| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] > | Lawyers, please come back (as KudoZ answerers)! Thread poster: Claire Titchmarsh (X)
|
|---|
CMJ_Trans (X)
Local time: 20:43
French to English
+ ...
| mother tongue only - not that obvious.... | Oct 27, 2006 |
Jo Macdonald said: "Now if both sides are out of their league and the asker can’t tell the difference between right and wrong because they haven’t a clue, maybe we should remove one end of the equation, so it’s only possible for mother-tongue pros to answer in their language pair."
Whilst this is a perfectly laudable and, in many ways, sensible suggestion, it does overlook one vital point.
If ProZ.com were really about true professionals, as it should be in my boo... See more Jo Macdonald said: "Now if both sides are out of their league and the asker can’t tell the difference between right and wrong because they haven’t a clue, maybe we should remove one end of the equation, so it’s only possible for mother-tongue pros to answer in their language pair."
Whilst this is a perfectly laudable and, in many ways, sensible suggestion, it does overlook one vital point.
If ProZ.com were really about true professionals, as it should be in my book, and if the points red herring were eliminated, the site could be used as it should be, in other words with people contributing ideas to help others find the answer they need. That would also mean that the contribution of SOME non mother tongue respondents could still be useful. Frankly, I am English mother tongue but I answer very often in French. Why? Because I have lived more than half my life in French-speaking countries and, when I write original text, prefer to write in French and, more particularly, because I chip in when I've seen that the French speakers have failed to understand the original English. It happens more often than you may think. I don't expect to get the points, I don't want them - unless I can save them to pay for my next holiday - I'm just happy (or I used to be) to point people in the right direction. Let others find the "perfect" formulation, if mine is not deemed good enough.
So not letting non mother tongue speakers contribute could be counter-productive. There was a good example this morning where someone had offered a fabulous turn of phrase but had failed to actually translate the idea. Everybody was queuing up to give "agrees" but the answer was out left field.
This is why I am so anti-points: because it makes the whole thing into a competition instead of a collective effort to help each other out.
I also agree with Writeaway however: too many good people have left this site disgusted for the reasons mentioned and, at this rate, there will soon be nobody good left, if only because ths standard will be so low that ProZ will be equated with a blot on one's reputation. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Argument for keeping non-mother-tongue answerers | Oct 27, 2006 |
I'm not really sure what to do in general about the problems in the KudoZ forums, so I'm limiting myself to suggesting the other side of the mother-tongue/non-mother-tongue answerer problem. I've posted several questions on KudoZ for which the most helpful answers (defined not necessarily entirely by the actual term proposed, but sometimes by the explanation given) were from non-mother-tongue answerers. I think that taking them out of the equation would damage the usefulness of KudoZ. (I shou... See more I'm not really sure what to do in general about the problems in the KudoZ forums, so I'm limiting myself to suggesting the other side of the mother-tongue/non-mother-tongue answerer problem. I've posted several questions on KudoZ for which the most helpful answers (defined not necessarily entirely by the actual term proposed, but sometimes by the explanation given) were from non-mother-tongue answerers. I think that taking them out of the equation would damage the usefulness of KudoZ. (I should also point out that in these cases, the glossary entry I made was the term I eventually used, not the proposed term.)
The problem is that there's no way to require people to be intelligent. You could restrict answering to certain people in each category: mother-tongue, only people with experience in a given field, people who have been on ProZ for a certain amount of time, only full members, but each of these restrictions will probably include people who will provide less-intelligent answers, and will exclude other people with the relevant expertise and experience.
Anna ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Lawyers vs mother tongue | Oct 27, 2006 |
Jo Macdonald wrote:
maybe we should remove one end of the equation, so it’s only possible for mother-tongue pros to answer in their language pair.
Having only answers from people in their mother-tongue I’m sure would make a world of difference though, much less competition - much more accurate feedback to build up a great glossary.
However, in my language pairs and fields I think you will find many more Dutch than English lawyers with a fair grasp of the differences between the Dutch civil law and English common law systems. The NL-EN-NL legal translation course I am following is attended by not even one "100%" English native translator I am afraid- although I know of one (!) who did in previous years.
Returning to the original question, I think that legal translation is a very interesting field, but one of the most difficult and underestimated ones as well. Often a KudoZ question does not give sufficient context to be able to decide what would be the best translation for a specific concept.
Again, in my humble opinion, knowledge of terminology used in a specific field (in the required language ) has very little to do with "being native".
Anjo
[Edited at 2006-10-27 13:08]
| | | | gianfranco 
Brazil
Local time: 15:43
Member (2001)
English to Italian
+ ...
| Legal translators are not deserting the site for this reason | Oct 27, 2006 |
Ford Prefect wrote:
...
By the time that damage-limitation post was made, the damage had been done. Whatever the fact of the matter is as regards the actual appliccability of the rule, many people had become convinced over the several previous days, not just through the forum but through personal correspondence with individuals who were dealt with for breaching the rule before the rule was even made known, that legal interpretations were no longer permitted anywhere on the site. Several inviduals have since withdrawn or scaled back their participation for a wide range of reasons which you are quite familiar with.
...
Dear Ford Prefect,
This is what has been announced http://www.proz.com/post/380472#380472
and this is the rule http://www.proz.com/siterules/forum/10#10
I copy it here:
No legal interpretation.
Legal interpretation and legal challenges to proZ.com policies and features should not be made in the forums, but sent in writing to ProZ.com headquarters.
I find it very clear and it is part of the forum rules (no relation with the KudoZ area). If it has been misunderstood by some persons probably is because they have not read carefully something that is very clearly worded, or were not willing to undestand.
By the way, if some legal translators have misunderstood a concept so clearly expressed, I would not expect them to be particularly sharp at translating far more complex legal documents, or to be a grave loss for KudoZ 
bye
Gianfranco
[Edited at 2006-10-27 13:30]
| | |
|
|
|
| You have been misinformed, Ford | Oct 27, 2006 |
Ford Prefect wrote:
By the time that damage-limitation post was made, the damage had been done. Whatever the fact of the matter is as regards the actual appliccability of the rule, many people had become convinced over the several previous days, not just through the forum but through personal correspondence with individuals who were dealt with for breaching the rule before the rule was even made known...
You have clearly been misinformed. The rule has nothing to do with KudoZ. Only one person has ever been cited for what the rule prohibits, and she is not a lawyer. She had repeatedly posted her legal opinions in the forums, refusing to respect (polite) requests from moderators (and me) that she not do so.
Since that matter has nothing to do with KudoZ, I would ask that you stick to the topic. Thank you!
| | | | | Weeding out the troublemakers | Oct 27, 2006 |
CMJ_Trans wrote:
If ProZ.com were really about true professionals, as it should be in my book, and if the points red herring were eliminated, the site could be used as it should be, in other words with people contributing ideas to help others find the answer they need.
This is why I am so anti-points: because it makes the whole thing into a competition instead of a collective effort to help each other out.
I also agree with Writeaway however: too many good people have left this site disgusted for the reasons mentioned and, at this rate, there will soon be nobody good left, if only because the standard will be so low that ProZ will be equated with a blot on one's reputation.
I agree that the points system attracts far too many folks who are way out of their depth and are seriously damaging the reputation of KudoZ. It's the Achilles' heel of KudoZ. But as long as we do have a points system, we should take some serious steps toward weeding these people out as quickly as possible.
I think we should consider giving KudoZ moderators more power to identify and disinvite the bad apples. Enrique has already stated that staff are considering giving more "bite" to peer graders:
Quality through peer comments Jul 27
There is a perceived quality problem in KudoZ, and some people feel moderators should be allowed to take administrative action against “low quality” players. On the other hand the site philosophy states that moderators do not act as linguistic authorities in a site of peers.
A way out of this conflict could be found by giving more bite to the peer comments *as a means of quality control*, and rely on the group, rather than any particular linguistic authority.
Would there be any support among the community for this approach?
http://www.proz.com/post/389574#389574
The details of the "bite" are yet to be worked out. I hope we come up with something good.
But I also think the time has come to give KudoZ moderators (I'm not a KudoZ moderator) some clout. It doesn't take a linguistic authority to spot the players who either honestly don't know that they are completely unqualified to answer questions in certain language pairs and subject areas or who honestly don't give a shit - the classic point grabber.
Let's identify these people quickly and politely show them the door.
[Edited at 2006-10-27 15:14]
| | | | | What native Dutch speaker doesn't translate into English??? | Oct 27, 2006 |
Anjo Sterringa wrote: Jo Macdonald wrote:
maybe we should remove one end of the equation, so it’s only possible for mother-tongue pros to answer in their language pair.
Having only answers from people in their mother-tongue I’m sure would make a world of difference though, much less competition - much more accurate feedback to build up a great glossary.
However, in my language pairs and fields I think you will find many more Dutch than English lawyers with a fair grasp of the differences between the Dutch civil law and English common law systems. The NL-EN-NL legal translation course I am following is attended by not even one "100%" English native translator I am afraid- although I know of one (!) who did in previous years. Returning to the original question, I think that legal translation is a very interesting field, but one of the most difficult and underestimated ones as well. Often a KudoZ question does not give sufficient context to be able to decide what would be the best translation for a specific concept. Again, in my humble opinion, knowledge of terminology used in a specific field (in the required language ) has very little to do with "being native". Anjo [Edited at 2006-10-27 13:08]
One of the things that has caused the level of the Nl-En site to plummet is the overriding number of native Dutch speakers posting questions about often basic English legalese and then being helped by other native Dutch speakers. Most native English speakers who actually do know and work in legal have now stopped participating. So it's become a site of native Dutch asking and native Dutch answering. That includes those who have added English as their second native language, a myth that quickly evaporates as soon as they write in their newest native lingo.
The claim is always that native Dutch have a far superior knowledge of Dutch and so will produce a far better translation than any native Anglo, but many of those asking don't seem to have understood their original native language either, not to mention having trouble wording English (often claimed as their second or third native language). So why marvel about the fact that no native Anglos took a course given to non-native English speakers trying to learn English legal terminology. I have "proofread" (ie retranslated) enough non-native legal translations to know what the end result actually looks like, including texts done by Dutch lawyers. It's Dunglish, not English.
| | |
|
|
|
Ford Prefect
Burkina Faso
Local time: 18:43
German to English
+ ...
henry wrote:
You have been misinformed Ford
That is precisely my point. Whatever the intention of the new rule, the matter has everything to do with why some legal translators (many of whom are not lawyers since it is easier to make good money in law than linguistics) choose not to give their opinions anywhere on Proz. Saying that this choice has been made due to misinformation does not get us any closer to reverting to the prior situation - something we would all like to see. My post was, therefore, entirely on-topic.
| | | | | Good topic, Claire | Oct 27, 2006 |
Claire said:
Are there are any ex-kudoz experts who would care to comment on why they no longer participate? And would they participate if the quality was higher? I'd be interested to know.
Good question, Claire. Thanks for posting. I would also like to know how people could be enticed to continue contributing at least in their specific areas of expertise. (That's why we offer the option to subscribe so narrowly.)
In addition to this question, for my part, I am asking whether or not the turnover we now see is something other than the usual turnover. We often see comments like yours, Claire; they first started appearing in 2000. But so far, every time we have polled the community as a whole, the consensus is that the level of KudoZ discourse is either the same or gradually improving. My conclusion is that the community is dynamic, and when people leave, others step in. (But maybe we should poll again.)
Thoughts?
By the way, there will be a KudoZ plan released soon... Enrique will post details...
| | | | | Thanks, Ford... but this is about KudoZ specifically. | Oct 27, 2006 |
Ford Prefect wrote: henry wrote:
You have been misinformed Ford That is precisely my point. Whatever the intention of the new rule, the matter has everything to do with why some legal translators (many of whom are not lawyers since it is easier to make good money in law than linguistics) choose not to give their opinions anywhere on Proz. My post was entirely on-topic.
We are talking about KudoZ, not forums. This is an important topic and I will appreciate your allowing others to give it the attention it deserves. Thank in advance!
| | | | Ford Prefect
Burkina Faso
Local time: 18:43
German to English
+ ...
henry wrote:
I would also like to know how people could be enticed to continue contributing at least in their specific areas of expertise.
Controversial and hard to implement: Asker pays correct answerer €1 for each correct answer. This will encourage people back. If you provide a service you should expect remuneration. Kudoz is essentially doing other peoples' work for them so why shouldn't it be paid. You can deal with the riff-raff this will attract by means of my third point.
Controversial because it will not favour the "grandfathers": Points system (for directory ranking) is made up of total points x "hit rate" (adjusted for number of answers to each individual question to eliminate the dilettante factor) x participation (number of answers given) in the last, say, 6 months. So total contribution is rewarded, accurate contribution is rewarded and points-farming punished, and not being busy (having time to play Kudoz) pushes you up the directory too, thus sharing out what work there is.
Controversial and easy to implement: Individuals with a "hit-rate" of less than, say 20% or some other appropriate proportion of correct answers are banned from answering for for two weeks, then four, etc, progressively longer periods until performance improves.
| | |
|
|
|
Claire Titchmarsh (X)
Local time: 20:43
Italian to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Things are definitely sliding | Oct 27, 2006 |
henry wrote:
I would also like to know how people could be enticed to continue contributing at least in their specific areas of expertise.
Patricia's idea was an excellent one in my opinion - there should be moderators with proven knowledge and expertise in each specific field. Law and medicine are just two that spring to mind but there are many others. No system is infallible and it is impossible to keep everyone happy all of the time, but my point is that Kudoz no longer fulfils its purpose, it is just becoming a free for all. The external perception of kudoz, on other sites, from what I can see, is a negative one. People either think that we are a bunch of know it alls (not true, the people who moan about kudoz are almost always just concerned with quality), or they think that kudoz is not worth the web space it's written in.
These discussions are becoming interminable and rather pointless. Action clearly There has to be some kind of quality regulation otherwise as another poster rightly said, kudoz will become completely worthless.
"But so far, every time we have polled the community as a whole, the consensus is that the level of KudoZ discourse is either the same or gradually improving. My conclusion is that the community is dynamic, and when people leave, others step in. (But maybe we should poll again.)"
- A general poll will include all the people who provide rubbish answers, so obviously it will not deal with the problem. Since I joined the site in 2003 I have noticed a decline in quality, although the dodgy answers have always been a feature, it seems that now there are more people just slapping down any old answer with no web references or any further information, and this has been particularly noticeable over the past 12 months.
By the way, there will be a KudoZ plan released soon... Enrique will post details...
- I'll be very interested to see the plan as I genuinely hope things improve.
| | | | | the kudoz glossary | Oct 27, 2006 |
The idea has been broached several times, though I have not heard anything more about it, of working on the kudoz glossary to make it more efficient and correct the errors.
If we could have someone reliable in charge of each language combination, we, the glossary users could, on detecting a wrong term entered, or too many repetitions of the same simple term, send them an email and they could investigate and make the corresponding changes, if applicable. Maybe even kudoz points could... See more The idea has been broached several times, though I have not heard anything more about it, of working on the kudoz glossary to make it more efficient and correct the errors.
If we could have someone reliable in charge of each language combination, we, the glossary users could, on detecting a wrong term entered, or too many repetitions of the same simple term, send them an email and they could investigate and make the corresponding changes, if applicable. Maybe even kudoz points could be awarded to what is in fact the correct answer, when applicable.
On another point, I don't agree with prohibiting non-native speakers from answering, I know on at least one occasion I knew the answer to a translation into Spanish precisely because of my experience doing the translation in the other direction while on another occasion it took the combined efforts of native Spanish speakers and English speakers to dillucidate the best translation of an expression in Spanish.
Lastly I do think people who blatantly use agrees and disagrees for reasons that have nothing to do with linguistics should be reported and their comments deleted. This would help to stop askers from being misled. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Plans under way | Oct 27, 2006 |
As many of you probably know, we recently announced the incoming (slightly delayed) publication of our plans in several section (KudoZ being the second priority aftrer jobs).
These plans will cover an explanation of how things work, our top priorities, what we plan to do (and not to do) and our answer to the many suggestions received from our comm... See more As many of you probably know, we recently announced the incoming (slightly delayed) publication of our plans in several section (KudoZ being the second priority aftrer jobs).
These plans will cover an explanation of how things work, our top priorities, what we plan to do (and not to do) and our answer to the many suggestions received from our community.
We will announce some plans for KudoZ after addressing the jobs systems.
Kind regards,
Enrique Cavalitto ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Lawyers, please come back (as KudoZ answerers)! | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
