| Halaman dalam topik: < [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? Penyiaran jaluran : XXXphxxx (X)
|
|---|
Samuel Murray 
Belanda
Local time: 16:01
Ahli (2006)
Bahasa Inggeris hingga Bahasa Afrikaan
+ ...
| The benefit would be the filter | Sep 25, 2012 |
Olly Pekelharing wrote:
Thanks for answering, but would you see any BENEFIT in it? Would it improve your profile if you could declare 'fully bilingual' next to English rather than nothing as is the case now?
Of course it would be nice to see such information at the top of the profile page, e.g.:
Native in: English
Bilingual in: English and French
Other: Dutch
or:
Native in: English
Near-native in: French
Proficient in: (none)
Basic in: Dutch
or:
As 1st language: English, French
As 2nd language: (none)
As foreign language: Dutch
or:
Read, hear, speak, write: English
Read, hear, speak, write: French
Read, hear, speak: Dutch
or any such variations, at the top of the profile page, depending on how ProZ.com decides to classify languages. So having that at the top of the profile page would be nice, but... the MAIN BENEFIT of the discussed "bilingual" option would be in the search filters.
My one concern with a filter is that it will create the impression that people who are bilingual are better translators than those who are non-bilingual. After all, the native language drop-down list will contain "Any | English | French | Bilingual" and I suspect more clients will choose "Bilingual", if they don't know that "bilingual" really means "really really native in just one of these".
Its the reverse of the current situation, whereby honest near-natives are excluded from jobs because clients believe that only native-native native translators are good translators.
Samuel
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 19:31
Ahli (2006)
Bahasa Inggeris hingga Bahasa Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | The case of Hindi and Urdu | Sep 25, 2012 |
The case of Hindi and Urdu is particularly relevant for this discussion on native language. Till just about a hundred years ago, there was no distinction between these two languages. They were merely considered as two literary versions of the same language, one written in the Devnagari script and the other written in the Persian script.
Later, in order to weaken a unified anti-imperialistic movement in India, the British hit upon an effective method of driving a wedge between the Hi... See more The case of Hindi and Urdu is particularly relevant for this discussion on native language. Till just about a hundred years ago, there was no distinction between these two languages. They were merely considered as two literary versions of the same language, one written in the Devnagari script and the other written in the Persian script.
Later, in order to weaken a unified anti-imperialistic movement in India, the British hit upon an effective method of driving a wedge between the Hindus and the Muslims by promoting Urdu as a separate language and that too exclusively of Muslims. The British then set up a standard of Urdu by inducing Urdu writers to adopt more and more terms from Persian and Arabic, and also set up a different standard for Hindi, by inducing Hindi writers to adopt more and more terms from Sanskrit. The fanatics on both sides picked up the cue and in about 50 years not only succeeded in dividing a single language but also a composite community and a country into two, and at the cost of immense bloodshed.
Yet today, the two languages of Urdu and Hindi continue to be exactly the same at the spoken level. The difference in these two languages is there only in higher levels of writing and in the script. For higher level terminology, Hindi relies on Sanskrit and Urdu on Persian and Arabic. This is the reason why Hindi films (a spoken medium) are equally popular in Pakistan and Pakistani Urdu serials and films are avidly watched in India, because there is total comprehension of each other’s language on both sides of the border. This is also the reason why when Urdu novels and books are published in the Devnagari script, they become immensely popular, because then the so called “Hindi” speakers are also able to read and understand them.
So mere speech based verification will have difficulty in telling apart two languages which in general perception are separate languages, ie, Hindi and Urdu.
This again highlights that the issue of native language is more complex than most people with less exposure to multi-lingual societies would assume.
[2012-09-25 06:45 GMT पर संपादन हुआ] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 19:31
Ahli (2006)
Bahasa Inggeris hingga Bahasa Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | More on Urdu | Sep 25, 2012 |
Today Urdu would be associated by most people with Pakistan, yet Urdu is the native language (as understood in this thread) of only a small section of people who have migrated to Pakistan from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in India which constitute the geographical origin of this language (where it continues to be spoken). Called Mohajirs, they mostly inhabit Karachi, where the main language is Sindhi. In the rest of Pakistan, a number of languages like Punjabi (which is perhaps spoken by the largest ... See more Today Urdu would be associated by most people with Pakistan, yet Urdu is the native language (as understood in this thread) of only a small section of people who have migrated to Pakistan from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in India which constitute the geographical origin of this language (where it continues to be spoken). Called Mohajirs, they mostly inhabit Karachi, where the main language is Sindhi. In the rest of Pakistan, a number of languages like Punjabi (which is perhaps spoken by the largest number of Pakistanis), Pashto, Baluchi, and various tribal languages are spoken. Urdu is however the official language of Pakistan and it is taught in schools and is generally used in administration. Like in all south Asian countries, English too is prevalent.
Now if we apply the native language criterion too closely, technically Urdu can be the native language of only those Pakistanis who have originally come from India, but yet Urdu is an article of faith on which the very nation of Pakistan is built and few Pakistanis would take kindly to Urdu not being considered their native language. Then again, how much “truth” would there be in a Punjabi-speaking Pakistani claiming Urdu his native language?
Again, this highlights that the native language issue is not merely a linguistic issue, but a lot of politics and history are also intertwined with it.
A similar case was also highlighted in the other thread (Native English Speaker) started by Kim by one of the posters there where, after the splitting of countries like Yugoslavia and Soviet Union, the language nomenclature has undergone a change. Many adults, who grew up speaking a particular language which was called one name, suddenly realized that they were speaking a different language, when the language had been renamed after the break up. What would be the native language of these people? Or, more interestingly their children, for their parents spoke a language that was called something else and the language they now speak is called something else (although, linguistically, both languages are the same)? I think the languages mentioned there was Russian and Ukrainian.
All these further highlight that the “native” in native language is a highly loaded concept with a lot of political and historical baggage. Do we want to lug that baggage along to this site?
It would be much simpler to take what is of relevance to us of this concept, which is “proficiency in the language” and pin our solutions on it, and discard the rest of the identity and historical baggage. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Belanda
Local time: 16:01
Ahli (2006)
Bahasa Inggeris hingga Bahasa Afrikaan
+ ...
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Verification method: go to a Powwow and talk to NL peers or have them evaluate a writing sample you create there and ask them to confirm your native language.
Most powows don't attract enough number of qualified native speakers of any language to form a reliable panel of judges to verify any language, at least not in places like India where many languages are spoken.
I've been to two or three powwows, and although the numbers were higher, and although most people there spoke the language of the country of the powwow to some degree, it's true that not many of them are native speakers of the main language. It is also difficult to figure out who is native and who isn't. A big problem with a powwow is that you can't remember who you've met at the powwow unless you have a good memory, and remembering details about how well the person spoke is even more difficult. Plus, with all the noise, a powwow is not a normal conversation environment.
If you would verify people at powwows, it would be best to have a set procedure for that, and that the candidate and judge(s) declare their intention to perform an evaluation beforehand, i.e. on the powwow's own web page. In what I envisage, all verification participants would print out one-page guidelines to be used at the powwow, and they should sit apart from everyone else during the verification process and fill in the forms. When they get back online, they then declare whatever it is that they want to declare.
Samuel
[Edited at 2012-09-25 06:50 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 15:01
Bahasa Ibrani hingga Bahasa Inggeris
| Linguistic mishaps..... | Sep 25, 2012 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
This is where the standard version of languages (English in this case) comes into the picture. Indians or Chinese or uneducated Londoners for that matter, may speak a pidgin version of English, call it Chinglish, Hinglish or Londonese
I was in stitches when I read this. It belies a deep misunderstanding of linguistics that you keep thinking education affects the basic ability of a native speaker to speak their own language. But, I'm here to clear this up:
1) There's no such thing as "Londonese".
2) There is a difference between DIALECT and PIDGIN. A rather large difference.
This is a dialect:
This is a pidgin (Tok Pisin in this case):
And just for the avoidance of doubt, this is a pigeon:
Translators master the standard version by a process that is artificial and hence has nothing to do with childhood learning. The standard version of the language is an artificial construct that has to be separately mastered in addition to learning the native language, and this has to be done equally by both the native as well as the non-native.
Yes, but for the native, it's NOT a non-native language to begin with! You also seem to be forgetting that native speaking children are taught the WRITTEN standard throughout their childhood (but you seem to think this makes uneducated native speakers incapable of SPEAKING/USING their own language,... hint: it doesn't).
visavis
That hypothetical dead Frenchman of mine is still spinning in his grave.
______________
I think you've taken your philosophy of:
the matter of truthfulness takes a back seat in this context.
...way too far. Truthfulness cannot take a backseat when it comes to linguistics.
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 19:31
Ahli (2006)
Bahasa Inggeris hingga Bahasa Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Hindi and its dialects | Sep 25, 2012 |
Kirsten Bodart wrote:
I would be interested to know too where we are with Hindi. A lot of India speaks Hindi beside another native language, because the country has to be run. Big economic area. I would be interested to know how the knowledge of one of those would affect your output of Hindi and how the definition of 'native language' would work there.
Hindi presents a unique case among all languages, at least among Indian languages. It is best viewed as a cluster of dialects of which one or more at any point in history assumes preeminence (that is, they become the “prestige dialect” in Phil’s terminology). Currently it is the Khadi Boli dialect spoken in the Delhi-Agra-Meerut area that is the preeminent dialect and is the standard of Hindi language. This is the version of Hindi that is taught in schools, used by the media, used in literature, in which films are made and in which scholarly writings are done, and which is described in grammar books. But that does not mean that this has been so always. Until a few centuries ago, this place was occupied by Brajbhasha, another dialect of Hindi spoken in Mathura, Vrindavan, etc., which was the standard of Hindi, and had been so for centuries earlier. There have been other times when dialects like Awadhi and Maithli have had their hours (actually centuries) of preeminence. It would even be a misnomer to call these dialects, because each of these “dialects” has extensive written literature, but mostly poetry. Prose in all language is a late arrival and so is the case with Hindi. Among the dialects of Hindi only Khadi Boli has substantial prose, which is probably why it became the dominant dialect of today, for prose is now the most important version of language.
Speakers of other dialects of Hindi number in their millions and live in contiguous and often overlapping geographical areas. Some of the dialects of Hindi like Rajasthani, Bhojpuri and Maithili are clamouring for their place among the ranks of full-fledged languages, and if the political winds blow favourably they can easily achieve that status.
But the main thing to remember is that although Hindi is actually a confederation of dialects, all these dialects have more in common among themselves than with other languages, which is why linguists treat all these as a single language (ie Hindi) and distinguish them from other languages. For example, there may be a lot of difference between say Khadi Boli and Awadhi, yet the similarities between these two are considerably more pronounced than the similarity between say Khadi Boli and Gujarati or Awadhi and Bengali, the latter two being different “languages”.
There is also a lot of politics, economics and social prestige attached to Khadi Boli, the standard version of Hindi and many speakers of other dialects learn this dialect for the distinct advantages it gives them. So we have a situation where a person may speak Bhojpuri or Maithili or Rajasthani at home or among close friends or relatives, but will attend school where the standard version of Hindi is taught and also use it for all day to day activities and all higher pursuits such as literary composition, scholarly usage, business usage, communication on a wider scale, etc.
Since the dialects of Hindi and the standard dialect of Hindi, ie, Khadi Boli, are so similar, there are no barriers for a person speaking one of the dialects of Hindi to pick up Khadi Boli, the standard version of Hindi. I have a feeling that a person who has been exposed to a dialect of a language in childhood can pick up a different dialect of the same language even in later life at native level of competence, and this routinely happens with people speaking the different dialects of Hindi.
People speak their dialects while they are in their villages or at home, but when they move to cities or market places they switch to the standard version (Khadi Boli) of Hindi. It would be difficult to say which is their mother tongue – the dialect spoken at home or standard Hindi. In censuses, people routinely declare Hindi as their mother tongue without specifying the dialect. Most people are not even conscious of the existence of two version of Hindi in their lives, so effortlessly is the switch from one version to the other in their lives.
Moving on, we come to the next peculiarity of Hindi. Hindi in addition to being the mother tongue of roughly half of India (which adds up to about 500 million speakers), is also the official language of the Indian state, and also, more importantly, the link language between the various other languages spoken in India of which nineteen have been recognized as national languages of India. So, when a Gujarati wants to converse with a Marathi or a Punjabi, he will use Hindi as the intermediary language of communication. Since this requirement of inter-lingual communication is quite frequent in India as language geographies often overlap and cities are all multi-lingual, many people for whom Hindi is not the native language routinely and unconsciously learn Hindi. In this they are greatly encouraged by the state too which has made Hindi a compulsory language to be taught in all schools in India. So many Indians for whom Hindi is not a native language, also get opportunities to immerse themselves in the culture and nuances of Hindi at levels comparable to levels that are available to native Hindi speakers themselves.
Moreover, all Indian languages share not only vocabulary but also the sounds, by which I mean that they all follow the same alphabet structure with similar phonemes. Anyone who has studied Indian scripts will be struck by the similarity among the various Indian scripts like Devnagari, Gujarati, Gurumukhi, Bengali, etc. They all have about 90% of their basic sounds the same. Which means it is very easy for the speaker of one Indian language to speak another Indian language effortlessly.
The above two main facts about Hindi lead to the following inferences:
1. Even though the native language of a person may be a certain dialect of Hindi, he can speak the standard version effortlessly.
2. The dialects of Hindi are more elaborately different from each other than the various speech versions of other (European) languages, and some dialects of Hindi even have high level literature. Some dialects of Hindi are in the historical process of making the formal transition to full-fledged languages.
3. Other Indian languages, especially those of North India, are phonetically and at the level of vocabulary very similar to Hindi and speakers of these languages easily pick up Hindi at spoken levels that is comparable to those of native Hindi speakers.
4. There is much more interaction among dialects and languages in India than can be expected in other countries where language boundaries more or less coincide with national boundaries and hassles of visa, passport, etc. come in the way of intermingling of languages. That is not so in the case of Indian languages.
The above facts make the linguistic situation in India very different from that of Europe, Japan, or America, where such easy mingling of languages and dialects is less possible, and hence language acquisition trends in India differ substantially. To that extent, native language and its applicability is different in the case of India and special provisions will be required to allow for these differences in any proposed system for native language.
[2012-09-25 09:02 GMT पर संपादन हुआ]
| | | | | Take your own advice | Sep 25, 2012 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
It would be much simpler to take what is of relevance to us of this concept, which is “proficiency in the language” and pin our solutions on it, and discard the rest of the identity and historical baggage.
It took Phil to point out to me that we are on the same "side" in this debate. He deserves a medal for realising it. I hadn't. If you truly want to help keep it simple and relevant, can I suggest you do so. Press home the clear logical superiority of focusing on proficiency rather than biography (something it seemed the thread was starting to converge towards a few days ago until it got sidetracked, by a man who claims to support the idea but turns people against it with every additional paragraph) and leave it at that.
| | | |
3 days ago Charlie Bavington wrote:
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
2) verification method: go to a Powwow and talk to NL peers or have them evaluate a writing sample you create there and ask them to confirm your native language.
If they can't, try again (maybe one more time). Their judgment is then final.
You may ask for peers who grew up close to where you grew up. Ge it done within a reasonable time frame.
It's doable.
I'm all for people making a bit of an effort when it comes to matters from which they could or should benefit, and indeed when it comes to running their business, but this strikes me as being a bit steep. For one thing, some people live hundreds of miles from their nearest pow-wow, or indeed their nearest colleagues who could conceivably pitch up if they organised one themselves in their own back garden. Secondly, it's a lot to ask of people (in terms of time and money) for something that ought to take ten minutes. Third for those living in countries where their native tongue is not a national tongue, other natives may not be available.
I see what you're trying to achieve (although even then, there are loopholes as there with ANY proposal) but I do feel that whatever method is decided upon, it should be reasonably feasible for any and all site members (even if the verification itself is not universal).
Fourth - you're making it personal. If I reject someone as a native speaker in person, he or she will know exactly who has rejected his or her claim. Given the financial reasons that underlie at least some of these claims, and given the contorted explanations some are prepared to give to substantiate their claims (as witnessed on here), how willing do you think some will be to let the matter rest there, and just walk quietly away? Conversely, given what's at stake, perhaps the pretend native might offer to make it worth my while, and I might accept ?
I wouldn't want to block pow-wow verification for willing participants, but the more I think about it, the more problematic it seems to be. I certainly wouldn't want to make it the method that was 'preferred' or 'recommended' - just one that was potentially acceptable (despite my reservations regarding probity, given the sort of people we would be dealing with).
I'm leaning towards third-party verification. I would have thought a website with the clout proz claims to have would have providers falling over themselves to provide the service and be associated with the website..... or would they?
[Edited at 2012-09-25 09:22 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| Focusing on proficiency rather than biography | Sep 25, 2012 |
But the fact remains and will remain that outsourcers (in any case in my part of the world) want native-speaking translators, and in by far the most cases these are the people with the right biography (it doesn't feel right at all, verging as it does on being a birthright, but I think it is the way that it is). What I do think, is that the subject on its own (and the button up on the profile on its own) carries no weight if not combined with proficiency. But this speaks for itself.
| | | | LilianNekipelov
Amerika Syarikat
Local time: 10:01
Bahasa Rusia hingga Bahasa Inggeris
+ ...
| I am sorry to say that, but for some people here | Sep 25, 2012 |
the understanding of "a native language" is purely nationalistic, or related to ethnicity, rather than anything else. Your comments about "native language". Ty, have not that much to do with the native language some clients are looking for in reference to translations. All they want is some close to perfection production in the target language -- not a text full of idiomatic expressions, that of course everyone from a particular region could recognize as the writing of their own, even such as Co... See more the understanding of "a native language" is purely nationalistic, or related to ethnicity, rather than anything else. Your comments about "native language". Ty, have not that much to do with the native language some clients are looking for in reference to translations. All they want is some close to perfection production in the target language -- not a text full of idiomatic expressions, that of course everyone from a particular region could recognize as the writing of their own, even such as Cockney, or East New York English, or Silesian. ((not that these dialects are inferior to any other dialects, but this is not usually what clients want).
As to Russian and Ukrainian (to Belasubramanian). No -- they are absolutely not the same languages, and there were no such languages which were called something else in the Soviet Union and then they were re-named. Certain languages were just not used that often in public life, especially, during those times. As for Urdu -- I know, I was told -- it is basically the same language as Hindi in its spoken form, although the written forms are in different alphabets, altogether. That might be a problem for a translator, less for an interpreter, I guess. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Sepanyol
Local time: 15:01
Ahli (2007)
Bahasa Inggeris
+ ...
| Look at agency websites | Sep 25, 2012 |
Olly Pekelharing wrote:
But the fact remains and will remain that outsourcers (in any case in my part of the world) want native-speaking translators.
What percentage declare to their potential clients that they 'only use native speakers'? I guarantee it's enormous. What sort of view would they have of a site that stops enabling them to select on that criterion? It's not the existence of field that's the problem, it's the quality of the data held.
| | | | | So wise Sheila, as usual! | Sep 25, 2012 |
Sheila Wilson wrote:
Olly Pekelharing wrote:
But the fact remains and will remain that outsourcers (in any case in my part of the world) want native-speaking translators.
What percentage declare to their potential clients that they 'only use native speakers'? I guarantee it's enormous. What sort of view would they have of a site that stops enabling them to select on that criterion? It's not the existence of field that's the problem, it's the quality of the data held.
YES! and let me add : if It's not the existence of field that's the problem, it's the quality of the data held ... and, therefore, the very existence of this site.
Catherine
| | |
|
|
|
Kirsten Bodart
United Kingdom
Local time: 16:01
Bahasa Belanda hingga Bahasa Inggeris
+ ...
| And how many | Sep 25, 2012 |
Sheila Wilson wrote:
Olly Pekelharing wrote:
But the fact remains and will remain that outsourcers (in any case in my part of the world) want native-speaking translators.
What percentage declare to their potential clients that they 'only use native speakers'? I guarantee it's enormous. What sort of view would they have of a site that stops enabling them to select on that criterion? It's not the existence of field that's the problem, it's the quality of the data held.
...declare that they only use 'qualified' translators? Also a lot, about as many as the ones declaring they only use native target translators. I can tell you for a fact that, in the end, they only care for one thing: that your text is acceptable. Whether you are really a native speaker or not (whatever may define this) is not really an issue to them, just like their qualification standards.
The only reason why they declare this (and lie to their customers in some cases) is that they need an ISO certificate and the ISO certificate sets out native target criteria, if I am not mistaken. IF they have native ttarget translators in their database, they qualify for this certificate. By whom the translations are carried out is a totally different thing.
I am know I am cynical.
Anyway, as to the egregious mistakes. I know this has been mentioned earlier, but where do those egregious mistakes stop? At the wrong use of present perfect or what? That has still not been answered.
I also disagree with the idea that George would still be a native speaker. He would maybestill be a native speaker in theoyr (he was born in America to American parents, he can't be anything else, right), but not a native speaker to be seen handling a text. That is what we are talking about here, right?
Since when is the right use of vocabulary not part of a mother tongue anymore? Indeed, George would have made himself understood, but he would have used the wrong vocab. If he had called a Verbleibserlaubnis a 'residence allowance' would he still have made the native test? There is something like fluency and that does include knowing how things are called and how you instinctively say things. He may have used 'shot out of my hip' for an expression, for example, where he could have said 'off the top of my head'.
Otherwise, as Paul said, you are aiming pretty low. George may have used his tenses right, but if he cannot explain himself, will he pass the native test? If the answer is yes, then you can probably count a lot of the Dutch translators who have been targetted to some extent into the native English camp. I would hope with their translation degrees, they would at least have a certain fluency and use their tenses right. That is clearly not the result we are aiming for, though, in this thread.
Conversely, if I write a correct English text, do I qualify for the native speaker thing?
If you are going to test proficiency here, as that is what it comes down to in the end, you need to clearly set out the criteria for this proficiency, aside from dialect words and accents, as then you need to admit that there will be non-natives who have mastered a language to a native proficient level. That chance is small, I admit, but while it is there you need to account for it.
You also need an adequate system, preferably with always the very same (trained/qualified + real native) people involved, to suit all languages. You cannot for example have one person who slipped through the net (i.e. non-native but proficient) judging another non-native. You'll get a system that waters down as you look at it. Again, Smauel has illustrated this (p)ages ago.
Proz would also have to look at defining languages, as someone said earlier. CHinese, but also Flemish. For myself, I speak Dutch and most clients post jobs into/from Dutch even if it is a clearly Flemish text. However, some die-hards still believe there is something like a 'Flemish' language. If you were to verify the native language tag, who would qualify to judge for Dutch and who for Flemish? Do the Flemish go their own way (I would hope so, although they wouldn't know what 'Flemish' is really like) and what about the Dutch? This should be standard Dutch, so in all likelihood, you would need to have a half Flemish and half Dutch panel, otherwise things are not fair. We are talking about different ways of handling noun genders. So on either side of the border, mainly modern words, can be deemed either male/female or neuter. Not all translators are aware of this. And there are more issues like that.
I for one would support the abolishment for Flemish as a labguage and would only allow it for localisation purposes.
| | | | | Lies on both sides | Sep 25, 2012 |
Sheila Wilson wrote:
What percentage declare to their potential clients that they 'only use native speakers'? I guarantee it's enormous. What sort of view would they have of a site that stops enabling them to select on that criterion? It's not the existence of field that's the problem, it's the quality of the data held.
First of all, I could place a paid ad on any newspaper or magazine saying that I translate between Bulgarian and Swahili. As I'm not offering any illegal service, the newspaper would publish it, and would take no liability whatsoever for my assertions. I could do the same on my web site, and my host wouldn't be liable either.
Taking a look at the About Proz page, we see that (my bold):
Services
Serving the world's largest community of translators, ProZ.com delivers a comprehensive network of essential services, resources and experiences that enhance the lives of its members.
ProZ.com enables language professionals to:
Outsource and accept translation and interpreting assignments...
... hence Proz enables language professionals to do a lot of things, however Proz doesn't do it on its own.
Some colleagues here are attempting to manipulate Proz into conducting some kind of "inquisition" on false claims they have enabled translators to make... just like the newspaper example above, and then stand liable for such translators' claims to be true. I hope Henry is smart enough not to fall into this trap.
Some outsourcers claim that they only use native speakers of the target language to translate. Some actually do, however others may use non-natives as long as their rates are low enough. The problem is when they use a truly native speaker who is not a skilled translator, and/or who is someone who has no clue on the subject area covered.
As Stalin possibly never faced a computer, he had to say that "paper will take anything that is written on it". The www will take much more.
So my vote goes for Proz remaining loyal to its original "enabling" mission, therefore not offering any kind of formal guarantee on translators and agencies' self-assertions. Hence the caveat to the effect that each translator is liable for their own self-assertions should prevail.
Of course, upon being provided with adequate evidence that a translator is certified by ATA, IOL, NAATI, or any other reputable such organization, in its enabling role, Proz may say that they received such evidence and, to the best of their knowledge, it looks authentic. I've seen agencies proclaiming their affiliation to such organizations on their web site, and it was easy to ascertain that to be a blatant lie.
However the present means provided by that enablement are somewhat inadequate, as they force individuals unquestionably able to translate into a language - always within their specialty subject area, of course - to falsely claim they are native speakers, for lack of a better option.
I think the four levels previously proposed here are a good option. Yet some natives tend to consider being native their first and foremost attribute for translation.
Taking Stalin's idea (I don't have to like him at all, to admit he was right in saying that), it shouldn't be too difficult for Proz to enable each Prozian to choose either method to state their skill in various languages from: a) the present system; or b) the 4-level system.
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 15:01
Ahli (2008)
Bahasa Itali hingga Bahasa Inggeris
| | Halaman dalam topik: < [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? | 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 » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
