| Pages in topic: < [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 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183] > | Should “native language” claims be verified? Thread poster: XXXphxxx (X)
|
|---|
| A partial solution | Aug 17, 2012 |
Bala,
There is already in place a partial solution, easily applicable to translators like you who are CPN members. They could apply to be certified in the reverse direction, in your case, Hindi to English. A certification of that kind, if properly made, indicates that the person has shown to be able to produce a professional translation from his or her native language to English. Granted, the certification is based just on the ability to produce an “adequate” translation, not an... See more Bala,
There is already in place a partial solution, easily applicable to translators like you who are CPN members. They could apply to be certified in the reverse direction, in your case, Hindi to English. A certification of that kind, if properly made, indicates that the person has shown to be able to produce a professional translation from his or her native language to English. Granted, the certification is based just on the ability to produce an “adequate” translation, not an outstanding one, but that is just all that is certified for members of any other profession (lawyers, MDs, etc.), that they meet minimum requirements.
If one is able to deliver a professional translation to English, by implication, that person has at least a professional command of the English language.
Whenever a client select English as native language, a window will appear that says: Do you want to include in your search those translators who are CPN members certified as A> EN (say) professional translators but who have not declared English as their native language? Yes/No (mandatory answer).
This:
A) Separates issues re native language and professional proficiency.
B) Does not imply any misrepresentation (intentional or by mistake).
C) Is not based on the translator’s self-assessment.
D) Does not incentivize price reduction as a competitive tool.
E) Properly leaves the decision on the hands of the only party entitled to make it.
F) Does not require any new procedure to determine proficiency as the CPN program is already in place.
Just a thought.
Best,
Luis ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Integrity is Important | Aug 18, 2012 |
I think some people have really missed the point of this whole discussion.
As a native speaker of English, I do not, in any way, feel threatened by people in my language pair who claim to be native speakers when they are obviously not. These people are not my competitors, even if they are charging lower rates. If I "lose" a job to a non-native, that is probably a job I did not want in the first place. There is plenty of work to go around, and I do not even feel that I am "competing"... See more I think some people have really missed the point of this whole discussion.
As a native speaker of English, I do not, in any way, feel threatened by people in my language pair who claim to be native speakers when they are obviously not. These people are not my competitors, even if they are charging lower rates. If I "lose" a job to a non-native, that is probably a job I did not want in the first place. There is plenty of work to go around, and I do not even feel that I am "competing" with other native speakers of English. Contrary to what has been implied by some, I do not see clients flocking to use non-natives with cheaper rates. Those who do usually end up paying the price later on when the work has to be edited by a professional.
Sometimes we do not have all the skills or qualifications that a particular client wants. If this is the case and you are convinced that you are able to do the job, all you have to do is explain your situation to the client. You can, for example, say, "I am not technically a native speaker of English, but I feel that my English-writing skills are comparable to those of a native. Here is a sample of my writing that demonstrates that." Or you could explain that you always work with a native editor who smooths out your language. Or whatever. The point is that you are showing a certain level of integrity when you interact with a potential client.
Most clients are very responsive to this type of honesty. It shows respect.
I have worked on numerous projects for which I did not meet the initial desired qualifications. One client wanted someone with a PhD in Middle East studies to translate news articles. I was able to overcome this by demonstrating I had practical experience in the field of journalism. Another client wanted someone with experience in literary translation, which I did not have at the time. This time, I was able to show I was qualified for the job by providing a well-written translation sample. I did not just go and fabricate experience or lie on my CV to get those jobs. Many clients over the years have actually taken the time to train me in the skills I was missing simply because I presented myself well and they were convinced I was the best person for the project.
If you are a non-native speaker who is able to write like a native, more power to you. But I think it shows a certain amount of insecurity when you lie about your background.
I was once the managing editor of a magazine. One of my responsibilities was to recruit writers. Some of them were non-natives, and it always showed. Even subtle mistakes can be very time-consuming to fix. A lot of people have the attitude of "that's what editors are for, to fix mistakes," but the truth is that editing can be very tedious and time-consuming work, and ESL-editing is different than "regular" editing for the occasional typo or grammatical error. If a client is asking for a native speaker, you should at least respect that and let him or her know your background. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | | Ty Kendall 
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:56
Hebrew to English
Amel Abdullah wrote:
I think some people have really missed the point of this whole discussion.
As a native speaker of English, I do not, in any way, feel threatened by people in my language pair who claim to be native speakers when they are obviously not. These people are not my competitors, even if they are charging lower rates. If I "lose" a job to a non-native, that is probably a job I did not want in the first place. There is plenty of work to go around, and I do not even feel that I am "competing" with other native speakers of English. Contrary to what has been implied by some, I do not see clients flocking to use non-natives with cheaper rates. Those who do usually end up paying the price later on when the work has to be edited by a professional.
Sometimes we do not have all the skills or qualifications that a particular client wants. If this is the case and you are convinced that you are able to do the job, all you have to do is explain your situation to the client. You can, for example, say, "I am not technically a native speaker of English, but I feel that my English-writing skills are comparable to those of a native. Here is a sample of my writing that demonstrates that." Or you could explain that you always work with a native editor who smooths out your language. Or whatever. The point is that you are showing a certain level of integrity when you interact with a potential client.
Most clients are very responsive to this type of honesty. It shows respect.
I have worked on numerous projects for which I did not meet the initial desired qualifications. One client wanted someone with a PhD in Middle East studies to translate news articles. I was able to overcome this by demonstrating I had practical experience in the field of journalism. Another client wanted someone with experience in literary translation, which I did not have at the time. This time, I was able to show I was qualified for the job by providing a well-written translation sample. I did not just go and fabricate experience or lie on my CV to get those jobs. Many clients over the years have actually taken the time to train me in the skills I was missing simply because I presented myself well and they were convinced I was the best person for the project.
If you are a non-native speaker who is able to write like a native, more power to you. But I think it shows a certain amount of insecurity when you lie about your background.
I was once the managing editor of a magazine. One of my responsibilities was to recruit writers. Some of them were non-natives, and it always showed. Even subtle mistakes can be very time-consuming to fix. A lot of people have the attitude of "that's what editors are for, to fix mistakes," but the truth is that editing can be very tedious and time-consuming work, and ESL-editing is different than "regular" editing for the occasional typo or grammatical error. If a client is asking for a native speaker, you should at least respect that and let him or her know your background.
I only wish other contributors to this thread had grasped it so comprehensively. Your post reminded me of when I got my first ELT teaching job (while I was still a student). I didn't get it by lying through my teeth or by pretending to be something I'm not. I was honest - I told them I have a severe lack of experience and moreover I was still a 1st year student.
They later called me saying how impressed they were with my enthusiasm.
I got the job.
I really hope this thread hasn't died because of the intentional derailing by some posters serving their own agenda.
| | |
|
|
|
| Unfortunately, I cannot agree with you, Amel | Aug 27, 2012 |
Native language is a very outdated and imprecise term in multi-lingual societies.I think terms like L1 -- for the first language, and Primary Language for somebody's best language and the one predominately used in everyday life and work should be used. Native language, nowadays, has just a symbolic, emotional value and usually signifies ethnic language, or the culture the person identifies with. This kind of term should not really be used for translation purposes. It might have been good in the ... See more Native language is a very outdated and imprecise term in multi-lingual societies.I think terms like L1 -- for the first language, and Primary Language for somebody's best language and the one predominately used in everyday life and work should be used. Native language, nowadays, has just a symbolic, emotional value and usually signifies ethnic language, or the culture the person identifies with. This kind of term should not really be used for translation purposes. It might have been good in the 18th or 19th centuries, but it is not anymore. I still don't believe many people here are lying -- they just simply have to choose something and there is no place to describe the subtleties -- just choose one or two. Black or white. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:56
Hebrew to English
| Outdated...according to what authority? | Aug 27, 2012 |
LilianBoland wrote:
Native language is a very outdated and imprecise term in multi-lingual societies.I think terms like L1 -- for the first language, and Primary Language for somebody's best language and the one predominately used in everyday life and work should be used. Native language, nowadays, has just a symbolic, emotional value and usually signifies ethnic language, or the culture the person identifies with. This kind of term should not really be used for translation purposes. It might have been good in the 18th or 19th centuries, but it is not anymore. I still don't believe many people here are lying -- they just simply have to choose something and there is no place to describe the subtleties -- just choose one or two. Black or white.
Apart from your own?
People are lying - they have even admitted as much on this very thread, it's called a confession, as evidence goes - it's pretty airtight.
By saying that you think the term shouldn't be used in translation then you are in disagreement with 99% of the contributors here, leading linguists and the main professional bodies (such as the ATA, IoL etc). This is not to say it's an invalid opinion - just a fringe one.
You also can't single out "native language" as being symbolic, emotional and tied up with ethnicity. Apart from being highly debatable (not fact as you state it), it could also be claimed for many other linguistic labels, including the ones you propose to replace it with.
| | | | Rachel Fell
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:56
French to English
+ ...
LilianBoland wrote:
Native language is a very outdated and imprecise term in multi-lingual societies.I think terms like L1 -- for the first language, and Primary Language for somebody's best language and the one predominately used in everyday life and work should be used. Native language, nowadays, has just a symbolic, emotional value and usually signifies ethnic language, or the culture the person identifies with. This kind of term should not really be used for translation purposes. It might have been good in the 18th or 19th centuries, but it is not anymore. I still don't believe many people here are lying -- they just simply have to choose something and there is no place to describe the subtleties -- just choose one or two. Black or white.
Shoemenders and Scandinavian characters.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:56
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Ty Kendall wrote:
I really hope this thread hasn't died because of the intentional derailing by some posters serving their own agenda.
No sooner than, eh?
I agree Ty. It’s so refreshing to see someone (Amel) who hasn’t been part of the heated discussion immediately understand that this thread is most certainly not about native speakers “protecting their turf”. As the days and weeks have gone by I’ve been sent links to a number of profiles, which are a clear indictment of the fact that ProZ is being used intentionally for fraudulent claims by large numbers of users precisely as a result of this loophole, which still has not been closed…
These profiles clearly reveal that there are translators on this site who claim more than one “native” language, while only claiming one on other sites (both professional and commercial) that have verification processes in place to stop this from being done. There are also translators here who have claimed English as their native language, while not doing so on other commercial sites, because ProZ allows them to reap the benefit of qualifying for a broader range of jobs, and con outsourcers seeking real native speakers in the process. It’s an absolute joke.
| | |
|
|
|
Phil Hand
China
Local time: 08:56
Chinese to English
| So... action? | Aug 28, 2012 |
We haven't really managed to reach the consensus I hoped we might achieve on what should be done, so how about going another way, and just throwing the question back to the site staff?
We own this site. If we can put together a petition and get enough members to sign it, we should be able to change site policy. I'm thinking of something as simple as: "We move that Proz take some action to enforce rule [whatever it is], with particular reference to native languages declared in user p... See more We haven't really managed to reach the consensus I hoped we might achieve on what should be done, so how about going another way, and just throwing the question back to the site staff?
We own this site. If we can put together a petition and get enough members to sign it, we should be able to change site policy. I'm thinking of something as simple as: "We move that Proz take some action to enforce rule [whatever it is], with particular reference to native languages declared in user profiles."
Lisa, would you like to kick such a thing off? ▲ Collapse
| | | |
"We own this site" - where on earth did you get that idea from?
This one is a classic case of "it's dead but it won't lie down"!
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:56
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Phil Hand wrote:
Lisa, would you like to kick such a thing off?
I can look into it, then again someone with more knowledge of this area might be better. The online petition sites I know are political. I suspect a Facebook page might be better but then that might assume we're all FB users. Anyone else with ideas?
| | | | | Hi Ty. No, not just me. Many contemporary -- more avangarde linguists | Aug 28, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
LilianBoland wrote:
Native language is a very outdated and imprecise term in multi-lingual societies.I think terms like L1 -- for the first language, and Primary Language for somebody's best language and the one predominately used in everyday life and work should be used. Native language, nowadays, has just a symbolic, emotional value and usually signifies ethnic language, or the culture the person identifies with. This kind of term should not really be used for translation purposes. It might have been good in the 18th or 19th centuries, but it is not anymore. I still don't believe many people here are lying -- they just simply have to choose something and there is no place to describe the subtleties -- just choose one or two. Black or white.
Apart from your own?
People are lying - they have even admitted as much on this very thread, it's called a confession, as evidence goes - it's pretty airtight.
By saying that you think the term shouldn't be used in translation then you are in disagreement with 99% of the contributors here, leading linguists and the main professional bodies (such as the ATA, IoL etc). This is not to say it's an invalid opinion - just a fringe one.
You also can't single out "native language" as being symbolic, emotional and tied up with ethnicity. Apart from being highly debatable (not fact as you state it), it could also be claimed for many other linguistic labels, including the ones you propose to replace it with.
think the term is not suitable for contemporary, multilingual environments. In job, or study situations, it is not that often used in the United States, being replaced with something less vague, like first language -- for the first language acquired or primary language for the language mostly used, or the best of all. There is one great Brazilian linguist who really thinks that this term is not only vague, but also a source of various kinds of prejudice. There are more and more people who think like him, in the linguistic field.
| | |
|
|
|
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
Phil Hand wrote:
Lisa, would you like to kick such a thing off?
I can look into it, then again someone with more knowledge of this area might be better. The online petition sites I know are political. I suspect a Facebook page might be better but then that might assume we're all FB users. Anyone else with ideas?
Hi Phil and Lisa,
I think a petition from Proz members is a good idea, but not via Facebook because by no means everyone uses Facebook.
As a first move, why not send Proz a support request asking what would be the best way for its members to present it with a petition? At least we'd be seen as trying to work *with* Proz rather than perhaps seeming hostile.
Best wishes,
Jenny
| | | | psicutrinius
Spain
Local time: 01:56
Spanish to English
+ ...
...why don't you stop fudging the issue and name the authors, give us also their credentials and location and a quotation of their exact sayings?. I mean:
being replaced with something less vague, like first language -- for the first language acquired or primary language for the language mostly used, or the best of all
Where? Who (a) uses that terminology and (b) where is the proof that they have switched to it from the "N" word? Remember: Names, places, quotatio... See more ...why don't you stop fudging the issue and name the authors, give us also their credentials and location and a quotation of their exact sayings?. I mean:
being replaced with something less vague, like first language -- for the first language acquired or primary language for the language mostly used, or the best of all
Where? Who (a) uses that terminology and (b) where is the proof that they have switched to it from the "N" word? Remember: Names, places, quotations ONLY.
There is one great Brazilian linguist who really thinks that this term is not only vague, but also a source of various kinds of prejudice.
Who is this?. Where (online, of course) can I study his publications / ideas?
There are more and more people who think like him, in the linguistic field.
Again: Who are these? What are their qualifications? where do they teach? How can we get hold of their publications/ideas?
Remember: Names, places, quotations ONLY.
As an Engineer who loves black on white, but who can also understand the grey scales, let me supply my own definition of the native language as "the one (the target) in which you can write an informal text you have read in another language (source), also informally, in such a way that nobody, ever, can trace the source language" (yes, an Argentinian will easily trace me as a Spaniard, of course, but the idea is that he cannot trace the English origin).
Certainly, I cannot give you any example in any of your pairs, but our peers here in mine will probably understand what I mean with an example:
In Spanish: "Vete a hacer gárgaras con tachuelas" means that you should leave me alone or suffer. How do you convey both the main idea and the associated "gallows humor" in the original exactly into English without losing in translation, while not sounding awkward?. That is, while the original translates as "go gurgle with nails", I think there are some ways of saying something along these lines which need not necessarily involve gurgling and nails -much the same as "pulling the leg" translates into Spanish as "tomar el pelo" ("taking the hair", literally).
There is another one: "Ni están todos los que son, ni son todos los que están"
And you surely can provide some of your own in your native language(s) as well.
Unless English is your native language, no way. And that's the name of the game here.
[Edited at 2012-08-28 12:13 GMT]
[Edited at 2012-08-28 12:14 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:56
Hebrew to English
| Not only AVANT-GARDE but also nameless, apparently | Aug 28, 2012 |
Thank you psicutrinius, you have said much of what I wanted to in reply to Liliana's inappropriately vague post. (Hint: if you want to bang on about being scientific and academic, then be scientific and academic in your referencing).
I'm sorry, but apart from Paikeday's "The Native Speaker is Dead" (1985), criticisms of the term "native speaker" are extremely thin on the ground. Even in the aforementioned article, not all the academics in discussion there agree on this issue.... See more Thank you psicutrinius, you have said much of what I wanted to in reply to Liliana's inappropriately vague post. (Hint: if you want to bang on about being scientific and academic, then be scientific and academic in your referencing).
I'm sorry, but apart from Paikeday's "The Native Speaker is Dead" (1985), criticisms of the term "native speaker" are extremely thin on the ground. Even in the aforementioned article, not all the academics in discussion there agree on this issue. So, I doubt this unnamed Brazilian linguist of yours is the final authority on the matter.
"In an ideal native speaker, there is a chronologically based awareness, a continuum from birth to death where there are no gaps. In an ideal non-native speaker, this continuum either does not start with birth, or if it does, the continuum has been significantly broken at some point. (I’m a case of the latter, in fact, having been brought up in a Welsh-English
environment until 9, then moving to England, where I promptly forgot most of my Welsh, and would no longer now claim to be a native speaker, even though I have many childhood associations and instinctive forms.)"
David Crystal in Paikeday's "The Native Speaker is Dead". (1985).
[Edited at 2012-08-28 12:45 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [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 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Should “native language” claims be verified? | 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 » |
| | 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! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
