| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | Add "degree of nativeness" to the native language search Thread poster: Samuel Murray
|
|---|
Samuel Murray 
Netherlands
Local time: 08:21
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | The whole point is to be discriminatory | Jun 27, 2012 |
Catherine GUILLIAUMET wrote:
I think that referring to "parents" would be discriminatory, particularly in those times when economical, environmental and political situations may (have) generate(d) real tragedies afa children are/were concerned. ... Not everyone has/had an as comfortable background as most of us have/had.
If you'll allow me to put on the devil's advocate hat: everything about "native language" is discriminatory. We discriminate against people who were not so fortunate (through no fault of their own) to be born and raised under ideal circumstances. No amount of effort on the part of the translator will grant him the label "native".
From a native language point of view (though only from that point of view), not having had parents is no less unfortunate than not having had enough money to emigrate back to country X, have regular contact with people of that country, or go to a university in the language in question. To put it differently, discriminating against a translator because he did not have parents is no worse than discriminating against him because had no money for university.
The parent/guardian sounds workable, but I get the impression that a guardian would be rather less likely to have had such a great influence on a child's language as a parent or siblings would have (whether the parent is biological, married-to, foster). The point of the question is, after all, "influence".
[Edited at 2012-06-27 11:37 GMT]
[Edited at 2012-06-27 11:38 GMT]
| | | | Ana Malovrh
Slovenia
Local time: 08:21
German to Slovenian
+ ...
| Is 10/10 really the best score? | Jun 28, 2012 |
Olly Pekelharing wrote:
Precisely, I want 10/10! In the present system I can simply say I'm a native speaker; in Samuel's system I am 'a native speaker to a degree' and, more importantly, 'less of a native speaker than x or y', with the obvious risks this entails for my business, while of course this degree of nativeness does not necessarily make me a poorer translator than x or y (except maybe that I need to cut down on long sentences). I know that nativeness is only one measure of proficiency, and off the record I'd be willing to concede the downsides to residing in a country that speaks a different language, but as far as my clients are concerned I meet the native speaker criterion and then it's just a matter of are you a good translator or not.
I'm quoting Olly but my questions are meant for everybody,
do you really think 10/10 is the best for a translator? I have my doubts on this one; if you absolutely master one language, where is the time and place for the second one? How good are you then with the language you translate from? How well can you understand standard phrases?
Producing is important but so is the correct understanding of details.
The way I see it, the best translator would be the one with scores from 7-9. The person with 10 can be a perfect editor, but not the best possible translator.
However, the fact is that if even translators themselves didn't notice this catch, it is less likely the potential clients will. So you see? Some people may understand things differently and it can have a pretty strong impact on their understanding of this system.
| | | | Daryo
United Kingdom
Local time: 07:21
Serbian to English
+ ...
| what about level 11? | Jun 30, 2012 |
which would be in which language you speak in your dreams?
That surely should count as your truly native language?
Jokes aside, I think this idea is nonsensical.
Firstly because it's unenforceable.
Who is going to stop anyone from being "creative with facts"?
Most importantly because this "nativeness index" is a useless indicator.
What is implied is that it would be an indicator of expected quality of work, which it's not.
I have seen few (and even thes... See more which would be in which language you speak in your dreams?
That surely should count as your truly native language?
Jokes aside, I think this idea is nonsensical.
Firstly because it's unenforceable.
Who is going to stop anyone from being "creative with facts"?
Most importantly because this "nativeness index" is a useless indicator.
What is implied is that it would be an indicator of expected quality of work, which it's not.
I have seen few (and even these few are too many) translators who consider opening a dictionary as being beneath them (before the explosion of the Internet) or spending some time on even basic Internet search as waste of time.
Or translators that loose the thread if a sentence has a two-digit number of words.
Which bit of this "nativeness index" is going to cover that?
Surely you need to be immersed in at least 2 cultures to be able to deliver a decent quality of work. But nowadays it's not so important to be physically in England, France or Spain to keep your level of understanding of English, French or Spanish.
Furthermore, one can be 10/10 native in one language, and still being totally “lost in the fog” if the subject matter involves anything other than the general everyday language, shifting words around without having a clue about their real meaning,
Enough for now, I won't even start about interpreting.
A counter proposal: "Hic Rhodus, hic salta" as ranking method, as much unenforceable, but at least makes sense.
[Edited at 2012-06-30 13:45 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 14:21
Chinese to English
| Just dragging this thread up a bit | Jul 3, 2012 |
Because, having thought about it for a week or so, verification doesn't seem very workable to me.
I would nod allow a degree of nativeness to be published, but I would assign native languages based *only* on scores on this scale - not allow anyone to "declare" or "swear" a native language at all.
Could it be used as is? Need tweaking? Is 7 the right number?
| | |
|
|
|
Signe Golly
Denmark
Local time: 08:21
English to Danish
+ ...
| clients' reaction? | Jul 3, 2012 |
Admittedly, I haven't read every single word in this now 3-page thread but am I correct that nobody has mentioned the potential hornet's nest of how clients would react? Would someone outside of the translation field be tuned in to the nuances of "degrees of nativeness" and understand that they're supposed to consider someone with a 7 or 8 as a native speaker? Doesn't it seem like most clients would simplify the whole system and conclude that if they want a native speaker, they have to filter to... See more Admittedly, I haven't read every single word in this now 3-page thread but am I correct that nobody has mentioned the potential hornet's nest of how clients would react? Would someone outside of the translation field be tuned in to the nuances of "degrees of nativeness" and understand that they're supposed to consider someone with a 7 or 8 as a native speaker? Doesn't it seem like most clients would simplify the whole system and conclude that if they want a native speaker, they have to filter to only include those who scored a 10 (maybe 9, if they're a bit lax)? So native speakers could actually find themselves excluded from a very large number of potential jobs if their degree landed on something like a 7 or 8...
(And I'm aware that many people on here do not feel that ProZ has significant value as a job site but in my personal experience, I've both bid on a won a decent number of jobs from the job board and been contacted by several clients through the translator search function. Besides, if people truly don't believe that the site has value as a tool for getting jobs, what's the whole point of all this talk of updating our profiles and ensuring that the information is correct? But I'm going OT...) ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 08:21
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Daryo wrote:
Firstly because it's unenforceable. Who is going to stop anyone from being "creative with facts"?
If you read the first sentence of my first post, you'll notice that I acknowledge that translators who want to lie will lie and will get away with it in all but the most stringent verification systems. The purpose of the nativeness scale is not to reduce lying but to clarify what honest people mean.
Most importantly because this "nativeness index" is a useless indicator. What is implied is that it would be an indicator of expected quality of work, which it's not.
Well, that is not its purpose. If you were asked to suggest ways in which to reduce the risk that the nativeness scale is abused as an indicator of quality of work instead of native language, what would you suggest?
I have seen [a] few ... translators who consider opening a dictionary as being beneath them ... Or translators that loose the thread if a sentence has a two-digit number of words. Which bit of this "nativeness index" is going to cover that?
Nothing. The nativeness scale is to help show whether a translator is likely a native speaker, and not whether he is punctual, logical, intelligent, ethical, etc.
Surely you need to be immersed in at least 2 cultures to be able to deliver a decent quality of work. But nowadays it's not so important to be physically in England, France or Spain to keep your level of understanding of English, French or Spanish.
And that is why clients can also select a translator's country of residence, as a separate item, that is independent of native language.
Furthermore, one can be 10/10 native in one language, and still being totally “lost in the fog” if the subject matter involves anything other than the general everyday language, shifting words around without having a clue about their real meaning...
And that is why clients can also select a translator's "specialisation", as a separate item, that is independent of native language.
| | | | | Signe, you scored a point ! | Jul 3, 2012 |
Signe Golly wrote:
Admittedly, I haven't read every single word in this now 3-page thread but am I correct that nobody has mentioned the potential hornet's nest of how clients would react? Would someone outside of the translation field be tuned in to the nuances of "degrees of nativeness" and understand that they're supposed to consider someone with a 7 or 8 as a native speaker? Doesn't it seem like most clients would simplify the whole system and conclude that if they want a native speaker, they have to filter to only include those who scored a 10 (maybe 9, if they're a bit lax)? So native speakers could actually find themselves excluded from a very large number of potential jobs if their degree landed on something like a 7 or 8...
(And I'm aware that many people on here do not feel that ProZ has significant value as a job site but in my personal experience, I've both bid on a won a decent number of jobs from the job board and been contacted by several clients through the translator search function. Besides, if people truly don't believe that the site has value as a tool for getting jobs, what's the whole point of all this talk of updating our profiles and ensuring that the information is correct? But I'm going OT...)
And a good one, indeed, maybe the key one.
And if you are baffled by the 3 pages of this thread, what would you say about the 38 pages now reached by the related thread "Should “native language” claims be verified?"
This is getting completely crazy because, as you highlighted it very intelligently, what will be the clients reactions to the so sophisticated scheme and procedures that some of our colleagues want to implement ?
I think that getting clients is the true goal of all ProZians, so we must make everything easier for them, allow them to find the appropriate professional they need in an average of 2 or 3 clicks. It would be suicidal for the whole profession to ask those potential clients to fill a 15-item questionnaire in, so complex that the average client might even not understand it clearly.
Do we really want to discourage clients and kill jobs on ProZ ?
If yes, let's go on this way, we are on the right track
Catherine
| | | |
Signe Golly wrote:
Admittedly, I haven't read every single word in this now 3-page thread but am I correct that nobody has mentioned the potential hornet's nest of how clients would react? Would someone outside of the translation field be tuned in to the nuances of "degrees of nativeness" and understand that they're supposed to consider someone with a 7 or 8 as a native speaker? Doesn't it seem like most clients would simplify the whole system and conclude that if they want a native speaker, they have to filter to only include those who scored a 10 (maybe 9, if they're a bit lax)? So native speakers could actually find themselves excluded from a very large number of potential jobs if their degree landed on something like a 7 or 8...
(And I'm aware that many people on here do not feel that ProZ has significant value as a job site but in my personal experience, I've both bid on a won a decent number of jobs from the job board and been contacted by several clients through the translator search function. Besides, if people truly don't believe that the site has value as a tool for getting jobs, what's the whole point of all this talk of updating our profiles and ensuring that the information is correct? But I'm going OT...)
You have perfectly expressed my tought and my experience (I am here since 2003) both in the first and second paragraph.
All the best!
| | |
|
|
|
| And again, you are so right! | Jul 3, 2012 |
Catherine GUILLIAUMET wrote: This is getting completely crazy because, as you highlighted it very intelligently, what will be the clients reactions to the so sophisticated scheme and procedures that some of our colleagues want to implement ? I think that getting clients is the true goal of all ProZians, so we must make everything easier for them, allow them to find the appropriate professional they need in an average of 2 or 3 clicks. It would be suicidal for the whole profession to ask those potential clients to fill a 15-item questionnaire in, so complex that the average client might even not understand it clearly. Do we really want to discourage clients and kill jobs on ProZ ? If yes, let's go on this way, we are on the right track Catherine
100 times agree Catherine!
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 08:21
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Making it easy for clients | Jul 3, 2012 |
Signe Golly wrote:
Am I correct that nobody has mentioned the potential hornet's nest of how clients would react? Would someone outside of the translation field be tuned in to the nuances of "degrees of nativeness" and understand that they're supposed to consider someone with a 7 or 8 as a native speaker?
I think it is very difficult to predict how clients will respond to something, but if one can make it fairly simple and apparently obvious, then I hope most clients would interpret it correctly. To make this system work, it has to be simple and straight-forward. On the search page, the wording should be very simple, e.g. "Nativeness score", with a small hyperlink to "What is this?" that explains the concept briefly by showing what questions translators have to answer. The fact that a low number is preselected should imply to clients that a top score is not necessary.
But yes, it is difficult to know if clients will understand this correctly. May I ask: do you think that clients understand the current option of simply "native" correctly?
Doesn't it seem like most clients would simplify the whole system and conclude that if they want a native speaker, they have to filter to only include those who scored a 10 (maybe 9, if they're a bit lax)?
This is what you would have seen if you had actually read the thread. A key component of the suggestion is that e.g. "7" would be the highest that a client can select, even if some translators score 8, 9 or 10 on the system. Another key component of the suggestion is that the number that is selected by default should be a fairly low number (e.g. 3 or 5).
Catherine GUILLIAUMET wrote:
I think that getting clients is the true goal of all ProZians, so we must make everything easier for them, allow them to find the appropriate professional they need in an average of 2 or 3 clicks.
True, but how many clicks does it currently take to do a search? There are NINETEEN options that a client can choose from (in addition to the two languages), so if degree of nativeness is added, there would be twenty options. A client need not select all options.
One suggestion in addition to what I wrote to Signe above would be that nothing is selected by default (this is how the other options currently work), and if the client does not select anything, then the search is done using a default value (e.g. 3 or 5). This means that the client is not confronted with the choice unless he actually deliberately selects something.
| | | |
Samuel Murray wrote: Catherine GUILLIAUMET wrote:
I think that getting clients is the true goal of all ProZians, so we must make everything easier for them, allow them to find the appropriate professional they need in an average of 2 or 3 clicks. True, but how many clicks does it currently take to do a search? There are NINETEEN options that a client can choose from (in addition to the two languages), so if degree of nativeness is added, there would be twenty options. A client need not select all options. One suggestion in addition to what I wrote to Signe above would be that nothing is selected by default (this is how the other options currently work), and if the client does not select anything, then the search is done using a default value (e.g. 3 or 5). This means that the client is not confronted with the choice unless he actually deliberately selects something.
Samuel, the figures I mentioned were "virtual"; their only purpose was to give an idea of the proportion difference. I could have just as well mentioned 10 versus 50 , or 20 vs. 100 items.
Catherine
[Edited at 2012-07-03 07:53 GMT]
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 14:21
Chinese to English
| Dump the novelty part | Jul 3, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
To make this system work, it has to be simple and straight-forward. On the search page, the wording should be very simple, e.g. "Nativeness score", with a small hyperlink to "What is this?" that explains the concept briefly by showing what questions translators have to answer. The fact that a low number is preselected should imply to clients that a top score is not necessary.
But yes, it is difficult to know if clients will understand this correctly. May I ask: do you think that clients understand the current option of simply "native" correctly?
However simple you make it, you're still teaching the client a new concept that he's not very interested in learning; moreover, it's not a well-defined concept at all - it's something that you've just made up off the top of your head!
Like I say, this seems like a good scale, but I can't see what relevance the number scores have - is there any meaning to the difference between a 3 and a 6? No, because they could be answering yes/no to completely different questions.
But I do think this scale would be pretty effective at distinguishing native from non-native; and the procedure itself makes people slightly less likely to be dishonest, which is the real point of the exercise.
We're not trying to reinvent the wheel or redefine nativeness here; we're just trying to reduce the number of people who make untrue statements about themselves.
| | |
|
|
|
XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 07:21
Portuguese to English
+ ...
| "Degree of Nativeness" | Jul 3, 2012 |
While I was initially supportive of this idea (out of pure desperation) and will still back any idea that reigns in the current chaos, if that’s what the majority want, I would just add that IMHO this “degree of nativeness” idea only reinforces the thoroughly amateur appearance of the site. I think you’d find outsourcers and the rest of the translation world would laugh out loud at this novel concept for selecting translators, which has had to be thought up purely due to reluctance to im... See more While I was initially supportive of this idea (out of pure desperation) and will still back any idea that reigns in the current chaos, if that’s what the majority want, I would just add that IMHO this “degree of nativeness” idea only reinforces the thoroughly amateur appearance of the site. I think you’d find outsourcers and the rest of the translation world would laugh out loud at this novel concept for selecting translators, which has had to be thought up purely due to reluctance to implement more stringent (and professional) measures. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 08:21
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Not fair, Lisa | Jul 3, 2012 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
This novel concept for selecting translators ... has had to be thought up purely due to reluctance to implement more stringent (and professional) measures.
Requiring translators to not only declare their native language but also specify in detail on their profile pages why they declared that specific language is far more stringent than most things that have been suggested in the past few days. It is also very professional -- after all, it relies on the honesty and integrity of translators to work, and not on policing them like little children.
What is sad is not so much ProZ.com's inability to make an unpopular decision for the benefit of us all, but that those who want ProZ.com to make that decision can't decide among themselves what that decision should be (and here I'm specifically referring to the definition of "native language").
Anyway, I'm happy that this thread very quickly brought in some very useful comments and some quite valid objections to this idea, instead of getting bogged down in discussions about what native language is and why it does or doesn't matter to be one or not be one. Ultimately I don't think that a "degree of nativeness" idea would work, although the idea of asking people why they believe that they are native in a language certainly has prospects. At the very least it will get translators to think more critically about what they declare.
| | | | | One truly hates to quibble | Jul 3, 2012 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
it relies on the honesty and integrity of translators to work,
If every translator on this website had showed honestly and integrity in the first place, this discussion would not be taking place.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Add "degree of nativeness" to the native language search | 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! » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
