also checked with a friend of mine who is an English professor at one of the US universities,and he said that everybody who has education in English from a US university is considered a native speaker of English, i... See more and people can keep their real native languages in the unverified form. No one can still use any forum entries, or perhaps even any Kudoz answers, to certify anybody's native language -- unless this particular individual agrees to it -- not just the members as a whole.
I also checked with a friend of mine who is an English professor at one of the US universities,and he said that everybody who has education in English from a US university is considered a native speaker of English, if the person wants to be considered one.
If someone wants to claim native fluency in another language -- in addition to English, they have to show their high school diploma from another country where the language was the language of instruction to authorized university personnel. If a person does not have high school education in L1 they cannot claim native language fluency in that language for any professional purposes -- perhaps just call it native as an emotional thing, or for ethnic or identity reasons. There is no way to test anyone's native language, and no school he knew of does it in the United States. It is being done just to assess some remedial course for children who have difficulties with English, not to give anyone any kind of professional credentials related to employment.
[Edited at 2012-08-13 21:35 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Sheila Wilson 
Spain
Local time: 08:45
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
LilianBoland wrote:
Kudoz answers for any other purposes than the things were originally meant for -- exchange of opinions, and helping people with their vocabulary questions. This is not only unethical, but in many countries illegal -- unauthorized use of written material.
Surely, it's illegal to keep declaring everything illegal, isn't it?
| | | | | Don't you see, Sheila, how unethical it is | Aug 13, 2012 |
I personally don't believe many people are lying -- just your idea of a native language (you -- in a generic sense, of many people) is somehow outdated and misunderstood.
If you want to prove something you have to use legal, ethical methods, and you have to have basis to call something a lie. I don't think anybody should lie, at all, but with your strict rules 50% of people would be left without a native language. Plus I don't like the methods proposed -- some of them are really sl... See more I personally don't believe many people are lying -- just your idea of a native language (you -- in a generic sense, of many people) is somehow outdated and misunderstood.
If you want to prove something you have to use legal, ethical methods, and you have to have basis to call something a lie. I don't think anybody should lie, at all, but with your strict rules 50% of people would be left without a native language. Plus I don't like the methods proposed -- some of them are really sleazy, like spying on people. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 08:45
Hebrew to English
| Isn't that illegal? - LOL | Aug 14, 2012 |
Sheila Wilson wrote: LilianBoland wrote:
Kudoz answers for any other purposes than the things were originally meant for -- exchange of opinions, and helping people with their vocabulary questions. This is not only unethical, but in many countries illegal -- unauthorized use of written material. Surely, it's illegal to keep declaring everything illegal, isn't it?
It's moments like these that make me wish there was a "Like" button.
| | | | | Even that may be illegal too... | Aug 14, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
It's moments like these that make me wish there was a "Like" button.
Sure the word "like" has been copyrighted... 
| | |
|
|
|
| I know it's tempting ... | Aug 14, 2012 |
but please don't tease the trolls.
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 08:45
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| You're right, of course | Aug 14, 2012 |
Jenny Forbes wrote:
please don't tease the trolls.
It's just so exasperating. I'm sorry. Back to topic everyone!
| | | | | My feeling is that many of the people who declared English | Aug 14, 2012 |
as their second native language might be people from Asia -- Singapore, Malaysia, and many other South Asian countries, where the variety of English spoken is very different from standard BE or AE, and they were just unjustly accused of lying by some people who have no knowledge about different varieties of English.
As to what is considered native proficiency of a language in the US, I just wanted to add, that some universities will take three years of high school in L1 as native fo... See more as their second native language might be people from Asia -- Singapore, Malaysia, and many other South Asian countries, where the variety of English spoken is very different from standard BE or AE, and they were just unjustly accused of lying by some people who have no knowledge about different varieties of English.
As to what is considered native proficiency of a language in the US, I just wanted to add, that some universities will take three years of high school in L1 as native for functional purposes, not necessarily a graduate diploma, and everything higher than that. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Methods for verifying "native language" claims | 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! » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
