| 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] > | Ten common myths about translation quality
|
|---|
| | | non-natives using the internet can hone their skills | Jul 29, 2013 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
My point was that the local language keeps changing, we can't stop it this process.
However the very same tools (TV, Internet) that nowadays help preventing a native speaker overseas from getting language-wise 'obsolete' may be used by a keen professional translator to hone their skills in a non-native language
....
My point is that globalization and technology are gradually ironing out the striking difference that existed between native and non-native translators. Of course, this is privy to those professionals who strive to use such resources for this purpose.
This poses a new challenge to translation outsourcers: Instead of merely screening native and non-native speakers, they'll have to check their location, and whether they bothered to do regular maintenance on their target language skills. A sign of the times.
TV and internet can be used by anyone to hone their skills in a non-native language, yes.
It is my opinion that globalization and technology do not necessarily iron out the difference that exists between native and non-native translators. Becoming a native speaker takes much more, it takes an immersion in the language and culture from an early age on. One can't simply become a native speaker "over the internet" in a few years, especially when one is already an adult.
Professional outsourcers and direct clients will look at our profiles and can ascertain all kinds of facts, of which native language is one, and they will make their choices. As long as the information is reported truthfully by the translator, I see no problem with the native speaker choice for the target text. I stand by my view that it is an important aspect, with good reason, for outsourcers, clients, and translators alike. And I would say outsourcers and direct clients do usually check more than the "native speaker" aspect.
I have no problem if an outsourcer or direct client decides that the "native speaker" option/preference for the target text isn't what he/she wants.
That's fine with me. But the native speaker credential should not be equated with the non-native one, no matter how advanced the non-native translator is. I never had a problem admitting that I am not a native speaker of English. Advanced knowledge of a language, which is expected of a professional translator anyway, is a good credential by itself. Combined with one's native language(s), and all the other important factors, it makes for a very attractive profile.
Bernhard edited to add the last 2 paragraphs
[Edited at 2013-07-30 02:16 GMT]
| | | | Balasubramaniam L. 
India
Local time: 13:02
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | That is the issue | Jul 30, 2013 |
Enrique Cavalitto wrote:
ProZ.com provides options to job posters to let them focus on the service providers that are more likely to deliver what they need. Of course we deal with fallible humans and with qualitative parameters, so no filter can assure that all notified translators are fit for the job, or that none of the translators who are fit for the job are excluded.
Please note that this applies not only to the 'native language' field but to most filtering parameters, such as 'field of expertise'.
Thank you for coming into this discussion. The site's perspective certainly enriches the discussion and fills in essential information that members cannot be privy to.
In the above quote you have clearly identified the issues as perceived by the members of this site.
Many of the filtering devices well-meaningly provided by the site to help job posters actually end up doing the opposite, especially the native language field.
As it has been shown in this thread and several similar threads in this site, taking native language as a sign of proficiency in translation is not only bad science but also bad judgement as several factors go into what makes a good or proficient translator, and none of these factors are of over-riding importance - that is, they all collectively contribute to translator proficiency. Now, when the site allows any one of these factors to be used as a first level screener, instead of separating the chaff from the grains, it divides the grain, chaff and all, into two piles and then presents one of the piles to the job poster. The job poster is not helped in any way because he is not getting the best translator, only a bunch of natives, some of whom could be "chaff", and he does not get a lot of non-natives, some of whom could be "grains".
This is completely contrary to the site's objective of providing these filters in the first place and it does not help job posters in any way either. It only blocks the access to legitimate jobs for many site members who are qualified to do the job and who can turn in a good job that would completely satisfy the job poster.
This is a genuine issue and is highlighted by frequent eruption of threads like these in these forums at regular intervals. I have tracked these threads and I have noticed that this phenomenon can be traced as back as 2003.
I think a grievance as old as this and as inimical to the interests of the members of this site should be urgently addressed.
When you look at it objectively, this is not a difficult issue to resolve either, as most translators on this site translate both into their declared native language and also in their reverse direction, that is, into their non-native language in which they have high levels of proficiency.
So the redesigning and redefining of the native filter is not something that would prove to be as contentious as some of these threads, as there is inherent benefit in it to both camps.
I think the native filter should be redefined as a proficiency metric rather than a geographical or ethnic metric as it currently seems to have become.
Another important improvement that the site can put in place is the number of native languages allowed for members on their profile. Currently it is one, with two accepted in exceptional cases. This logic can be true for monolingual persons, but translators are proficient in two languages at least, and the norm in their case would be to have two native languages.
So the site should accept this linguist trait of translators and allow two languages to be declared as native languages. This in itself will solve a lot of the issues coming up in these threads, and the discrimination perceived by members against them on the basis of the native language filter would immediately go away. Also, job posters filtering on the native field will then be able to catch even those translators who are now excluded because they have been allowed to declare only one language as the native language.
So the suggestions for improvement from my side are these two:
1. Redefine and redesign the native language filter to base it on proficiency level in the language.
2. Allow two languages to be declared as native language (defined as above in 1.) as a rule.
These are simple measures and should not cause too much disruption to the working of the site.
| | | | | You can currently declare up to two native languages in your profile | Jul 30, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote: Enrique Cavalitto wrote:
ProZ.com provides options to job posters to let them focus on the service providers that are more likely to deliver what they need. Of course we deal with fallible humans and with qualitative parameters, so no filter can assure that all notified translators are fit for the job, or that none of the translators who are fit for the job are excluded.
Please note that this applies not only to the 'native language' field but to most filtering parameters, such as 'field of expertise'.
Thank you for coming into this discussion. The site's perspective certainly enriches the discussion and fills in essential information that members cannot be privy to. In the above quote you have clearly identified the issues as perceived by the members of this site.
I believe that there are different opinions on this issue, so you should probably write about your opinions instead of talking on behalf of the "members of the site".
Please note that you have taken my disclaimer out of context. While all filters are fallible and can be improved, I consider the current options given to job posters to be appropriate.
Please note that you can currently declare up to two native languages in your profile.
Regards,
Enrique
| | | | | native language verification | Jul 30, 2013 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Professional outsourcers and direct clients will look at our profiles and can ascertain all kinds of facts, of which native language is one, and they will make their choices. As long as the information is reported truthfully by the translator, I see no problem with the native speaker choice for the target text.
When two or more native languages are claimed and a confirmation/verification button (yellow) is desired for both, I would prefer verification of both languages by native speaker peers in order to be officially confirmed as a native speaker of both languages because it is rather rare that anyone has two or more native languages. The translator who wants that done should be given an opportunity within a reasonable period of time after his/her application for verification unless it is technically too difficult to be carried out.
I believe some translators do want the "verified" status of speaking two native languages in order to apply for jobs that stipulate "verified" native language or to attract clients who are looking for that.
Granted, there are countries or regions with multiple native languages but I doubt that the same people usually speak two native languages at the same location and if so, I doubt it's the norm. If that is indeed the case, I don't see a problem making exceptions. But it would have to be determined and defined by Proz.com which particular regions are accepted.
The only alternative I see for holding peer-to-peer conversations (oral or written ones) to verify native languages is a limitation to two native languages, based on geographical locations, and based on signed declarations by the translator after having fulfilled certain requirements stipulated in an application form. These requirements will have to include statements to where a person grew up and went to school and which languages were spoken in that region. Such a form will have to include a definition of native language and should be signed by the applicant, certifying that all his/her statements are true.
I doubt it very much that anyone has more than two native languages. But exceptions might exist and should certainly be considered.
Native speakers of regions with multiple native languages should help Proz.com define these regions.
There is no such verification procedure in place, therefore I would currently only expect one native language to be confirmed (yellow button) per translator, based on their declaration, since every translator must indeed have one native language. This is Proz.com's current policy.
Bernhard
[Edited at 2013-07-30 05:54 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 13:02
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Code of conduct for translators | Jul 30, 2013 |
I found this code of conduct for translators followed by ATA. It is interesting to note that it does not talk of native language, only of native level proficiency.
Code of Professional Conduct and Business Practices
I. As a Translator or Interpreter, a bridge for ideas from one language to another and one culture to another, I commit myself to the highest standards of performance, ethical behavior, and business practices.
A. I will endeavor to translate or interpret the original message faithfully, to satisfy the needs of the end user(s). I acknowledge that this level of excellence requires:
1. mastery of the target language equivalent to that of an educated native speaker,
2. up-to-date knowledge of the subject material and its terminology in both languages,
3. access to information resources and reference materials, and knowledge of the tools of my profession,
4. continuing efforts to improve, broaden, and deepen my skills and knowledge.
B. I will be truthful about my qualifications and will not accept any assignments for which I am not fully qualified.
C. I will safeguard the interests of my clients as my own and divulge no confidential information.
D. I will notify my clients of any unresolved difficulties. If we cannot resolve a dispute, we will seek arbitration.
E. I will use a client as a reference only if I am prepared to name a person to attest to the quality of my work.
F. I will respect and refrain from interfering with or supplanting any business relationship between my client and my client's client.
| | | |
From the code of conduct...
4. STANDARDS OF WORK
4.1 Translation
4.1.1 Subject to 4.4 and 4.5 below, members shall
translate only into a language which is either (i) their
mother tongue or language of habitual use, or (ii) one
in which they have satisfied the Institute that they have
equal competence. They shall translate only from those
languages in which they can demonstrate they have the
requisite skill... See more From the code of conduct...
4. STANDARDS OF WORK
4.1 Translation
4.1.1 Subject to 4.4 and 4.5 below, members shall
translate only into a language which is either (i) their
mother tongue or language of habitual use, or (ii) one
in which they have satisfied the Institute that they have
equal competence. They shall translate only from those
languages in which they can demonstrate they have the
requisite skills.
If you satisfy the Institute that you have equal competence, than there is no problem. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 08:32
Hebrew to English
| ATA "Getting it right" | Jul 30, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
I found this code of conduct for translators followed by ATA. It is interesting to note that it does not talk of native language, only of native level proficiency.
The ATA better explains its stance in their "Getting it Right" publication, available as a download from their website:
Professional translators work into their native language...
As a translation buyer, you may not be aware of this, but a translator who flouts this basic rule is likely to be ignorant of other important quality issues as well. OK, there are exceptions. But not many. If your supplier claims to be one of them, ask to see something
he or she has done.
http://www.atanet.org/docs/Getting_it_right.pdf
| | | |
Ty Kendall wrote: Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
I found this code of conduct for translators followed by ATA. It is interesting to note that it does not talk of native language, only of native level proficiency. The ATA better explains its stance in their "Getting it Right" publication, available as a download from their website: Professional translators work into their native language...
As a translation buyer, you may not be aware of this, but a translator who flouts this basic rule is likely to be ignorant of other important quality issues as well. OK, there are exceptions. But not many. If your supplier claims to be one of them, ask to see something
he or she has done. http://www.atanet.org/docs/Getting_it_right.pdf
It's actually on the ITI website as well... but to be fair, Ty, it also says this...
OK, there are exceptions. But not many. If your
supplier claims to be one of them, ask to see something
he or she has done. If it’s factually accurate and reads
well, and if the translator guarantees equal quality for
your text—why not? Sometimes a linguist with special
subject-matter expertise may agree to work into a
foreign language. In this case, the translation must be
carefully edited—and not just glanced through—by a
language-sensitive native speaker before it goes to press.
So, it's not categorically excluded...
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 08:32
Hebrew to English
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
It's actually on the ITI website as well... but to be fair, Ty, it also says this...
OK, there are exceptions. But not many. If your
supplier claims to be one of them, ask to see something
he or she has done. If it’s factually accurate and reads
well, and if the translator guarantees equal quality for
your text—why not? Sometimes a linguist with special
subject-matter expertise may agree to work into a
foreign language. In this case, the translation must be
carefully edited—and not just glanced through—by a
language-sensitive native speaker before it goes to press.
So, it's not categorically excluded...
Yep! So it basically says what you have been saying for the past 10 pages, in a nutshell: "if you defy the statistics and have the competency, go for it!" - which I entirely agree with.
[Edited at 2013-07-30 07:43 GMT]
| | | | | erm, well, yes... | Jul 30, 2013 |
Ty Kendall wrote: Yep! So it basically says what you have been saying for the past 10 pages, in a nutshell: "if you defy the statistics and have the competency, go for it!" - which I entirely agree with.
I thought it was a fair comment... but the non-natives in this thread seem to be wanting carte blanche... which, being non-natives, is rather arrogant, if you ask me. Let's hope now that I don't hear the usual but most natives are not good either argument again... because, in this case, I'm off...
[Edited at 2013-07-30 07:46 GMT]
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 08:32
Portuguese to English
+ ...
| You have both your wishes | Jul 30, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
So the suggestions for improvement from my side are these two:
1. Redefine and redesign the native language filter to base it on proficiency level in the language.
2. Allow two languages to be declared as native language (defined as above in 1.) as a rule.
These are simple measures and should not cause too much disruption to the working of the site.
I'm somewhat bemused that after last summer's mammoth thread you aren't aware that these are already a possibility. I hope José won't mind if I use him as an example, since he has several times openly declared and discussed the fact that he is not a native speaker of English. Nevertheless, he believes his proficiency to be such that he can count himself as one. José therefore declares that he has two native languages (Portuguese and English) and in turn qualifies for any jobs where the client requires an English native speaker. If that's what you want, the site needn't change a thing.
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 13:02
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | No, Lisa, it is not as simple as that | Jul 30, 2013 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote: Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
So the suggestions for improvement from my side are these two:
1. Redefine and redesign the native language filter to base it on proficiency level in the language.
2. Allow two languages to be declared as native language (defined as above in 1.) as a rule.
These are simple measures and should not cause too much disruption to the working of the site.
I'm somewhat bemused that after last summer's mammoth thread you aren't aware that these are already a possibility. I hope José won't mind if I use him as an example, since he has several times openly declared and discussed the fact that he is not a native speaker of English. Nevertheless, he believes his proficiency to be such that he can count himself as one. José therefore declares that he has two native languages (Portuguese and English) and in turn qualifies for any jobs where the client requires an English native speaker. If that's what you want, the site needn't change a thing.
B., understands this better than you. While anyone can declare two languages as native, the moment you do it, both your languages will get unverified. And I understand it is not easy at proz.com to get your second language verified.
So there is still scope for change in this site, and 100s of pages of discussion is not exactly in vain.
[Edited at 2013-07-30 08:23 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 08:32
Hebrew to English
| Greek levels of Procrastination | Jul 30, 2013 |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote: because, in this case, I'm off...
Me too, but mostly because I've got work to do and really shouldn't be here in the first place
P.S. Bala did you just refer to yourself in the third person? Who's "B"?
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 13:02
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | About "Getting It Right" | Jul 30, 2013 |
Ty (and also G.), you forget that the Getting It Right is aimed at outsourcers (those wanting translation services). The Code is for us translators. Therefore, what is said in the Code is what applies to us translators.
By taking up the outsourcer's cause, you are unwittingly fighting someone else's battle.
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 08:32
Hebrew to English
| They complement each other Bala, there's no conflict... | Jul 30, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
Ty (and also G.), you forget that the Getting It Right is aimed at outsourcers (those wanting translation services). The Code is for us translators. Therefore, what is said in the Code is what applies to us translators.
By taking up the outsourcer's cause, you are unwittingly fighting someone else's battle.
Getting it right: "Either HIRE a native speaker or a non-native speaker with the requisite proficiency"
Code of Conduct: "Either BE a native speaker or a non-native speaker with the requisite proficiency".
| | | | | 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] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Ten common myths about translation quality | 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 » |
| | 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 
Translation news
