| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | Replace "native language" with "most competent language combination" Thread poster: Samuel Murray
|
|---|
Phil Hand 
China
Local time: 01:59
Chinese to English
| Again, enough with the either/or false distinctions | Jun 25, 2012 |
Nuno Rosalino wrote:
The core definition, is, indeed, simple
Thank you!
- but, like Nani said, it has nothing to do with competence
No, that's just not true. I put it this way to Samuel above:
"there are zero competent speakers of English in the world for whom the unqualified statement "X is my native language" does not imply that the speaker speaks X competently."
The core definition is simple, but it is not binary. It's not *just* I learned it in childhood. There are a bunch of other parts - most importantly, competence. (linguistic competence, not professional competence. You don't have to be a good writer)
unless you so choose to tack it on yourself, by associating it with a translator
This is Proz. A translator's website. I think the association with translators happens naturally.
You say it's about nationality AND skill both, but Lisa is also suggesting tests of proficiency and proficiency alone in her post... 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 is proficiency and skill level, no?
No, not at all. Any test for anything ever is partial and incomplete. Think of medical diagnoses, qualification exams, bank stress tests. No test is a perfect match for all aspects of the thing you want to test, because this is the real world, not some kind of perfect logicland. Testing any one of the core parts of the meaning of "native" would get us 99% of the way there. I can't see any way to test childhood acquisition - what documentation do you have that proves where you grew up? Primary school reports?! But we can test competence. (Complex and problematic though it is - I actually agree with Robert on the other thread that it could create conflict between members.)
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.
Well, I agree, which is why I'm finding your odd claims about what native means/does not mean to be completely irrelevant.
I've already told you (and Samuel) that your suggestion to change to "childhood language" won't solve the problem. It will be understood in exactly the same way as "native language", and those who are going to misrepresent themselves - like you, incidentally - will still misrepresent themselves in the same way.
In truth, as I said on the other thread, your case is not what I'm most worried about. The reason I would like to see this fixed is that translators who cannot write competent English clog up the searches (and Kudoz) in my pair. They can be weeded out with a test of competence.
That test of competence could be no more than a quick look at forum posts by a Proz staff member, and an email sent to those who are obviously non-native. Or it could be more formal.
@Morgan Freeman: lol
I'm with you on that one. There has to be an element of caveat emptor for agencies. If you provide full disclosure it's their choice. I would just say that I wish you did it on Proz, rather than later.
[Edited at 2012-06-25 07:59 GMT]
| | | | | Come in, Jared | Jun 25, 2012 |
Last night, I asked Jared to join this debate and the one in the other, related, thread, because I think it's high time we heard from a member of Proz's staff. So far, I've received no reply and he hasn't responded here - but perhaps they're all still asleep across the pond.
Jenny
[Edited at 2012-06-25 10:47 GMT]
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Hebrew to English
| OT: Grammar obsession and confusion with competence | Jun 25, 2012 |
Just throwing this in:
I think a lot of the non-native speakers are confusing "linguistic competence" with "grammatical competence".
They are not the same.
"competence is the 'ideal' language system that makes it possible for speakers to produce and understand an infinite number of sentences in their language, and to distinguish grammatical sentences from ungrammatical sentences. This is unaffected by "grammatically irrelevant conditions" such as speech er... See more Just throwing this in:
I think a lot of the non-native speakers are confusing "linguistic competence" with "grammatical competence".
They are not the same.
"competence is the 'ideal' language system that makes it possible for speakers to produce and understand an infinite number of sentences in their language, and to distinguish grammatical sentences from ungrammatical sentences. This is unaffected by "grammatically irrelevant conditions" such as speech errors...."
To add to that, it's also the ability to recognize when a grammatically perfect sentence just isn't acceptable/idiomatic. Native speakers can do this without blinking (educated or not), non-native speakers struggle.
A recurring problem in this thread and the other, is that a few non-native speakers come along with the anecdote "I once spotted a few "grammatical" errors in a native speaker's output, therefore I must be more "competent" than your average native speaker".
I think it reveals a lack of understanding between L1 / L2 errors and a confusion between grammatical competence and linguistic competence, which are not the same thing.
_________________________________________________________________________
I'm also confused by Nuno's declaration that "native speaker" simply cannot be a childhood language AND competence.
Has polysemy been banned while I was sleeping? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Nuno Rosalino
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Member (2012)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| No it hasn't. | Jun 25, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
I'm also confused by Nuno's declaration that "native speaker" simply cannot be a childhood language AND competence.
Has polysemy been banned while I was sleeping?
You were confused because you didn't understand the point I was making. Just to clarify, I was talking about how to go about testing for 'nativeness'.
[Edited at 2012-06-25 08:42 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall wrote:
To add to that, it's also the ability to recognize when a grammatically perfect sentence just isn't acceptable/idiomatic. Native speakers can do this without blinking (educated or not), non-native speakers struggle.
A recurring problem in this thread and the other, is that a few non-native speakers come along with the anecdote "I once spotted a few "grammatical" errors in a native speaker's output, therefore I must be more "competent" than your average native speaker".
I think it reveals a lack of understanding between L1 / L2 errors and a confusion between grammatical competence and linguistic competence, which are not the same thing.
Thank you, Ty! That´s what I was just - unsuccessfully as it seems - trying to say.
Ty Kendall wrote:
Has polysemy been banned while I was sleeping?
I hope not. 
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Portuguese to English
+ ...
Nuno what would be the problem with declaring PT as your native language and continuing to offer EN>PT and PT>EN as your language combinations, as you do at present?
| | | | Nuno Rosalino
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Member (2012)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| Bolded and everything. | Jun 25, 2012 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
Nuno what would be the problem with declaring PT as your native language and continuing to offer EN>PT and PT>EN as your language combinations, as you do at present?
Nuno Rosalino wrote:
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.
(in certain cases)
Truth be told a few months ago I tried to remove one of the languages being displayed on my profile as native (I think Portuguese is or was showing up twice as a native language on my profile for some obscure reason) - and hey, guess what? Turns out it's easier to add native languages than it is to remove them!
[Edited at 2012-06-25 08:27 GMT]
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Hebrew to English
I'm not confused in the slightest, and I understood you perfectly. I was disagreeing with your insistence that "native speaker" must mean either/or and it couldn't possibly mean both. You'll notice Phil also disagreed, maybe we both misunderstood? Hm?
| | |
|
|
|
Nuno Rosalino
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Member (2012)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| Differences, differences. | Jun 25, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
I'm not confused in the slightest, and I understood you perfectly. I was disagreeing with your insistence that "native speaker" must mean either/or and it couldn't possibly mean both. You'll notice Phil also disagreed, maybe we both misunderstood? Hm?
You insist on something that's quite different from what Phil insisted on.You're misrepresenting what I said, whereas Phil had a valid point to make. I was talking in the context of how to go about testing natives. I was saying you could either TEST for proficiency or nationality - doing both being somewhat impossible.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Portuguese to English
+ ...
| Correct me if I'm wrong | Jun 25, 2012 |
Nuno Rosalino wrote:
'Labelling' myself a English native on my profile only lifts the restriction of being actually capable of contacting the client.
[/quote]
I'm not sure if I've understood correctly. Are you saying you use the "English native" label in order to be able to quote on jobs?
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Portuguese to English
+ ...
Strikes me as the most pointless test of all. I have rafts of friends, originally non-Europeans, who now have Dutch nationality because it was/is easy to get and allowed them to remain in Europe. Not a single one of them speaks Dutch or even lives there. I have French nationality, so does that make me a French native speaker?
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Hebrew to English
| Improbable, not impossible | Jun 25, 2012 |
Nuno Rosalino wrote: Ty Kendall wrote:
I'm not confused in the slightest, and I understood you perfectly. I was disagreeing with your insistence that "native speaker" must mean either/or and it couldn't possibly mean both. You'll notice Phil also disagreed, maybe we both misunderstood? Hm? You insist on something that's quite different from what Phil insisted on.You're misrepresenting what I said, whereas Phil had a valid point to make. I was talking in the context of how to go about testing natives. I was saying you could either TEST for proficiency or nationality - doing both being somewhat impossible.
Again, I disagree. Where there's a will, there's a way. But don't let that stop you from splitting hairs....
| | |
|
|
|
Nuno Rosalino
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Member (2012)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
| It's a way, just a very hard way. | Jun 25, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote: Nuno Rosalino wrote: Ty Kendall wrote:
I'm not confused in the slightest, and I understood you perfectly. I was disagreeing with your insistence that "native speaker" must mean either/or and it couldn't possibly mean both. You'll notice Phil also disagreed, maybe we both misunderstood? Hm? You insist on something that's quite different from what Phil insisted on.You're misrepresenting what I said, whereas Phil had a valid point to make. I was talking in the context of how to go about testing natives. I was saying you could either TEST for proficiency or nationality - doing both being somewhat impossible. Again, I disagree. Where there's a will, there's a way. But don't let that stop you from splitting hairs....
What about the folks saying they'd instantly leave if ProZ required one to prove 'nativeness' in the other thread? I remember seeing someone post something along those lines in the other thread - I'll try to fish it up for you. EDIT: Here it is
And I don't think it'd be possible for ProZ to feasibly test proficiency and 'childhood acquisition' - there must be a reason there's no verification now, no?
[Edited at 2012-06-25 09:07 GMT]
| | | | Nuno Rosalino
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Member (2012)
English to Portuguese
+ ...
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
Strikes me as the most pointless test of all. I have rafts of friends, originally non-Europeans, who now have Dutch nationality because it was/is easy to get and allowed them to remain in Europe. Not a single one of them speaks Dutch or even lives there. I have French nationality, so does that make me a French native speaker?
Fair enough, I apologize for using 'nationality' when I shouldn't have. What I meant by 'testing nationality' was what Phil referred to as 'Childhood Acquisition'.
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 18:59
Hebrew to English
Nuno Rosalino wrote:
What about the folks saying they'd instantly leave if ProZ required one to prove 'nativeness' in the other thread? I remember seeing someone post something along those lines in the other thread - I'll try to fish it up for you.
Don't bother. It doesn't concern me in the slightest that some people throw their rattle out the pram at the slightest thing. What you really have to ask yourself is, just why would they leave?
And I don't think it'd be possible for ProZ to feasibly test proficiency and 'childhood acquisition' - there must be a reason there's no verification now, no?
As I said, it's possible, just improbable....and you'll notice I'm not actually advocating it, just mentioning the fact it's not actually impossible. Personally, I don't think you need to test for childhood acquisition. If you possess the LINGUISTIC COMPETENCE I mentioned earlier (not grammatical competence), then chances are you acquired that language as a child.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [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" | 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 » |
| | 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 
