| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | Add "degree of nativeness" to the native language search Thread poster: Samuel Murray
|
|---|
| Great the way it is | Jul 3, 2012 |
I finally made my decision: ProZ is great the way it is.There will always be some dishonest people on every site, but they will learn the hard way. One day they will get a job they are not capable of doing , and after they complete it, they won't get paid for it. I don't wish anybody that, but this is what might happen. Allowing non-native speakers to bid on all jobs in their language pairs will also eliminate a part of the problem. There will be no incentive to lie.
| | | | Sheila Wilson 
Spain
Local time: 01:14
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| That would destroy all credibility | Jul 3, 2012 |
LilianBoland wrote:
I finally made my decision: ProZ is great the way it is.There will always be some dishonest people on every site, but they will learn the hard way. One day they will get a job they are not capable of doing , and after they complete it, they won't get paid for it. I don't wish anybody that, but this is what might happen. Allowing non-native speakers to bid on all jobs in their language pairs will also eliminate a part of the problem. There will be no incentive to lie.
There will also be absolutely no incentive for outsourcers to pay anything more than peanuts to this group of people (I refuse to call them translators). Yes, I know that for a time there will be some genuine translators trying to get some benefit from the site they used to love and respect. But they will be very quickly disillusioned by the dross around them. If ProZ.com follows that path then almost all of the capable translators here will leave it and they will not be replaced by other capable translators but by non-translators who have a bit of spare time, learnt a language at school, and think they can translate between two languages, no doubt with massive help from Google.
Would you really want to stick around?
Sheila
| | | | Daryo
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:14
Serbian to English
+ ...
| the law of unintended results | Jul 24, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
Daryo wrote:
Most importantly because this "nativeness index" is a useless indicator. What is implied is that it would be an indicator of expected quality of work, which it's not.
Well, that is not its purpose. ...
But that's how it will be perceived.
From the point of view of potential clients, this site is about finding translators.
Some clients may care only about price; some other may care more about the quality of work.
WHATEVER information you put on the site concerning available translators WILL be understood by clients as indicator of quality of work.
Or simply ignored if they don't consider it relevant.
Your intentions, however good, are not going to change that.
And the fact remains that this "nativeness index" would have a very loose connection with the expected quality of work. Way more tenuous than other indicators.
| | | |
Texte Style wrote:
is starting to sound like Thatcher's definition of British
(1 point if you were born in a former colony, 2 points if you were born in India before independence, 2 and a half if you were born in the Falklands or if your father was in the Navy and you were born in Hong Kong, 3 points if your mother sold cherries and had a fulsome cleavage, 4 points if your father married an Englishwoman, an extra point if the wedding took place in Gibraltar...)
This exactly.
I am very much against the idea of classifying nativeness based on things like languages spoken at home and number of years in X country. It is incredibly discriminatory toward those with immigrant parents (taking English as an example). Say someone raised in the United States to Latino parents have English as their native language ( a common occurrence). They'd have less "native points" than someone whose parents were British, all other things being equal. Then you get into who's a "real" American and other sorts of nonsense. What's next, giving people with English names more points in nativeness? Outrageous.
The bottom line is : you cannot tell someone else what their native language is (or isn't). This is not like ATA membership, where you either took and passed the test or you didn't.
Native language, ethnicity and identity are intertwined and incredibly personal, and people have the right to self-identify.
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:14
Hebrew to English
Annie Sapucaia wrote:
The bottom line is : you cannot tell someone else what their native language is (or isn't).
This is where we part ways. It's not that absolute. I think it can be incredibly troublesome telling someone what their native language is. However, it is often far simpler telling someone what their native language isn't.
Native language, ethnicity and identity are intertwined and incredibly personal, and people have the right to self-identify.
The trouble is when you enshrine this right to self-identify is that it is either abused or taken to ridiculous heights (like people on here with a verrrrry shaky grasp of a language claiming it as their native one - whatever you want to define a native language as, it sure as hell isn't a language you can barely speak!).
| | | | | Agreed, but... | Jan 4, 2014 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
Annie Sapucaia wrote:
The bottom line is : you cannot tell someone else what their native language is (or isn't).
This is where we part ways. It's not that absolute. I think it can be incredibly troublesome telling someone what their native language is. However, it is often far simpler telling someone what their native language isn't.
Native language, ethnicity and identity are intertwined and incredibly personal, and people have the right to self-identify.
The trouble is when you enshrine this right to self-identify is that it is either abused or taken to ridiculous heights (like people on here with a verrrrry shaky grasp of a language claiming it as their native one - whatever you want to define a native language as, it sure as hell isn't a language you can barely speak!).
Oh absolutely people can lie about this, but I still think that language is such an important part of self-identity that you have to, at least at first, believe that someone's native language is what they say it is. Even if they lie, it'll be short-lived (if they can barely speak the language it'll be pretty obvious)!
What I disagree with is having some sort of checklist system based on factors that do not (necessarily) have to do with what your first language is.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:14
Portuguese to English
+ ...
| | Any non-native speaker of a language is not a native speaker to any degree (IMO) | Jan 4, 2014 |
Diana Coada, PGDip DPSI NRPSI wrote:
LilianBoland wrote:
Samuel, with all my appreciation for your great ideas, I don't think this will work. People whose native language is really good, but they haven't lived in the country where it is spoken for a while, or did not get most of their education in that language, even if they read a lot by themselves, would only get something like 7, and they probably deserve 9 at least, if their native language is really good. This is possible. I have known people who love their native language, and although they left the country at about the age of fifteen their native language is really perfect. So, this would not be fir to them. Also, some people may live in a particular country for a shorter period than 3/4 of their life, but still have close to native command of their L2, especially if they have most of their education in that language. Then they can get minus points for their parents, and for other people if they don't recognize them as completely native speakers due to some slight accent or simply because they know that they were not born in that country. This way they may end up with native level 6, although their native level should be more like 9. Also, if some people want to cheat, they will still be able to cheat. I just think the system should stay the way it is, after I have thought more about it. I think translators should be required to translate 100 words sample text for each job they apply to to prove the quality of their work. Then nobody will really care if their native language is Klingon.
Couple of thoughts:
1. Just because an emigrant has lost some of the skills IN his/her native language (if that is indeed the case), no one should infer that another language he/she now speaks and which he/she has only learned after the so-called critical period is now his/her (new) native language
2. I don't consider anyone's language their native language if they haven't grown up with it.
3. For a translator to claim a language as his/her native language if they haven't learned it throughout the critical period is unacceptable (well, to me anyway).
4. There are no "degrees of nativeness in a language" - you either completed the native language acquisition process - during the critical period and for at least a good number of years, including first and/or secondary education or you are not a native speaker. (IMO)
5. IMO, no one is a (insert 0-99%) native speaker but instead they are either native speakers or non-native speakers. A non-native speaker can indeed achieve a high degree of proficiency in that language and should be proud of it. But it doesn't make him/her a native speaker.
6. No client looking for a native speaker is looking for someone who is a 25-, 50-, or 75-% native speaker; instead, they want a 100% - the only kind of - native speaker - AND THEN SOME.
7. I don't subscribe to the idea of degrees of nativeness in a language.
8. "Nativeness in a language" might not be what the client is looking for. They might be looking for exceptional fluency and experience in the source- and target languages - AND THEN SOME (expertise in a subject matter, for example). If you want to show/express your degree of fluency in a language, that's fine, just don't call yourself a 80% native speaker - cause there is no "nativeness" involved.
If anything, demonstrate that high degree of fluency DESPITE the fact that you are NOT a native speaker - it's much more honest and impressive (IMO).
Lots of this was already discussed in the thread linked to by Lisa above.
... just my thoughts!
B
[Edited at 2014-01-05 03:36 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| Prove your native language I say (to everybody) | Jan 4, 2014 |
Annie Sapucaia wrote:
Ty Kendall wrote:
Annie Sapucaia wrote:
The bottom line is : you cannot tell someone else what their native language is (or isn't).
This is where we part ways. It's not that absolute. I think it can be incredibly troublesome telling someone what their native language is. However, it is often far simpler telling someone what their native language isn't.
Native language, ethnicity and identity are intertwined and incredibly personal, and people have the right to self-identify.
The trouble is when you enshrine this right to self-identify is that it is either abused or taken to ridiculous heights (like people on here with a verrrrry shaky grasp of a language claiming it as their native one - whatever you want to define a native language as, it sure as hell isn't a language you can barely speak!).
Oh absolutely people can lie about this, but I still think that language is such an important part of self-identity that you have to, at least at first, believe that someone's native language is what they say it is. Even if they lie, it'll be short-lived (if they can barely speak the language it'll be pretty obvious)!
What I disagree with is having some sort of checklist system based on factors that do not (necessarily) have to do with what your first language is.
Referring to the parts in bold:
1. No, I don't have to believe it just because they say so or if it's obvious that they can't be , i.e. they grew up in a country where that language is not even spoken in school or if their lack of proficiency is self-evident in their profile (I am speaking generally here).
Problem is that your definition of "native language" might be different from mine - but believe me, in this industry, it's quite a common concept that most clients and translators will relate to someone having learned it during childhood and/or their teenage years, at home and/or at school and especially in their social life within the country they grew up in and outside their immediate family environment.
Unfortunately, in our profession, there are people who clearly self-identify as native speakers of certain languages to the tune of their own definitions (and not the commonly held opinion) in order to gain access to jobs that specify "native speaker." That becomes quite unfair toward the true native speakers and those who would never do such a thing and know exactly why not.
What's your definition? Why do you "self-identify" English as your native language?
2. You write "If they lie... it's short-lived." Not necessarily as long as we permit anyone to define themselves according to their own particular definition or self-identification. Then there is no reason for them to stop calling themselves native speakers
3. Native language and first language
Those two are not necessarily the same. Native-language jobs are not advertised as "first language"- jobs. I'm sure for a good reason.
As long as someone only claims one language as their native language, it's very likely it is indeed their native language (I say likely) and Proz.com recognized that by allowing those translators to gain the designation of "verified" native speaker.
As soon as people claim two native languages, I'd be very suspicious and would clearly favor a checklist - see also this thread:
http://www.proz.com/forum/prozcom_suggestions/230297-methods_for_verifying_native_language_claims.html
I have no qualms about being asked to demonstrate (by checklist or interview) that I am indeed a native speaker of German. No matter how well I speak and write English, it's not my native language but I do use it professionally.
B
[Edited at 2014-01-05 01:03 GMT]
| | | | | Most sensible view so far | Jan 5, 2014 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
8. "Nativeness in a language" might not be what the client is looking for. They might be looking for exceptional fluency and experience in the source- and target languages - AND THEN SOME (expertise in a subject matter, for example). If you want to show/express your degree of fluency in a language, that's fine, just don't call yourself a 80% native speaker - cause there is no "nativeness" involved.
Most clients are looking for proficiency in translation and excellent writing skills. However these are not so easy to assess, especially when the subject matter may shift the situation completely.
Native-speakerness is hard to ascertain. It's not as clear-cut as for an airline trying to avoid hiring overweight flight attendants, where 'visual inspection' will immediately answer the question.
I could mention a flock of cases I know where truly native speakers would not be able to translate properly into their native language, not to mention people who wouldn't be prepared to translate anything, period.
The problem with native speakerness is in its being mostly a self-claimed attribute, boldly (and perhaps unduly) highlighted by translation agencies and translator databases like Proz. It is aggravated by the unavailability of a surrogate criterion, e.g. where the individual has been living and working for the past decade or more.
The fallacy of demanding native speakers of the target language lies in assuming that an individual who was born and raised in X-land wouldn't have been able to elude the local school system in X-ese, and therefore can be safely (?) taken as having mastered X-ese.
However "native speaker" is a boldly advertised trait, so it's deemed "better". Though DOHC (double overhead valve command in automotive engines) is a clear-cut yes/no feature, people who don't know squat about mechanics will tend to perceive a vehicle having it as "better" than one that doesn't. That's why they put DOHC on the outside. And that's why some translators boldly advertise "native speaker".
| | | | | It's not always that clear cut | Jan 5, 2014 |
I read over and over again how one can only have one native language. This isn't always as clear cut as is repeatedly put forward. When I am really pressed to choose just one language, I will say German PURELY because I was born there and it saves a lot of hassle when dealing with someone who is absolutely determined that one can only have one native language. There are people who grow up bilingual and who keep their languages in balance. In my case, it looks like this:
* This is th... See more I read over and over again how one can only have one native language. This isn't always as clear cut as is repeatedly put forward. When I am really pressed to choose just one language, I will say German PURELY because I was born there and it saves a lot of hassle when dealing with someone who is absolutely determined that one can only have one native language. There are people who grow up bilingual and who keep their languages in balance. In my case, it looks like this:
* This is the language that I identify with as "my language". - To me there is no difference between English (UK) and German. If I am in an English-speakng environment, I think in English. If I am in a German speaking environment, I think in German. I swap languages automatically without even noticing. I dream in whatever language I used last before falling asleep.
* This is the language that other people think is "my language". - When I tell them that I was born in Germany, they will assume it's German. If I don't say anything, people in the UK assume I am from Glasgow and that English is my mother tongue. People in Germany assume that I am native there.
* This is the language that I speak and write best. - Speech: In German, I don't have a dialect, as in Hannover, a very accent-free German is spoken. In English I sound Glaswegian, I guess some will class a local dialect as negative. Writing: No difference.
* This is the language that I spoke as a child. - 50% German, 30% Spanish, 20% English (socially, in school the percentages are different)
* This is the language in which I did most of my school. - 60% German, 40% English
* This is the language in which I wrote my college exams. - 100% English
* This is the language that I use the most. - 60% English, 40% German
* This is the language that my parents used the most. - 50% German, 50% Spanish
* I have lived for more than 3/4 of my life in a country where this language is used the most. - I am 33. I have spent 15 years in Germany, throughout which 1-2 months each year were spent in an English-speaking country; 15 years in English speaking countries (13 UK, 1 Ireland, 1 Australia), throughout which 2 month are spent in Germany each year; 3 years in Spanish speaking countries (2 Chile, 1 Spain).
* If I were to visit a country where this language is used the most, any school teacher who speaks this language most would regard me as a native speaker. - Both in Germany and in the UK. Here I am usually taken for a Glaswegian.
[Edited at 2014-01-05 10:17 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Lincoln Hui
Hong Kong
Local time: 08:14
Member
Chinese to English
+ ...
| Some people have a lot of ideas but never actually think about them | Jan 5, 2014 |
3. Native language and first language
Those two are not necessarily the same. Native-language jobs are not advertised as "first language"- jobs. I'm sure for a good reason.
Setting aside the fact that the entire idea of determining nativeness other than prociency is impossible, I am not under the impression that agencies and clients are capable of distinguishing between native and first language. Most outright refuse to allow translators to translate into anything other than their "native" (snigger) language, regardless of proficiency level. The end result of what is being suggested is that quite a few translators would be required to translate into a language other than their best.
I'm not even going to touch on things like speaking, writing and reading proficiency being very different things. And I am not convinced that there exists such a thing as high proficiency that is distinguishable from "nativeness". If you can clearly tell from somebody's writing that they are not a native speaker, then they are clearly not proficient in that language.
[Edited at 2014-01-05 10:33 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| This is getting good! | Jan 5, 2014 |
... better than that endless other discussion.
Lincoln Hui wrote:
Setting aside the fact that the entire idea of determining nativeness other than prociency is impossible, I am not under the impression that agencies and clients are capable of distinguishing between native and first language. Most outright refuse to allow translators to translate into anything other than their "native" (snigger) language, regardless of proficiency level. The end result of what is being suggested is that quite a few translators would be required to translate into a language other than their best.
The truth is that few translators like to translate into a language that is not their best. Many (at least in Brazil) tend to charge more for translating 'in reverse gear'. The Brazilian law on sworn translations (dated 1943) is evidence of that: statutory rates for translation from the national into a foreign language are 20~25% higher.
On the other hand, a subject matter specialist might translate specific material into a foreign language better than a lay/general native of the target language.
Now and then Brazilian writers ask me to translate their books into English. I suggest they use a native EN speaker, most of all living in the targeted country. I even provide the e-mail addresses of some colleagues in the USA that I know as adequate for the job. Nope, they want *me* to do it, and claim that client is king. When I read their masterpieces, I discover why: now and then, what they wrote fails to make sense as stated. It behooves translating what they actually meant into clear Portuguese before translating into English. This could be a major challenge for a non-native, non-current speaker of the source language.
Lincoln Hui wrote:
I'm not even going to touch on things like speaking, writing and reading proficiency being very different things.
I would definitely include writing proficiency in the target language as a must.
To me, the telltale sign of amateur-ish translation is finding source-language text written with target-language words. IMO if I can't prevent my brain from involuntarily back-translating before processing the information, it is definitely a bad translation. If I get the impression that the text was originally written in the language I'm reading it, that's an excellent translation.
Lincoln Hui wrote:
And I am not convinced that there exists such a thing as high proficiency that is distinguishable from "nativeness". If you can clearly tell from somebody's writing that they are not a native speaker, then they are clearly not proficient in that language.
Well put, Lincoln. However I would add that native proficiency in writing is not enough for translation. I have seen many cases where translators wrote flawlessly in the target language, however they completely misunderstood the source text.
| | | | Kay Denney
France
Local time: 02:14
French to English
| knowledge of source language is not a native issue | Jan 5, 2014 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Now and then Brazilian writers ask me to translate their books into English. I suggest they use a native EN speaker, most of all living in the targeted country. I even provide the e-mail addresses of some colleagues in the USA that I know as adequate for the job. Nope, they want *me* to do it, and claim that client is king. When I read their masterpieces, I discover why: now and then, what they wrote fails to make sense as stated. It behooves translating what they actually meant into clear Portuguese before translating into English. This could be a major challenge for a non-native, non-current speaker of the source language.
I often get to translate this sort of stuff. I do it well not because I'm a native speaker of the source language but because my handle of my source language is topnotch. I have lived in France for over thirty years and have devoted a lot of time to improving my knowledge of French. As an in-house proofreader I have often had to correct translations showing a poor grasp of the source language and/or culture. Very often the translator boasts several source languages and of course there's no way they match my knowledge of French in four different languages!
This is a point which rankled with me at the school I got my Master from: those with only one language pair had to get higher marks than those with two. Whereas when a client calls on a translator for a translation from FR to EN they couldn't care less whether he is any good at DE-EN, they just want a good translation. If he then has a text in German he might be glad that he already has a translator in his address book who can handle it, but apart from that, there is no advantage to the client.
So you may well be a good choice for a complex and poorly-written PT to be translated into EN but that's not to say that there are not native English speakers capable of doing the same.
| | | | | Two native languages are possible but not (at all) the norm | Jan 5, 2014 |
dianaft wrote:
* If I were to visit a country where this language is used the most, any school teacher who speaks this language most would regard me as a native speaker. - Both in Germany and in the UK. Here I am usually taken for a Glaswegian.
[Edited at 2014-01-05 10:17 GMT]
Especially with languages such as English and German, it's mostly just one of them that's the native language. But I am not here to argue that one cannot have two native languages. But as you have shown, there had to be some very unique circumstances that would allow that to happen. If one hasn't spent a significant time during their childhood and/or teenage years using these languages, I would not believe that both are native languages.
B
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Add "degree of nativeness" to the native language search | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
