| صفحات الموضوع: < [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] > | Ten common myths about translation quality
|
|---|
| | | I you understand, Ty that it is not about quoting | Jul 30, 2013 |
Ty Kendall wrote: LilianBNekipelo wrote:
a sign of ethnic belonging, rather than proficiency..... and also I think there should not be any limitations in quoting Native language is not inextricably linked with ethnicity aaaaand there aren't any limitations in quoting if you meet the criteria (plural). Fin.
but rather about the principle, in my case at least, and about objectivity. I don't really care about quoting -- most of the jobs offer too low rates anyhow. It is just about certain stereotypes and prejudices. For some people form the Bronx, let's say, native is only what they recognize as their way of speaking, for some other people Texan may be native, and they would not even be able to tell, a fluent in English person from Holland let's say, and someone from England, speaking an unknown local variety.
Many people will not be able to tell British English writing from educated, high quality non-native writing.
Thinking in those terms, people could say that there should be only US, UK born lawyers, or politicians, because otherwise their would a danger that their language might not sound 100% native -- which would be a total nonsense -- pure prejudice never allowed here. Many lawyers speak very questionable English, yet they are good lawyers-- nothing like slight accent or small grammatical mistakes, or rather stylistic, once in awhile -- really heavy mistakes,from time to time,and problem comprehending spoken English -- when spoken fast, or in a murmuring manner.
So a lawyer, the comptroller, or even the governor can use whatever variety of English they please and be born wherever they please, but a translator expected to work for $.0.08/w or less, should be US or UK born -- give me break. Interpreters usually speak much better English than most foreign born lawyers, politicians, including even one governor. The requirement to be US born applies only to one position in the United States -- to the president of the United States, not any translators, senators, lower politicians, lawyers, doctors, IT people and anyone else, you can think of.
[Edited at 2013-07-30 22:16 GMT]
| | | | Bernhard Sulzer 
الولايات المتحدة
Local time: 09:25
أنجليزي إلى ألماني
+ ...
| native language is usually perceived as best language within a context | Jul 30, 2013 |
LilianBNekipelo wrote:
If you agree that native language isn't always the best language
LilianBNekipelo wrote:
than it should not be taken into consideration as such for translation purposes. Then it becomes discriminatory because it is merely a sign of ethnic belonging, rather than proficiency. I think what we have here now, is not so bad, provided native language stays this quite a vague term, and also I think there should not be any limitations in quoting -- not necessarily getting the jobs, based on the native language category.
But it is taken into consideration. In our business, listing your native language (as here in our profiles) usually means "best language because we grew up with it and have continued to use it". And it doesn't exist in a vacuum for us translators or our clients. It's tied to the other credentials and experiences. If it isn't, one should probably say so or not list it, as I suggested earlier, and just list their "best" languages. Best languages as in best non-native ones.
But could it be that you just feel that, currently, you are not on a par with other native speakers in your native language and therefore reject the concept of native language?
Aren't you working in these languages?
Bernhard
[Edited at 2013-07-30 21:53 GMT]
| | | | | What about your other native languages | Jul 30, 2013 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote: LilianBNekipelo wrote:
You have lived in an English speaking country only for five years from what I remember, and my father's native language as Lithuanian, and although I speak it quite ell, I would not claim it as my native for any serious purposes. I cannot tell by your writing, without any offense, that it is authentic British English, although it is very good English. I can tell Ty's, right away, but not a yours. I'm sorry if you're having trouble understanding me. I'm not sure where the "five years" comes from either. Glad to undergo verification - if it should ever happen 
I don't have trouble understanding you, I usually even understand Australian English, Cockney and AAVE. I am just not convinced that it is really any type of native -- just good English perhaps. From what I remember, you have lived in Brazil most of your life like 25 years, then for ten years in France, and you are still quite a young person, so don't think you really had time to spend more than 5 years in England, if you include the 2 years in Belarus, and your native language claim is mostly based on your father being a Londoner. You also totally neglect such languages as Brazilian Portuguese and Hokka -- a really interesting language partially spoken in your household. Why is that? I think you are also a multilingual person who just convinced herself to be an authentic British-English speaker. Is it possible to live in a Portuguese speaking country from one until about 25 and not consider Portuguese another native language? It is really hard for me to believe.
I don't think you should be verified, or anyone else, for that matter. This is just something to ponder upon. You consider BE your native language -- fine. It is absolutely fine with me.
[Edited at 2013-07-30 22:00 GMT]
| | | | Kay Denney
فرنسا
Local time: 15:25
فرنسي إلى أنجليزي
| Just wondering... | Jul 30, 2013 |
Liliana, if it's illegal to require sensitive information such as what your native language is in the US,
...how does Proz get away with it?
(and Lisa's English is as good as Ty's BTW. I was going to say as good as mine, but Ty has apparently been honoured with the rank of Benchmark Brit, I'm happy to go along with that)
| | |
|
|
|
Kay Denney
فرنسا
Local time: 15:25
فرنسي إلى أنجليزي
Balasubramaniam L. wrote: Texte Style wrote: Just one minor quibble with the quote above (once a proofreader, always a proofreader  ), I would replace "starting" with "hijacking" or "monopolising"  That would be encroaching on the editor's turf and not strictly proof-reading, just as this post is not strictly on topic for this thread and is therefore an encroachment on this thread. [Edited at 2013-07-30 16:25 GMT]
You're pulling my leg! Stringing me along, on this thread!!!
Your sense of humour is rather too subtle though, I've wasted the entire afternoon mulling this over, and only now have managed to catch up with the rest of the L1 episode
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
المملكة المتحدة
Local time: 14:25
برتغالي إلى أنجليزي
+ ...
[quote]LilianBNekipelo wrote:
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
I am just not convinced that it is really any type of native -- just good English perhaps. From what I remember, you have lived in Brazil most of your life like 25 years, then for ten years in France, and you are still quite a young person, so don't think you really had time to spend more than 5 years in England, if you include the 2 years in Belarus, and your native language claim is mostly based on your father being a Londoner. You also totally neglect such languages as Brazilian Portuguese and Hokka -- a really interesting language partially spoken in your household. Why is that? I think you are also a multilingual person who just convinced herself to be an authentic British-English speaker. Is it possible to live in a Portuguese speaking country from one until about 25 and not consider Portuguese another native language? It is really hard for me to believe.
You clearly did take offence because you're now on the attack. I'm sorry if I offended you.
You have got most of your "facts" wrong but I really can't be bothered arguing over this one. The CIoL and ITI are clearly satisfied so, as I say, please just bring on the verification
| | | | | No, did not get that offended, really | Jul 30, 2013 |
I think I got most facts right -- because I have a very good memory --perhaps naturally, or slightly due to years of training. I might have gotten the Belarus wrong -- I was not sure if it was two years or one semester, perhaps.
| | | | | When is enough enough? | Jul 30, 2013 |
It is true; in a pure employment context, there are some questions that should be avoided when hiring employees. Many sites on the Net give examples, but none re freelancers (except NYC, and maybe Minnesota). Further, these laws apply to employers with a certain number of employees (15, under Title VII; a lower number under certain other federal, state and local laws). To the extent I know, they do not apply to one-person employer, who can be an obnoxious racist and male chauvinist pig).
... See more It is true; in a pure employment context, there are some questions that should be avoided when hiring employees. Many sites on the Net give examples, but none re freelancers (except NYC, and maybe Minnesota). Further, these laws apply to employers with a certain number of employees (15, under Title VII; a lower number under certain other federal, state and local laws). To the extent I know, they do not apply to one-person employer, who can be an obnoxious racist and male chauvinist pig).
Some of the questions to be avoided are, among others:
Questions about Language that Should be Avoided
•Applicant's mother tongue.
•Language commonly used by applicant at home.
•How the applicant acquired the ability to read, write, or speak a foreign language.
•Examples of discriminatory questions:
a) Was English your first language?
b) What language did you speak as a child?
Question about Language that is Acceptable
•Languages applicant speaks fluently (only if job-related).
http://www.hr.ufl.edu/recruitment/resources/interview_questions.asp#examples
National Origin/ Citizenship
Illegal Questions
• Are you a U.S. citizen? • Where were you/your parents born? • What is your “native tongue”?
Legal Questions
• Are you authorized to work in the United States? • What language do you read/speak/write fluently? (This question is okay only if this ability is relevant to the performance of the job.)
https://careeradvancement.uchicago.edu/sites/careeradvancement.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/docs/employers/Potentially%20Discriminatory%20Questions.pdf
Be as it may, I am getting sorta fed up with this subject. Nobody has convinced anyone re his or her position, and the subject appears every so often, with about the same participants, at least since 2003. What can we do to compromise? I am more than willing to give up my “colorful” N by the word Spanish, my declared native language (after all, while it stands to reason that if I declare a single native language it must be so, nobody has verified it, although I am willing to submit to verification any day.) So, if you declare two and I one, we are at the same level. We have the same access to those clients we claim we can serve.
I would, however, hope that Henry D. would do what he said it will in 2003:
Therefore, no one should claim to be "native" if (s)he is not. Simply lying will get you nowhere. You'll have angry customers, projects for which you don't get paid--not to mention that if it is clear that you misrepresent yourself, in violation of the user's agreement of this site--you'll lose your ProZ.com membership.
http://www.proz.com/forum/linguistics/15967-requirement_for_native_speakers_only_isnt_that_discrimination.html#102945
[Edited at 2013-07-30 22:36 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
المملكة المتحدة
Local time: 14:25
عبري إلى أنجليزي
| On the principle of "it takes one to know one".... | Jul 30, 2013 |
Texte Style wrote:
(and Lisa's English is as good as Ty's BTW. I was going to say as good as mine, but Ty has apparently been honoured with the rank of Benchmark Brit, I'm happy to go along with that)
...then I can say with certainty that Lisa is as English/British as me, despite the fact we clearly had very different upbringings.
I am flattered by becoming the benchmark Brit though, I might put it on my website "Voted Proz.com's most British member" (maybe a picture of me waving the Union Jack, eating fish & chips and standing in front of Stonehenge will set the scene!)
| | | | | A simple solution: ETHICS | Jul 30, 2013 |
A lot has been said lately on the rights to assert on one side, and to demand on another, native speaker ability, whatever it is.
Proz's Professional guidelines cover that better:
Professional translators and translation companies: - represent their credentials, capabilities and experiences honestly
- accept only assignments that they have the knowledge, resources and time to do well
- take any and all steps necessary to ensure consistent delivery of work of a high professional standard
If every outsourcer who ever endorsed these guidelines bothered to refrain from demanding impertinent requirements; AND every translator who endorsed them bothered to refrain from asserting skills they don't have, this entire discussion could have been avoided.
There would have been no finger-pointing to say that "you are a less genuine native speaker than I am, hence you are a liar!", no claims that "it's illegal to ask/demand that", no blaming on Proz for having set up a system that allows translation prospects to act as smartly or as stupidly as they wish, if only... translators were open and honest enough about their actual limitations!
Every day I see a kind of warfare among translators desperately defending their turf from the 'enemies'. Their goal is to grab as many translation jobs as they can, the 'native speaker' attribute being just one of the weapons used. They couldn't care less if they'll be able to do these jobs; after all, they are native speakers of the target language! Let them come! Any subject matter; any media, video, dubbing, subtitling, interactive DVD; PDF; DTP; PPT; whatever! Keep 'em comin'!
Outsourcers just want to simplify their process and evade blame, so they demand native speaker, must have Trados, certifications required (CPT too?)... whatever they can cling to later - for CYA purposes - in case anything goes wrong.
Would a truly native speaker having good translating experience with complex financial reports be able to properly translate the intricacy of chemical and biological reactions that will take place in the next generation treatment for cancer? Would a truly native speaker seasoned in translating telecommunications and IT systems RFPs do an adequate job translating a spiritual self-help book? I'd bet against them.
This is getting pointless. Going back to the OP, a most common myth about translation quality is that "hiring a native speaker of the target language represents fail-proof quality assurance".
| | | | Bernhard Sulzer
الولايات المتحدة
Local time: 09:25
أنجليزي إلى ألماني
+ ...
| dominant versus native | Jul 30, 2013 |
LilianBNekipelo wrote:
...
English is definitely my dominant language, and thus native, if you like this term. Polish is my L1 -- that went through slight attrition due to lack of exposure and significant changes within the language over the last quarter of a century. I understand Russian, and perhaps even speak it, on a native level as well. ...
Native language can be and most often is the dominant language if you will, but dominant language does not automatically equate native language, not the way I interpret the term.
Some people don't use their native language as dominant language any longer (again rather rare with translators I would say), some use it to a lesser extent. The way I see it, native language can only be acquired in one's childhood and teenage years. But you don't accept that requirement, correct?
Slight attrition doesn't mean a language is no longer your native language. If it ever was your native language, it still is, you might just be rusty at it, for example "speaking it". As I said before, I believe re-immersion in it will take care of that attrition.
Again, why don't you think that Russian isn't one of or your one native language(s)?
You are using them at least as source languages in your work, don't you?
I understand that, so far, you have not embraced the idea behind "native language" the way many of us (certainly not all) have although you do, in a way, admit to the concept even though you call it "vague".
Bernhard
[Edited at 2013-07-31 00:32 GMT]
| | | | Bernhard Sulzer
الولايات المتحدة
Local time: 09:25
أنجليزي إلى ألماني
+ ...
| not pointless I believe | Jul 30, 2013 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
This is getting pointless. Going back to the OP, a most common myth about translation quality is that "hiring a native speaker of the target language represents fail-proof quality assurance".
That might be a myth but it's certainly not true. Hiring a native speaker based simply on the fact that he/she is a native speaker of the target language does not represent fail-proof quality assurance. It's very hard anyway to get fail-proof quality assurance.
| | |
|
|
|
| Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member for the following reason: Empty post | | Trying to reason... | Jul 31, 2013 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote: José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
This is getting pointless. Going back to the OP, a most common myth about translation quality is that "hiring a native speaker of the target language represents fail-proof quality assurance". That might be a myth but it's certainly not true. Hiring a native speaker based simply on the fact that he/she is a native speaker of the target language does not represent fail-proof quality assurance. It's very hard anyway to get fail-proof quality assurance.
Snipped from Merriam-Webster:
Myth:
a: a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something or someone;
b : an unfounded or false notion
If a myth were true, it would be a FACT, no longer a myth.
Many people do believe in that myth, otherwise Proz wouldn't have it selectable as a must-have requirement, and/or no outsourcer would be using it as such.
Yet you are stating now that it's certainly not true.
Fail-proof quality assurance becomes a lot easier when you find someone who has successfully done something over and over again, regardless of any other criteria.
That's why airlines rank their pilots on the hours each one has flown so far in total, and on each 'level' of aircraft. They really strive to be fail-proof, as many lives will be at stake.
| | | | Bernhard Sulzer
الولايات المتحدة
Local time: 09:25
أنجليزي إلى ألماني
+ ...
| what makes an excellent cake? | Jul 31, 2013 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
If a myth were true, it would be a FACT, no longer a myth.
Many people do believe in that myth, otherwise Proz wouldn't have it selectable as a must-have requirement, and/or no outsourcer would be using it as such.
Yet you are stating now that it's certainly not true.
And I thought we could agree, at least here.
From Proz.com FAQ:
8.8 - Does the PNS credential tell whether or not someone is a good translator? [Direct link]
Absolutely not. Native language is only one factor that a client may consider when screening a translator or interpreter. It is usually not the most important factor.
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Fail-proof quality assurance becomes a lot easier when you find someone who has successfully done something over and over again, regardless of any other criteria.
That's why airlines rank their pilots on the hours each one has flown so far in total, and on each 'level' of aircraft. They really strive to be fail-proof, as many lives will be at stake.
I agree, experience is one important factor. So is native language. So are many other criteria.
Pilots are human beings. So are we. We all strive to do our best.
Bernhard
[Edited at 2013-07-31 00:50 GMT]
| | | | | صفحات الموضوع: < [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] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Ten common myths about translation quality | 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 » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
