| Pages sur ce sujet: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | Replace "native language" with "most competent language combination" Auteur du fil: Samuel Murray
|
|---|
I absolutely agree with Christine. The notion of native language should not overshadow other aspects of translation. Some people think, not exactly in this forum, that if they are native speakers of X and have lived most of their lives in the country where X is spoken, and in addition, they have a degree in translation and studied another language for four years, they are the best candidates to translate from their L2. This is often not true. It takes years to really get to know certain language... See more I absolutely agree with Christine. The notion of native language should not overshadow other aspects of translation. Some people think, not exactly in this forum, that if they are native speakers of X and have lived most of their lives in the country where X is spoken, and in addition, they have a degree in translation and studied another language for four years, they are the best candidates to translate from their L2. This is often not true. It takes years to really get to know certain languages well, Chinese being one of them. This is why there are so many poor book translations because some translators just don't feel the original. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Diana Coada (X) 
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 05:02
portugais vers anglais
+ ...
| I agree with Christine | Jun 24, 2012 |
And how is it even possible for someone to say that after some 10-15-20 years in a country they do not feel comfortable translating into that country's language? (this has been said by various translators on this site and it is still a big surprise to me every time I hear something like this).
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Espagne
Local time: 05:02
Membre (2007)
anglais
+ ...
| Jobs at all cost? | Jun 24, 2012 |
writeaway wrote:
If clients are happy to let non-natives take care of their translations, then that's their business. It's not "modern", it's just a sign of the times. People simply don't care anymore.
I've only been a translator for a few years, so I can't comment on what the industry used to be like. However, bringing this thread back on topic , I would suggest that in those "good old days" a non-native would most likely have come clean to the client. There are clearly many translators here on ProZ who would do the same today. But there seem to be a growing numbr who will put absolutely anything in their profiles if it will leverage their quotes. With so many posters restricting offers to native speakers, it must make a difference. To hell with the fact that it's a lie - they do it anyway.
By the way, maybe one of the reasons so many people think English is their second native language is that we (I'm not sure about ProZ rules, though) keep talking about native speaker. Where translators are concerned, should we perhaps be talking about native writer? As I said about 10 pages back, some people are pretty much native-equivalent in conversation (to the extent that natives wonder about their background), but can't write a sentence without errors or at least it sounding stilted. We keep in touch by email with several Dutch friends who seemed totally bilingual when we lived in Den Haag, but who write at upper-intermediate level at best (I have 15 years' experience teaching EFL so I'm well qualified to evaluate levels).
Sheila
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 05:02
portugais vers anglais
+ ...
| A point well made Sheila | Jun 24, 2012 |
Actually I have a question for the English native speakers. How many of you have been approached by a translation agency (not a direct client) to translate from English into one of your source languages in the belief that this would actually be your 'most competent language combination' and produce a better result. Anyone?
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 05:02
hébreu vers anglais
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
Anyone?
Tumbleweed.
| | | | Kay Denney
France
Local time: 06:02
français vers anglais
| Comfort zones... | Jun 24, 2012 |
Diana Coada wrote:
And how is it even possible for someone to say that after some 10-15-20 years in a country they do not feel comfortable translating into that country's language? (this has been said by various translators on this site and it is still a big surprise to me every time I hear something like this).
I have been living in France for 30 years.
I love France, the way of life, the culture, the LANGUAGE (drool drool) I've been in love with since Mrs Fyfe flew into our classroom (we never caught a glimpse of the broomstick but the magic spell has not lifted). I can spell better than probably 98% of French people and I know the Bescherelle (French bible of irregular verbs) inside out. I read the newspaper in French, I have satisfying dealings with French people every day, I watch the news in French, I do volunteer work of a fairly intellectual nature speaking in French...
For reasons too long-winded to touch on here, I had to take a couple of courses translating into French and I found it terribly difficult. I got top marks (the teachers knew I was a native English speaker and I was not subject to such harsh marking as the native French speakers). However, translating a 300 page text took me longer than 3000 equivalent words in English. And while I felt each time that I had done a fairly competent job, when I saw what the native French students had produced I could see that my work was much closer to the source, and theirs was much more fluid and, well, effortlessly French in flavour.
And I couldn't begin to produce an authentic sounding sentence in French with alliteration bundled in for free with the same breezy confidence as what I felt just now as I typed "effortlessly French in flavour". And I would be hard put to find as apt an adjective as "breezy" were I to try to write that last sentence in French. Of course larousse-synonymes.fr does exist but it would take me that much longer to choose the word that would really fit the bill or decide to completely rephrase it to turn the adjective into something else.
May I just point out that authors who write in a language which is not their own do have their work thoroughly edited? I was reading recently about the very significant contribution of certain publishers who have often been instrumental in turning a promising jumble into a masterpiece.
I have had the opportunity of proofreading translations into English from Polish and other languages in which the situation must be similar to that described by Phil, and have often had to rewrite vast swathes of text because it just didn't sound right. My domain being textiles (as my pseudonym indicates!), fashion, cosmetics, jewellery etc., the style is incredibly important (as my pseudonym also indicates!), far more than in ball bearings or rocket science.
I can quite well imagine that in some fields such as the above-mentioned, it might be more practical to have an engineer translate from their native language and have a linguist proofread what they produce than to have someone like me who couldn't tell a ball bearing from a pinball translate into my native language and have an engineer proofread me.
There are people who are not native English speakers who write incredibly well in English in this forum (Samuel for one, I'm mentioning your name because you expressed your curiosity as to how natives rate your English ).
But then again, Samuel's writing his own opinions and might well choose not to say certain things because he's not sure exactly how to put it. When you translate, you don't get that option.
I set myself high standards when translating into my native language and find it very annoying that so many people think they write English as well as me when in fact they are merely proficient. When you're an engineer, proficient is good, you can get your ideas across, people don't correct your slightest mistakes but answer your questions, you can have meaningful conversations. But not if you're writing press releases for beautifully designed swimsuits or the latest hairstyle.
Sheila I totally agree about native speaking and writing!
[Edited at 2012-06-24 20:51 GMT]
| | | | Nuno Rosalino
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 05:02
Membre (2012)
anglais vers portugais
+ ...
| Mother tongue | Jun 25, 2012 |
This whole debate, debacle, call it what you will, seems to rest on one thing and one thing only.
Confusion regarding the definition and meaning of 'native language' - for different people find different meaning in words, after all.
Native language, for most people, does not directly translate into 'mother tongue' or 'L1'. Questions regarding proficiency and one's writing/speaking ability arise (as we can see in the threads discussing the topic) when using the term nat... See more This whole debate, debacle, call it what you will, seems to rest on one thing and one thing only.
Confusion regarding the definition and meaning of 'native language' - for different people find different meaning in words, after all.
Native language, for most people, does not directly translate into 'mother tongue' or 'L1'. Questions regarding proficiency and one's writing/speaking ability arise (as we can see in the threads discussing the topic) when using the term native language, whereas mother tongue is very clear-cut.
So, why not simply change the wording in all profiles (which would be trivial) from native language to mother tongue? And then, for those rare situations where someone has, in fact, been brought up speaking more than one language, creating a system whereby one could prove their place of birth/parent's nationality/provide proof of their claim.
Now, at the risk of being shunned as an heretic, I'd like to mention that I'm actually one of the people who've claimed English as one of their native languages (Sure as hell wouldn't say it's my mother tongue, though! And I obviously make it clear to clients that I'm a Portuguese native) when I haven't actually grown up (for the most part - I mean, I did get my C2 certification, when I was, what, 17 years old?) speaking English. ProZ doesn't have an option where I can simply say I'm near-native, nor does the site define (as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong) what native means for its own purposes. And not doing so would bar me from quoting on projects (the only reason I actually defined myself as having English as a native language) I feel that I'm capable of handling just as well, or even better in some cases, than someone who has lived their entire life in the UK or US. And hell, if I can do the job, and the client is satisfied, why not? Let the market decide.
I've corrected homework for friends, British and American natives who have English as their first language, and I've done so from an early age. Does that mean they, who have lived in English-speaking countries their entire lives should not be considered to have English as their native language?
Does that then mean that, through the Highlander Transfer of Power Law ("There can be only one" - I'm sure you know what I'm talking about), their native status is given unto me?
I've corrected texts for Portuguese university professors, professors who are Portuguese natives and for whom Portuguese is their first language. Professors who, very simply put, don't write all that well.
This begs the question: would one such professor be considered a native when put under the scrutiny of a 'nativeness review board' (which is something people have suggested in the other thread)? Who the hell knows.
So, I completely agree with the points Samuel made in his original post. Lets stop with all this drama over what is nothing more than a mere technicality - just change it, native language, to mother tongue - or as Samuel put it: childhood language.
Perhaps in conjunction with 'most competent language combination', which is an all around good idea, and with a slight change/addition to the choices a client can pick from when creating a job post; which would be, of course, an option to choose a translator who has defined their 'most competent language combination' to be the one the client is looking for.
[Edited at 2012-06-25 05:27 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phil Hand
Chine
Local time: 12:02
chinois vers anglais
| You know they're now talking about remaking Highlander? | Jun 25, 2012 |
Which is (a) sacrelige, and (b) makes a bit of a mockery of the whole "only one" thing...
Anyway.
Nuno:
1) I don't think your "childhood language" suggestion helps, because it will just be abused in exactly the same way as "native speaker". Honestly, no-one is really confused by what native speaker means. It definitely means you acquired the language as a child.
"And not doing so would bar me from quoting on projects I feel that I'm capable of... See more Which is (a) sacrelige, and (b) makes a bit of a mockery of the whole "only one" thing...
Anyway.
Nuno:
1) I don't think your "childhood language" suggestion helps, because it will just be abused in exactly the same way as "native speaker". Honestly, no-one is really confused by what native speaker means. It definitely means you acquired the language as a child.
"And not doing so would bar me from quoting on projects I feel that I'm capable of handling just as well"
Here's a perfect example. You're not claiming English native status because you think you are, but because it would harm your business prospects.
And I understand that too, but this is the outsourcer's choice to make (on Proz). You're actually harming your own case by lying here. If outsourcers are wrong to insist on "native speakers", then we should argue that. I certainly thing the debate needs to become a lot more nuanced. But we can't do it while there is widespread dishonesty about native languages.
"would one such professor be considered a native when put under the scrutiny of a 'nativeness review board'"
I actually agree with that: when you're trying to find fault, it's easy to seize on any typo as evidence of poor language skills. Care is required.
@Lisa:
I've been asked to translate L1-L2 not because the client thought it was my best combination, but because I'd do it better than anyone else they could find - a case of other factors (professionalism, familiarity with the material) being more important than native speakerdom.
Edit: oops, no, not what you asked: these were direct clients. Never by an agency.
[Edited at 2012-06-25 05:33 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| And again this poor language skills of native speakers... | Jun 25, 2012 |
Poor language skills don´t make a native speaker/writer less native. And perfect grammar doesn´t make you native.
| | | | Nuno Rosalino
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 05:02
Membre (2012)
anglais vers portugais
+ ...
Phil Hand wrote:
1) I don't think your "childhood language" suggestion helps, because it will just be abused in exactly the same way as "native speaker". Honestly, no-one is really confused by what native speaker means. It definitely means you acquired the language as a child.
As has been pointed out by many in both these discussion threads, people, linguists and translators by trade, see the term as having different definitions, or having something to do with proficiency or skill level - probably because using 'native' as an indication of proficiency leads people to compare themselves to natives, who may or may not be well educated in the use of their own language.
Using the term 'mother tongue' or 'childhood language' in the stead of 'native language' completely removes such doubts or ambiguities, because it doesn't refer, nor would anyone think it would, to the skill or proficiency one has with the language. Everyone CLEARLY knows what those terms are supposed to mean - unlike the current state of affairs brought on by the usage of 'native language'.
Phil Hand wrote:
"And not doing so would bar me from quoting on projects I feel that I'm capable of handling just as well"
Here's a perfect example. You're not claiming English native status because you think you are, but because it would harm your business prospects.
And I understand that too, but this is the outsourcer's choice to make (on Proz). You're actually harming your own case by lying here. If outsourcers are wrong to insist on "native speakers", then we should argue that. I certainly thing the debate needs to become a lot more nuanced. But we can't do it while there is widespread dishonesty about native languages.
I make sure the client knows I'm not an English native on my dealings with them - I also make sure I only quote on jobs I know I'd probably perform just as well as a native. (nothing that would require too much 'flair', such as poetry or the like). If despite knowing I'm not a native they still choose to deal with me rather than with an actual native, well, that's not really my fault, is it?
In practice, this is pretty much already what happens with ptPT and ptBR - I COULD quote on jobs for ptBR, but I do not since it would be a complete waste of time, both for the client and myself.
Much in the same way I do with jobs where clients request English natives - I assess whether I would be capable of providing a good service to the client, independently of my native status, and if I find that I could, I'll contact the client. 'Labelling' myself a English native on my profile only lifts the restriction of being actually capable of contacting the client.
Phil Hand wrote:
"would one such professor be considered a native when put under the scrutiny of a 'nativeness review board'"
I actually agree with that: when you're trying to find fault, it's easy to seize on any typo as evidence of poor language skills. Care is required.
Oh, I wasn't even talking about typos - just bad sentence structure, nonsensical phrases, so on. I've never been one to nitpick on typos, trust me. But no one would question these professor's status as a native Portuguese speaker - where as a 'review board' probably would.
Also, like what was stated in the sister thread, I doubt ProZ has the man power required to complete the bureaucracy behind checking documents proving nationality and such, so that a test of one's proficiency in the language would be necessary - which would, in turn, outcast at least a portion of actual native speakers, thus again, completely missing the point of having checks in place for this kind of stuff.
[Edited at 2012-06-25 06:21 GMT]
| | | | Nuno Rosalino
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 05:02
Membre (2012)
anglais vers portugais
+ ...
Nani Delgado wrote:
Poor language skills don´t make a native speaker/writer less native. And perfect grammar doesn´t make you native.
Completely agreed.
But if people suggest that one should be tested on their proficiency of the language in question in order to achieve 'native' status (which again, is what was being suggested in the previous thread), well, that would be quite hypocritical, wouldn't you also agree?
People need to make up their minds - it's either about place of birth/nationality/whatever or proficiency. If it's the latter, it shouldn't be called native language on our profiles, if it's the former, it should be made clearer. It's as simple as that.
[Edited at 2012-06-25 06:36 GMT]
| | | | Phil Hand
Chine
Local time: 12:02
chinois vers anglais
| Getting to the point of deliberate obfuscation here | Jun 25, 2012 |
Nuno:
I don't mean to be rude, but you're just being unreasonable with this kind of blatantly false either/or argument about what "native" means. There can be disagreement on what the boundaries of "native" are, but the core definition is simple.
"people, linguists and translators by trade, see the term as having different definitions"
No. A native language is one which you learned as a child and are competent in. Being competent doesn't mean you're a good ... See more Nuno:
I don't mean to be rude, but you're just being unreasonable with this kind of blatantly false either/or argument about what "native" means. There can be disagreement on what the boundaries of "native" are, but the core definition is simple.
"people, linguists and translators by trade, see the term as having different definitions"
No. A native language is one which you learned as a child and are competent in. Being competent doesn't mean you're a good writer. Native is not a single-criterion word (most words aren't). Trying to pretend that just because there are some borderline cases people don't know what it means is frankly just obfuscation.
There is doubt about exactly where a vehicle stops being a truck and starts being a car; people will draw the line in different places. That does not mean these words have no meaning or are difficult to understand.
In your particular case, you obviously recognise this. You said that you take care to inform outsourcers about your status.
These continuing claims that this simple question is somehow enormously difficult to answer are not progressing the debate. I refer you to my last post on the other thread.
"having something to do with proficiency or skill level"
Of course it has something to do with skill level! A translator is a professional writer. They have (a) native language competence plus (b) professional writing skills. So of course a translator working into their own native language will be skilled. No-one is denying this. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Pays-Bas
Local time: 06:02
Membre (2006)
anglais vers afrikaans
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL | I see Phil's point | Jun 25, 2012 |
Nuno Rosalino wrote: Phil Hand wrote:
I don't think your "childhood language" suggestion helps, because it will just be abused in exactly the same way as "native speaker". Honestly, no-one is really confused by what native speaker means. It definitely means "...". As has been pointed out by many in both these discussion threads, people ... see the term ['native language'] as having different definitions... Using the term 'mother tongue' or 'childhood language' in the stead of 'native language' completely removes such doubts or ambiguities...
Yes, but if I understand Phil correctly he believes that most non-native claims of nativeness have nothing to do with different definitions but with deliberate lying in order to get more jobs.
This seems particularly prevalent in his language combination, even among translators with impeccible profiles: 80 paying members and 1150 non-paying Chinese-English translators claim English as their native language, with 9 of those paying members and 290 of those non-paying members hailing from China.
I make sure the client knows I'm not an English native on my dealings with them... If despite knowing I'm not a native they still choose to deal with me rather than with an actual native, well, that's not really my fault, is it?
No, this is not a valid argument. If the client doesn't speak English very well then he won't be able to "catch you out". Also, if the client had specified "native" in his search then he would expect that to apply to you (if you quoted or contacted him for that job), and will not be on guard against possible misdeclarations, so it would not be "his fault" if he fails to recognise that you're not.
I'm not saying that I oppose "native" declarations by translators who aren't really native (after all, ProZ.com is economical with its definition of other standard industry terms too). I'm just saying that your reasoning above does not fly.
On the other hand:
I don't mean to be rude, but you're just being unreasonable with this kind of blatantly false either/or argument about what "native" means. There can be disagreement on what the boundaries of "native" are, but the core definition is simple.
You're not being rude, Phil. You're just so religiously certain that your theory is absolutely correct that you can't comprehend how anyone can possibly have any other belief (and therefore you doubt their sincerity).
[Edited at 2012-06-25 07:42 GMT]
| | | | Nuno Rosalino
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 05:02
Membre (2012)
anglais vers portugais
+ ...
| Boink, why must I come up with all these titles?! | Jun 25, 2012 |
Phil Hand wrote:
Nuno:
I don't mean to be rude, but you're just being unreasonable with this kind of blatantly false either/or argument about what "native" means. There can be disagreement on what the boundaries of "native" are, but the core definition is simple.
"people, linguists and translators by trade, see the term as having different definitions"
No. A native language is one which you learned as a child and are competent in. Being competent doesn't mean you're a good writer. Native is not a single-criterion word (most words aren't). Trying to pretend that just because there are some borderline cases people don't know what it means is frankly just obfuscation.
In your particular case, you obviously recognise this. You said that you take care to inform outsourcers about your status.
These continuing claims that this simple question is somehow enormously difficult to answer are not progressing the debate. I refer you to my last post on the other thread.
"having something to do with proficiency or skill level"
Of course it has something to do with skill level! A translator is a professional writer. They have (a) native language competence plus (b) professional writing skills. So of course a translator working into their own native language will be skilled. No-one is denying this.
Samuel Murray wrote: The Wikipedia article on native language mentions five ways in which to define native language: 1. Based on origin: the language(s) one learned first (the language(s) in which one has established the first long-lasting verbal contacts). 2. Based on internal identification: the language(s) one identifies with/as a speaker of; 3. Based on external identification: the language(s) one is identified with/as a speaker of, by others. 4. Based on competence: the language(s) one knows best. 5. Based on function: the language(s) one uses most. I assume the ProZ.com definition would likely be #3, since that is the easiest, least intrusive method of verification (though subjective, and fraught with other problems).
The core definition, is, indeed, simple - but, like Nani said, it has nothing to do with competence - unless you so choose to tack it on yourself, by associating it with a translator, whose native language may or may not be that in which he specialized him or herself .
And I realize you're not strictly talking about the definitions of the terms, but neither am I. I'm speaking from a practical standpoint, and from that standpoint only - the question for me here is how to solve the issue, not merely bicker about it.
And I was objecting to the suggestion posted in the other thread. This is what I was talking about when I said it's either about proficiency or nationality. You say it's about nationality AND skill both, but Lisa is also suggesting tests of proficiency and proficiency alone in her post. Which brings us to the definition of the term, again. If you're testing people claiming to be natives based on their ability with the language, then, you are, logically, saying that the only criterion that matters to be considered a native in that language is proficiency and skill level, no? Which conflicts with what you said, again, regarding people having different definitions of native.
I suggested, like Samuel, to simply make the wording used in the profiles clearer, more objective, and less subject to interpretation - which would in turn make 'policing' non-natives posing as such a much simpler affair.
Now, you're saying that in order for a translator to be considered a native, you'd have to provide proof of your place of birth, nationality, as well as proficiency and skill, correct? All from a practical standpoint, remember. If not, what do you propose then?
[Edited at 2012-06-25 07:50 GMT]
| | | | Nuno Rosalino
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 05:02
Membre (2012)
anglais vers portugais
+ ...
| That last bit is humour, don't lynch me please. | Jun 25, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
No, this is not a valid argument. If the client doesn't speak English very well then he won't be able to "catch you out". Also, if the client had specified "native" in his search then he would expect that to apply to you (if you quoted or contacted him for that job), and will not be on guard against possible misdeclarations, so it would not be "his fault" if he fails to recognise that you're not.
Oh, so should we just start assuming outsourcers are completely illiterate now? I think that if someone can set a native language in their search on ProZ, they'll be able to understand 'Hey, I'm not from the UK or anything, but my English is still good enough for what you need!'
If I can't communicate properly with the client, or vice-versa, chances are my services wouldn't be requested either, don't you think?
Really, your argument is about as valid as you say mine is.
P.S. I find it utterly appalling that you don't provide an audio version of your CV and credentials for the visually impaired (read by Morgan Freeman of course, we wouldn't want to upset the outsourcer's sensitive little ears, would we?)
[Edited at 2012-06-25 08:19 GMT]
| | | | | Pages sur ce sujet: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Replace "native language" with "most competent language combination" | 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 Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
